What Makes a Good Shoeing Job Good & Vice Versa? [Archive]

CookiePony

Dec. 14, 2007, 08:38 AM

The number one thing that makes a good shoeing job is a good underlying trim ...

This hits the nail on the head, so to speak. ;) Now, you will get some disagreement about what the right trim is, although pretty much anyone will tell you that long toe, underrun heel is not healthy (however, I am astounded at how many horses I see in this state). I'll give you a little info-- do you have some time to read?

There is a good tutorial here: http://www.hopeforsoundness.com/natbalance/nbguidelines.html
There is a section on recognizing healthy and distorted hoof form.

The above site is a shoes-and-barefoot site; the following sites are barefoot only but have excellent information on healthy hoof form:
www.ironfreehoof.com
www.barefoothorse.com
www.barefoottrim.com
www.clickandtrim.com

Finally, you can look at pics of my own horse's feet, before and after decent trimming (I need to update w/ more recent pics): http://cookiepony.googlepages.com/langston%27sbeautifulhooves%21

Auventera Two

Dec. 14, 2007, 08:56 AM

Tiempo

Dec. 14, 2007, 09:41 AM

A great shoeing job is only great because of the trim underneath it, and the horse's husbandry. And the most signifigant problem with a great shoeing job is that the hoof is constantly growing and changing from day to day, and what was great a week ago might not be so great today. Hooves are dynamic - shoes are static.

I agree that a great trim is essential to a good shoeing job, but not that a shoeing job is ONLY great because of the trim.

Of course it's possible to trim foot perfectly, then apply an ill fitting shoe with poor nailing/finishing.

I'd like to think that if the practioner were capable of the perfect trim, then s/he'd be unlikely to perform a crappy shoeing, but it is possible in theory.

Tiempo

Dec. 14, 2007, 09:49 AM

Tom Stovall

Dec. 14, 2007, 03:19 PM

Staish in gray, deletia

What separates a decent shoeing job from a great one?

In technical terms, complete, as opposed to partial, biomechanical efficiency.

What are things you really WANT to see? What would make you run from a farrier? I also need to be educated about proper angles. You hear people talking all the time about angles and I'd really like to learn what kind of angles complement different types of conformation, what is bad, what is good, and so on. Would anyone care to enlighten me? I would also love pictures with explanations. Or if you know of any good sources where I could read up on this kind of thing, please direct me to them!

For an overview of farriery, please see the certification guides at <http://americanfarriers.org>. Bear in mind that there is no single method of trimming or farriery that works on every horse, every time; furthermore, the more athleticism required for an activity, the greater the stress on the horse, and the greater the importance of a farrier's correctly assessing and addressing the horse's needs.

There's a helluva gap between trimming a pasture ornament and shoeing a puissance horse. :)

The most difficult thing about farriery is not addressing the horse's needs, it's assessing those needs. After a competent farrier gets one figured out, it's just connect the dots. On the other hand, a horse's needs can change due to factors beyond a farriers control - which means farriers become complacent at their peril.

Dec. 14, 2007, 08:43 PM

This is some of the worst work I've ever seen...

http://www.clickandtrim.com/hooves1.htm

Sorry, but it just...is. :no:

Would you care to point out exactly what is so bad about it? Did you realize that the top photos are of a partially trimmed foot?

CookiePony

Dec. 15, 2007, 12:01 AM

Tiempo, I have the same questions as JB.

There are both before and after pics on that page-- sometimes it's confusing which is which.

LarkspurCO

Dec. 15, 2007, 12:25 AM

Here's an example of a shoeing job that served the horse quite well.

http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i213/hfournier/Desert%20Spark/Des-fronts.jpg

These are Natural Balance aluminums with flat NB pads. Initially the shoe/pad combo were ground back to create the rocker. The shoes continued to wear throughout the shoeing cycle, providing excellent breakover. I believe they lasted two cycles, and this was taken after the first reset:

http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i213/hfournier/Desert%20Spark/LFSept07.jpg

Note the horse had his shoes and pads pulled six weeks ago and is "winter pasture" sound with good sole thickness.

Hooves are dynamic - shoes are static.

Wrong. See above.

RhythmTempo

Dec. 15, 2007, 09:33 AM

Dune

Dec. 15, 2007, 10:50 AM

There's a helluva gap between trimming a pasture ornament and shoeing a puissance horse. :)

.

This is something similar that my friend's husband, who is a farrier, says and it bugs me. Why wouldn't you do the same "good job" on a show horse versus a pasture horse. They both need a great trim and to be balanced, what would be so different about the trim?? I understand that the shoeing package will most likely be different, but discounting the fact that one will be shod and the other will probably be barefoot, why shouldn't the trim be of equal quality??

Tiempo

Dec. 15, 2007, 10:57 AM

Tiempo, I have the same questions as JB.

There are both before and after pics on that page-- sometimes it's confusing which is which.

I'd be happy to, but unfortunatley it will have to wait until I'm back visiting friends in town. Here at home almost all of the pictures won't load :(

ThirdCharm

Dec. 15, 2007, 11:12 AM

Larkspur.... lovely shoeing job there, IMHO. Nice balance, great heel support. If more farriers would do that there would be fewer horse owners getting desperate and going barefoot!

Cookiepony, the 'before' pix of your horse made me cringe, you were very right to go elsewhere. He looks much better afterwards, but I would note the same effect could have been produced by a competent farrier.

The fourth site made me wince along with Tiempo, very few of the 'after' trims showed any appreciable difference in the angle of the hoof (which were mostly bad), just rasped off the flares and dubbed back the toes/mustang-rolled the wall. I know some people don't believe in trimming sole, which would be necessary to reduce toe length, but if your horse does not wander the Sierra Nevada 24/7, and you cut down the bar and heel to try to make it look like a mustang hoof, why not do the rest? I could post numerous pix of horses I trim, NONE of which would require the notation "sound x months of the year" and most of whom jump 3-4' on a regular basis. Maybe I should!

Jennifer

Daydream Believer

Dec. 15, 2007, 11:57 AM

JHUshoer20

Dec. 15, 2007, 12:06 PM

This is something similar that my friend's husband, who is a farrier, says and it bugs me. Why wouldn't you do the same "good job" on a show horse versus a pasture horse. They both need a great trim and to be balanced, what would be so different about the trim?? I understand that the shoeing package will most likely be different, but discounting the fact that one will be shod and the other will probably be barefoot, why shouldn't the trim be of equal quality??

I think you might be taking Mr Stovall a little out of context there and he'll certainly be able to answer your question.

But yes, every horse should get the best job any of us can give it regardless of where it lives or what it does.
George

CookiePony

Dec. 15, 2007, 12:24 PM

Cookiepony, the 'before' pix of your horse made me cringe, you were very right to go elsewhere. He looks much better afterwards, but I would note the same effect could have been produced by a competent farrier.

Thanks... BTW, I do have a competent farrier who trims him, but she stopped shoeing last year and now just does barefoot. I have not seen any shoeing jobs in my area that are competent, so I'll have to look around quite a bit if I need to get my horse shod so I can stud him.

I agree, Larkspur's horse's feet look just great.

And thanks for your thoughts on the 4th site.

Auventera Two

Dec. 15, 2007, 12:41 PM

Here's an example of a shoeing job that served the horse quite well.

http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i213/hfournier/Desert%20Spark/Des-fronts.jpg

These are Natural Balance aluminums with flat NB pads. Initially the shoe/pad combo were ground back to create the rocker. The shoes continued to wear throughout the shoeing cycle, providing excellent breakover. I believe they lasted two cycles, and this was taken after the first reset:

http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i213/hfournier/Desert%20Spark/LFSept07.jpg

Note the horse had his shoes and pads pulled six weeks ago and is "winter pasture" sound with good sole thickness.

Wrong. See above.

Yeah, alrighty then. :lol: You have your opinion. I have mine. There's a helluva lot more to how the shoe interacts with the foot then just the toe wearing back.

JHUshoer20

Dec. 15, 2007, 12:46 PM

I have not seen any shoeing jobs in my area that are competent,
Answer to that problem is state licensing. Horse owners must unite and push for it.
George

LarkspurCO

Dec. 15, 2007, 01:01 PM

Yeah, alrighty then. :lol: You have your opinion. I have mine. There's a helluva lot more to how the shoe interacts with the foot then just the toe wearing back.

Gee whiz -- really??? Does this mean the frog support pads and hoof packing were there for a reason.:confused:

Tom Stovall

Dec. 15, 2007, 07:59 PM

Dune in gray

Why wouldn't you do the same "good job" on a show horse versus a pasture horse. They both need a great trim and to be balanced, what would be so different about the trim??

The needs of a pasture ornaments are neither as specific nor as critical as those of a puissance horse. For any competent mechanic, there's nothing to trimming a pasture ornament: Keep the toe out of the way, the phalanges aligned, balance the hoof, address flairs, the frog in contact with the environment, leave the sole alone, radius the hell out of edges, etc., and the horse's needs have probably been met as best they can be.

On the other hand, a puissance horse is trimmed according to the individual's conformation with the objective of attaining maximum biomechanical efficiency. The object of the exercise is to give the horse exactly what it needs for jumping the big wall. Most likely, that will entail routinely taking lateral rads to insure phalangeal alignment and angulation at whatever the horse's connections have determined is optimum, facilitated turnover in front, but NOT in back, and many other things that're unique to the individual and the exercise, all of which means the trimmed feet of a puissance horse, especially the hinds, usually look different than those of a pasture ornament.

I understand that the shoeing package will most likely be different, but discounting the fact that one will be shod and the other will probably be barefoot, why shouldn't the trim be of equal quality??

"Quality" in farriery is always a matter of the operator's successfully assessing and addressing the individual's needs. The needs of pasture ornaments and puissance horses can seldom be met with the same trim.

goeslikestink

Dec. 15, 2007, 09:38 PM

This hits the nail on the head, so to speak. ;) Now, you will get some disagreement about what the right trim is, although pretty much anyone will tell you that long toe, underrun heel is not healthy (however, I am astounded at how many horses I see in this state). I'll give you a little info-- do you have some time to read?

There is a good tutorial here: http://www.hopeforsoundness.com/natbalance/nbguidelines.html
There is a section on recognizing healthy and distorted hoof form.

The above site is a shoes-and-barefoot site; the following sites are barefoot only but have excellent information on healthy hoof form:
www.ironfreehoof.com
www.barefoothorse.com
www.barefoottrim.com
www.clickandtrim.com

Finally, you can look at pics of my own horse's feet, before and after decent trimming (I need to update w/ more recent pics): http://cookiepony.googlepages.com/langston%27sbeautifulhooves%21

I personally think all the sites listed is shameful trimming jobs and not up to any standard that iam used to - I think they are all awful if thats whats up for offer and you are happy with sort of treatment for your horses i can tell you as a horse owner all off them would lame or sore on all four feet and to the untrianed eye may look sound but in my opinion they arn't

as i have an open mind i am for the fairrers but look gave benefit of doubt and looked at all photos before posting my opnion i wll stick to my qualified farriers i pay for a professional complete service as i have both barefoot and shod horses it just confirms that what you pay is what you get - and i am glad mine get the very best as no way would i let anyone of those people near mine as the horses are to valuable to me

Dec. 15, 2007, 10:05 PM

gls, instead of ranting about how poor something is, would you care to share WHY you think so?

Appassionato

Dec. 15, 2007, 10:54 PM

gls, instead of ranting about how poor something is, would you care to share WHY you think so?

THERE'S a long overdue question. :rolleyes: Thank you JB, I've sincerely been wondering if it was just me.

Daydream Believer

Dec. 16, 2007, 08:47 AM

I'm glad I'm not the only one who felt that way. Good question JB.

elctrnc

Dec. 16, 2007, 09:56 AM

gls, instead of ranting about how poor something is, would you care to share WHY you think so?

Hoping the answer isn't just "because farriers are regulated here in the UK," and is rather actually something useful. I mean, how are those of us with "untrained eyes" going to learn anyway?:rolleyes:

Since goeslikestink apparently can look at a picture and determine that "all off them would lame or sore on all four feet and to the untrianed eye may look sound but i can assure you then arnt," maybe goeslikestink can start her own hoof education thread?

Appassionato

Dec. 16, 2007, 12:18 PM

Hoping the answer isn't just "because farriers are regulated here in the UK," and is rather actually something useful. I mean, how are those of us with "untrained eyes" going to learn anyway?:rolleyes:

It's interesting that you mention this. I'm sorry that I can't provide evidence, but I have found it very curious when I've seen pics of poor hoof form posted by owners in the UK at horseshoes. No, it isn't often that this occurs, but I did see it. The "UK is perfect and has perfect farriers and vets" is quite possibly a very mistaken notion...why should owners over there educate themselves on good hoof form or whatever since they have "perfect" help in the form of farriery and vets? Really? Why bother? You know, since there is no need to protect your horse from a hack farrier and all. FWIW, I didn't bother studying neurosurgery before having a neurectomy years ago...was that wrong? I mean, geez, I could have been hurt! Badly! :rolleyes:

Since goeslikestink apparently can look at a picture and determine that "all off them would lame or sore on all four feet and to the untrianed eye may look sound but i can assure you then arnt," maybe goeslikestink can start her own hoof education thread?

I think that's an excellent idea! :yes: But I have one request: can it be done without downing horse owners, or the BUA, or the lack of regulation of farriers in the US, or breeding characteristics, or any other kind of spiteful BS and JUST stick to the facts? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

elctrnc

Dec. 16, 2007, 01:16 PM

oh--OH--I've got an even better idea! Goeslikestink, can YOU post pictures of your horse's feet (all your horses, if you have several), so WE can see what a GOOD trim/shoe job looks like? Thanks.

Edited to add: While my posts certainly have some sarcasm, I'm actually serious here. I would really be interested in seeing what this person thinks is a good job from a regulated UK farrier. Oh, and of course, I would still be interested in why she thinks all of those trimming sites are "disgusting peices of work." Maybe when she discusses how each of those examples are bad, she can compare them to her horses.

Lookout

Dec. 16, 2007, 02:00 PM

The fourth site made me wince along with Tiempo, very few of the 'after' trims showed any appreciable difference in the angle of the hoof (which were mostly bad), just rasped off the flares and dubbed back the toes/mustang-rolled the wall. I could post numerous pix of horses I trim, NONE of which would require the notation "sound x months of the year" and most of whom jump 3-4' on a regular basis.
Jennifer

Huh :confused: :confused: ? "Sound" part of the year?

goeslikestink

Dec. 16, 2007, 02:06 PM

simple - the feet arnt dressed to long to short unlcean thrushy. chiped flared
not level and by that imean all the way around the foot - theres tons of reason why i am not happy each one has a problem that could be cured in one session with a qualifed farrier yet you pay mint for one that isnt

goeslikestink

Dec. 16, 2007, 02:11 PM

i will when i can work out the photos thingy- as mine have excellent feet and any farrier will tell you so and that any off my horses barefoot of not
i have some piccys somewhere so yeah dont mind and you will see a huge difference as in clena trimmed and dress by that i mean a nice finish as my farrier do rasp allthe way rounf the foot so nice and even like you would when you file your finger nail then wax it
or buff it up - same thing happens to my horses -- top and bottom thats what i mean by a good trim think how you like your nails done in a beauty palour or nail shop and how nice they are when done-- its the same with the horses ther should be crack nor flares or chips
or to much long toes that you can see when horse is standing then when you lift the foot can see the how long it is from the toe - ie sole tip to toe tip how much has to come of and it isnt off --

irishcas

Dec. 16, 2007, 06:05 PM

Huh :confused: :confused: ? "Sound" part of the year?

Oh Puhlease christina, you mean it isn't possible for a barefoot horse who is IR to become UNSOUND on grass?

What's so ???ey markabout a horse who has issues that I haven't figured out yet and is sound in the winter and unsound in the spring/earlier summer. :8

I know friends of mine, who live in a different area, different farrier (shoeing farrier) whos horses are sound in Spring and Summer and go laminitic in the winter. They have all their hay tested, supplements to match that, dry lotted and yet laminitis every time.

GLS: Major rolling of my eyes, put up or .... well you know what they say. I too have seen hooves posted by Thomas and other UKer's and it's just as crappy as some of the farrier work we see here. Certification does not make someone good.

If you can't share photos of your horses feet than you don't have a thing to say as far as I'm concerned.

Auventera Two

Dec. 16, 2007, 08:56 PM

Auventera Two

Dec. 16, 2007, 09:03 PM

Last hoof pic from this set.

Pic of my 3 mares together, and a shot of my side pasture, where they live most of the time. Relatively soft footing, grassy, I'd like tougher terrain for better wear but - eh, I'll take it.

Pic of the white foot after it went bare on a 35 mile endurance race. We went off course and the best we figure (and thanks to GPS), we did about 40 miles, very rocky, long stretches of gravel roads. Horse was sound - got all As on vet cards.

Pic of my Appendix mare. Slightly metabolic. Used to be laminitic. Diet is now managed, horse is completely sound, rarely requires boots anymore. Just before this pic was taken, I rode her up and down this (very long) gravel driveway, at trot and canter. I was trying out this el companero (spelling?) that belongs to my friend. Obviously the cowboy riding her here is not me. *laugh* He wanted to try out the pad too. The toes are long in this pic. This is 6 wks worth of growth because she was at a trimming clinic, and was due to be trimmed the next day. I wanted plenty of growth so the students would have something to work with. Was just posting the pic to show her feet on the gravel.

Auventera Two

Dec. 16, 2007, 09:34 PM

In regard to the pictures on the linked websites - what I don't like about most of the "natural trims" is the lack of finish and dress. The toes are just sort of hacked back into the inner wall and left with ragged rasp teeth tracks. I just hate that. I like walls to be finished beautifully with a neat edge, perfect bevel, and no inner wall exposed. I don't want to see dubbed toes either. I want the hooves to have a professional appearance without rasp marks. In looking at most of the pics on the referenced sites, I do have to cringe at the total lack of finish. The horses probably are very sound, and the feet are functional. I just prefer a nicer looking finished product.

Auventera Two

Dec. 16, 2007, 09:50 PM

This is my foundered horse.

First pic was in March, 2007 the day I brought her home (1 wk after she was trimmed by someone else).
Second pic was December, 2007, immediately after I trimmed her.

A farrier trimmed her the first couple of times, and I've been trimming her since. I trim her every 3-4 weeks. She has a pretty signifigant laminar wedge and generally just "weird" feet due to the rotation. She's sound on almost anything.

When I got her, she was rocking back and forth with pain. The last pics were taken yesterday ;)

I could probably post 100 pics but it's time consuming to do so, and so I hope these will suffice for now for the put up or shut up challenge. lol

Lookout

Dec. 16, 2007, 10:04 PM

irishcas

Dec. 16, 2007, 10:22 PM

I just hate that. I like walls to be finished beautifully with a neat edge, perfect bevel, and no inner wall exposed. I don't want to see dubbed toes either.

A2, Okay so you did say they are probably sound and I know for my clients and Paige's the websites list whether they are sound are not but jagged teeth marks aren't what makes that so :)

Also Paige Poss and I trim almost exclusively from the top. We find our style works for our horses and all of our clients. It is not how KC trims or teaches people to trim. We are NOT dubbing the toes. We are bringing the toe back to where it will best facilitate more sole growth and a tighter connection.

After all the cadaver dissections we have done I feel comfortable rolling the toe to where we do.

Paige and I are part of the AHA and even in that group we march to a different beat, but it doesn't mean we don't get the job done. We just have to work less to do it.

Email me if you'd like to discuss further or call me, we have each others numbers ;)

Nice pictures by the way, I would just like to see more of a roll har har.

Regards,

Appassionato

Dec. 16, 2007, 11:08 PM

This is a great thread. My farrier happened to comment to me last shoeing that my horse's one foot always seems to 'grow' unbalanced/uneven every cycle. Does that somehow indicate that the 'underlying' trim was not as correct as it could be or is this normal for some horses? Would the specific nature of the uneveness/balance issue offer some clue to my horse's... way of traveling or conformation or...? Does this make any sense!?! :lol:

I'd like to expand on Lookout's observations in a slightly different way. Have x-rays been taken of this horse's hooves? I ask because a horse will try to "right itself" somewhat. I say "somewhat" because of my own experience after founder when the then farrier tried to leave the heels too tall...my horse kept shedding these wedge-like soles that were thicker towards the heels...I think this was in atempt to put his own P3 back in proper alignment. In any case, when I found a farrier that understood my guy's needs, the wedge-shaped exfoliation pattern stopped and my horse gained more sole depth as a result. That's a good thing.

This same horse has flared lateral walls. My horse is base narrow by genetics, and attempts to "T-square" his front end (thanks Mr. Tom! :winkgrin:) resulted in demineralization of the medial side of his P3's. That's not good. The weight that comes down on his foundered hooves that aren't able to fully support his weight flare on the outside (lateral) walls. That flare ends up in even less support for my horse. Another "not good" thing.

Then there's clubbed feets. Speaking again of mature horses, a severe club can't become normal by just slashing heel off the horse. The horse will do one of two things: either not weight the heel and keep the toe wore down so that heel can develop again, or founder. I'm trying to give very basic predictions here from discussions with other farriers. I don't have a clubbed-footed horse, others can speak more intelligently on what I've mentioned here. I just wanted to give some food for thought. It all comes down to one thing from my basic understanding, vectors: weight and it's distribution on each hoof as provided by the structure within and above. Don't ask me about dynamics, that's still "magic" to me. :D:lol:

Appassionato

Dec. 16, 2007, 11:24 PM

Put up or shut up.

Okay. I'll play. :)

Here are a few snapshots of my Arab's feet. I've trimmed her myself for almost 2 years. She is sound on all surfaces, all the time. The solar shot is of her WORST foot. That's why I took it. She has a deep sulcus on that foot despite 2 rounds of Clean Trax and various other treatments. The picture shows it at the worst it's ever been. Again - that's why I took the pic. But - even at that, I don't think the foot is half bad.

These pics are 4 weeks out of her trim. Certainly not perfect feet, but pretty nice.

Not complaining against your mare's hooves one bit, you know how I'd LOVE to have Bo barefoot for the ease of it. It just isn't in the cards right now.

You'r mare's hooves look great, but I could help but to notice something that Bo's founder vet has been very curious about in regards to Bo from early on once I found him and Jaye: the broken HPA on the hind (noticable on your gal's white hoof). We know what Bo's was caused by, any thoughts for your girl?

In regard to the pictures on the linked websites - what I don't like about most of the "natural trims" is the lack of finish and dress. The toes are just sort of hacked back into the inner wall and left with ragged rasp teeth tracks. I just hate that. I like walls to be finished beautifully with a neat edge, perfect bevel, and no inner wall exposed. I don't want to see dubbed toes either. I want the hooves to have a professional appearance without rasp marks. In looking at most of the pics on the referenced sites, I do have to cringe at the total lack of finish. The horses probably are very sound, and the feet are functional. I just prefer a nicer looking finished product.

This might be naive of me, but the "dress" not only doesn't bother me, but I can see a possible benefit for the soft-hooved crowd when left this way...increased surface area when applying hardeners...just thinking out loud here...thoughts?

Auventera Two

Dec. 17, 2007, 08:35 AM

A2, Okay so you did say they are probably sound and I know for my clients and Paige's the websites list whether they are sound are not but jagged teeth marks aren't what makes that so :)

Also Paige Poss and I trim almost exclusively from the top. We find our style works for our horses and all of our clients. It is not how KC trims or teaches people to trim. We are NOT dubbing the toes. We are bringing the toe back to where it will best facilitate more sole growth and a tighter connection.

After all the cadaver dissections we have done I feel comfortable rolling the toe to where we do.

Paige and I are part of the AHA and even in that group we march to a different beat, but it doesn't mean we don't get the job done. We just have to work less to do it.

Email me if you'd like to discuss further or call me, we have each others numbers ;)

Nice pictures by the way, I would just like to see more of a roll har har.

Regards,

I greatly admire all you do for horses, and I think your site gets a little too much "jabbing" by people here. But I just prefer a different trim style, I do a totally different trim, than you, and we're each free to our own style, right? :)

I call it toe dubbing, you call it mustang rolling. My horse isn't a wild mustang, and there is no need to have a mustang foot. When I was doing a Ramey type trim, with strong mustang rolling, and never touching the toe callous, all I got was a negative palmar angle, and thick false sole growing like wild fire. I don't have those problems now since I use a different trim. I bevel the outer wall to relieve it, and load the inner wall at the ground just a bit, but I don't roll my rasp around the foot and create that big heavy roll. The trim style I've learned is not a "wild horse trim" at all in that we don't use the wild horse as a model.

Different strokes for different folks. That's all. :D

Auventera Two

Dec. 17, 2007, 08:43 AM

Not complaining against your mare's hooves one bit, you know how I'd LOVE to have Bo barefoot for the ease of it. It just isn't in the cards right now.

You'r mare's hooves look great, but I could help but to notice something that Bo's founder vet has been very curious about in regards to Bo from early on once I found him and Jaye: the broken HPA on the hind (noticable on your gal's white hoof). We know what Bo's was caused by, any thoughts for your girl?

These pics weren't taken correctly for doing a very good critique. I have 2 cameras, both older than dirt, and I'm lucky if I actually "get" one out of every 10 or 15 pics I try to take. :lol: The intent of the pics was to show how I dress the feet. I don't believe this mare has a broken HPA in "real life" because if she did, I'd be concerned about it.

But also - this mare does grow a very upright foot with tons of "foot" overall. She grows very fast, and this was 4 weeks out of a trim. Balancing the feet properly would resolve anything screwy with angles. When I'm working her regularly on hard ground, the feet wear very nicely, but when these pics were taken, she hadn't been worked much due to weather, and my time schedule.

This might be naive of me, but the "dress" not only doesn't bother me, but I can see a possible benefit for the soft-hooved crowd when left this way...increased surface area when applying hardeners...just thinking out loud here...thoughts?

Well, my views on hoof hardeners are different than yours too. I have never used one, and probably will never. I toyed with the idea of iodine once, but only applied it a couple of times, then thought better of it. But that's a whole 'nother debate.

Further - I don't believe there to be any benefit at all to opening up so much inner wall at the toe, like the referenced sites show. Why? Inner wall is a different molecular makeup than outer wall, and as so, it is much softer and is not meant to protect like the outer wall does. Why on earth would you want to expose so much of it, and then apply a hoof hardener to it to harden it up to make it do the job of the outer wall??? Makes zero sense to me. Sorry.

Auventera Two

Dec. 17, 2007, 08:49 AM

i am entitled to say what i think the same as you and give an opnion
as for thomas and I we know whats the better end of the market is where horses feet are concerned shame you dont match that- but then again all you lot are governed by a fetious
lie - so i think my horses feet and what i paid for have the best care around being a responsible owner and understanding the health and wealth of horses needs -shame you do not

Where's the pictures? Still waiting. Have been for over a year now. Have yet to see a single photograph. ;)

elctrnc

Dec. 17, 2007, 08:50 AM

i am entitled to say what i think the same as you and give an opnion
as for thomas and I we know whats the better end of the market is where horses feet are concerned shame you dont match that- but then again all you lot are governed by a fetious
lie - so i think my horses feet and what i paid for have the best care around being a responsible owner and understanding the health and wealth of horses needs -shame you do not

so now you are saying that the poster isn't a responsible owner and doesn't "understand the health and wealth of horses needs"? gee, goeslikestink, this is a pretty rude statement and isn't constructive at all.

once again, if you and thomas "know what's better," please enlighten the rest of us.

goeslikestink

Dec. 17, 2007, 08:59 AM

goeslikestink

Dec. 17, 2007, 09:00 AM

also will say thomas `1 has nothing to do with post i only mention him becuase you did and iricas did thats personal

Auventera Two

Dec. 17, 2007, 09:06 AM

elctrnc

Dec. 17, 2007, 09:28 AM

gls: i would like you to post pictures of your horses' feet so we can see what *in your opinion*, a good trim looks like. this isn't about shod versus barefoot, and it really isn't about UK versus US farriers...or even "unqualified" trimmers for that matter. It is about you making a very strong statement and NOT backing it up. It's that simple. Your blanket statements about a good trim are the blanket statements about everyone's trim. What I am interested in is how ALL the feet on each of those four sites (and i mean ALL, not just some of the feet) are bad examples of trimming and the horses will go lame on all feet. If you are prepared to say something like that, you should be prepared to elaborate when someone asks for more detail.

Maybe it would be easiest for you to go through each site and post which foot you are talking about and how it should really be trimmed. THAT is what I want to see. Also, if you can add how and why the horses are going to go lame because of the trim, that would be most useful as well. For example, this horse is going to become lame due to XXXX because the trim is XXXX and it should have been trimmed like XXXX.

If you are so sure of how those sites are wrong and how you are right, TELL US! Of course, since you AREN'T a trimmer or farrier, maybe you aren't qualified to do that. *shrug*

ThirdCharm

Dec. 17, 2007, 09:31 AM

I'm not sure I understand "trimming from the top". Could someone explain? The only thing I can imagine is that it means putting the hoof on a stand, sole down, and addressing the outside/top of the hoof with a rasp, with minimal attention to the underside of the hoof. Which is consistent with the photos on the fourth site, I suppose, but not very consistent with how a hoof wears in its natural state, if that is what one is trying to imitate. Wild horses walk on TOP of the ground, no through it....

Jennifer

Moderator 1

Dec. 17, 2007, 09:45 AM

The discussion of different schools of thought re: shoeing principles is excellent. We pruned out a few comments that were detracting from the overall message. Thanks!

Daydream Believer

Dec. 17, 2007, 09:46 AM

Jennifer, Trimming from the top is a technique that I use at times...not always but mostly. I have also worked with Paige Poss who is the trimmer who has made this technique popular. The idea is that instead of using nippers to take down excess wall from the bottom as most farriers and many trimmers do, you use the rasp from the top with the hoof on a stand to address both the flares and the wall at the same time as well as the roll. It is quite easy to feel your way along with your finger as you rasp and using this method, it is much harder to trim too short. Generally when you finish from the top, you do pick up the foot and check the balance and heels. Here is a page from Paige's site that shows some pics. Don't feel bad for not getting it...I had to ride with Paige and watch her do this a few times to really understand exactly what she was doing.

http://www.ironfreehoof.com/top.htm

Many trimmers also do very little to the bottom of the foot...it varies some...some folks with clean up the dead sole, some leave it, some trim bars and some don't. Some trim frogs but most only do minimal work to the frogs just to keep them healthy from infection and thrush.

I run somewhere in between. I do clean up the bottom enough to find my landmarks and I do clean up frogs a little when necessary and trim only overgrown bars. If a horse has a very overgrown foot with a lot of wall, I will sometimes nip first and take off some of the wall and then rasp. I'm finding with the drought here, feet are like concrete and I'm using up rasps way too fast doing so much rasping.

I hope this helps.

Dec. 17, 2007, 09:47 AM

This is a picture I found some months ago on a natural trimming site. There is just NO excuse for this kind of work. Hacking the toe straight back is not the correct way to shorten the toe, bring breakover back, or increase biomechanical efficiency, as Tom Stovall would say.
Can you explain why this is not a "correct" way to bring the toe back? Are you saying there is one and only one correct way to do that? What about the foundered horse who has inches of dead/stretched lamina out front and coffin bone knocking on the sole to get out - certainly can't do a rocker. What would *you* do to get rid of the useless and damaging length of toe?
If you don't know where this picture comes from, how do you know that there wasn't miles of excess toe out in front, making this the best choice at that particular time?

Could you imagine going into a hunter class with feet that look like this?
I can indeed, at least a lot more than I can imagine going into the class with the feet as they might have looked before this trim ;)

Or a championship halter class? There is a way to trim correctly, achieve the desired result, and yet leave the hoof with a professional, classy looking dress.
If you're talking purely cosmetics, then that is another ballgame and not necessarily related to function.

Auventera Two

Dec. 17, 2007, 09:48 AM

Dec. 17, 2007, 09:53 AM

Ideally, if there is just a moderate to minimal amount of flare, the removal of it is done along the same plane as the front of the toe - no vertical cut (aka dubbing).

Rather than calling it "trimming from the top", which to me implies that all the trimming is done with the foot right side up, it's better to think of it as a "top down" trim. It's what DDB said - remove the flares from the top first, then address whatever it to be addressed from the bottom.

Auventera Two

Dec. 17, 2007, 09:54 AM

Can you explain why this is not a "correct" way to bring the toe back? Are you saying there is one and only one correct way to do that? What about the foundered horse who has inches of dead/stretched lamina out front and coffin bone knocking on the sole to get out - certainly can't do a rocker. What would *you* do to get rid of the useless and damaging length of toe?
If you don't know where this picture comes from, how do you know that there wasn't miles of excess toe out in front, making this the best choice at that particular time?

I think I just addressed this on another post I just made. We must have posted at the same time. :)

Founder is different - particularly when there is a laminar wedge. Of course you have to cut it straight back because of the way it grows. But we're not talking about founder here.

I can indeed, at least a lot more than I can imagine going into the class with the feet as they might have looked before this trim ;)

I'm not saying it's appropriate to allow toes to run out in front of the horse. But I do think there's better ways of getting them back than what I see with this toe dubbing. Yes, you can cut the toe back if you need to, but I think some people get carried away with it.

I was with my farrier friend a few weeks ago and he did a Saddlebred with toes out to the moon. She'd been neglected for quite a few months. He cut the toes back based upon the visible outline of P3 on the sole. He shod the horse in Eventers to keep her from being sore, since he did take quite a bit of toe off. But, when he was done, but toe wasn't hacked and chewed up with a straight back 90 degree cut. It looked like a totally normal foot with shoes on. The feet were actually, quite beautiful when he was done.

Obviously since I don't shoe, I would boot the horse if necessary, or take the toes back a little more gradually over a couple of trims.

If you're talking purely cosmetics, then that is another ballgame and not necessarily related to function.

Most of what I'm talking about is purely cosmetic, yes. But exposing such a large amount of inner wall isn't something I consider healthy, or particularly desirable either though. I'm not saying that dubbed toes will make a horse lame, I'm just saying it's not how I personally prefer to see a horse trimmed.

Daydream Believer

Dec. 17, 2007, 09:55 AM

JB, you've got it. A major advantage to this type of trim is that it is nearly impossible to get the hoof overly short as you easily can with nippers.

Auventera Two

Dec. 17, 2007, 09:57 AM

irishcas

Dec. 17, 2007, 10:07 AM

I've always wondered the same thing about "trimming from the top." It seems that there is a big emphasis on creating a "third plane" by dubbing the toe straight back. In other words - when you trim a foot, the dorsal wall is a plane, and the solar toe is a plane. The two meet to create somewhere around a 50ish degree angle. What a lot of the natural trimmers seem to do is rasp straight back at 90 degrees, removing toe, and creating a third plane. So you end up with, say a 54 degree angle of the dorsal wall, a 90 degree angle of the dub, and then the flat ground surface, instead of bringing the toe height down, and the dorsal wall back, and meeting the two.

A2,

First off I'm totally in agreement that different rasp strokes for different folks :) I have respect for your work even though I don't agree with the cookie cutter recipe that KC teaches. Just like with any methodology it is only as good as the student makes it. I like what you've done with your feet.

Pete Ramey doesn't trim the same as Paige and I, but he recognizes we basically get the same results.

Most of the pictures on my website are of Pathological Hooves. Major changes were needed. With the Trimming from the Top it isn't about angles, degrees and dubbing the toe straight back. It's about feel and rolling the toe so that when the horse walks and pushes off from the breakover point, not creating more pathologies. As the foot returns to soundness the roll is less high and closer to the ground. I just updated some of the pix at www.clickandtrim.com/soundfeet.htm scroll down and look at the last horse's feet Oisin, whos pix I took 2 days ago.

Look at the hind foot I'm showing from the outside. That is what my Trim from the Top looks like on a sound healthy foot.

To the others who mentioned the horses walking from the top of their foot :) Again this trim is to effect changes, these horses needed help.

Finally the Trim from the Top is easy to teach to horse owners who want to do their own horses. I DO NOT have a problem teaching people how to trim their own, especially when they have absolutely no good hoofcare professionals in their area. TftT has definite easy markers for the owner to recognize and not do much harm to their horses feet.

I find that this method fits into my belief system and all the clients who seek me out. It is a less is more approach. Of course I touch heels, bars and ratty frogs it depends on what I'm presented with when I pick up the foot.

But fix breakover, return the DC to a healthier state and many of the other pieces fall into place. A horse with underrun heels has them mostly because the breakover/toe is waaaay too far forward. Trimming those heels will serve no purpose, but bringing the toe into the WL usually does.

It is so hard to do over the internet, it's much easier as Daydream said to follow one of us around to "get" it.

Anyway, have to venture out to trim in this wicked cold UGH! We have 35mph wind gusts... booo hoooo. :D

Regards,

Auventera Two

Dec. 17, 2007, 10:40 AM

Thanks for the clarification Kim :) And don't freeze to death today! You're right, it's wicked cold out there. :eek:

JHUshoer20

Dec. 17, 2007, 11:51 AM

OP was asking about shoeing. How did BUA manage to hijack this one?
George

Dec. 17, 2007, 12:03 PM

George, it's not hijacked - not any more than many other threads on many other topics get hijacked. The point was made about how often the underlying trim made a difference in a good "shoeing" job, since MANY people who don't know better equate "shoeing" with the whole thing, trim included. Many people say "I need a farrier who can shoe my horse to make him sound" and then present a "well shod" foot on a horribly trimmed foot.

And yes, information WAS given as to what makes the actual application of the shoe good.

And just in case you haven't noticed, or chose to ignore, most of the "barefooters" who have replied to this thread have no problems with shoes in the right applications, so please stop lumping all of us into the BUA :mad:

Lookout

Dec. 17, 2007, 12:20 PM

Founder is different - particularly when there is a laminar wedge. Of course you have to cut it straight back because of the way it grows. But we're not talking about founder here.

You have no idea what we're talking about here because as you said you have no idea where this picture came from or what it represents. It is meaningless to post this picture, and say, this looks bad. For starters the growth lines at the toe do indicate that there was excessive heel growth prior to this foot being trimmed.

And App was right, that hind foot HPA is broken forward. If your camera is useless why are you posting pictures? That's about as helpful as the pictures GLS has posted.

Instead of hijacking a shoeing thread where the OP had some very valid questions about shoeing that are not being addressed with this bickering, why not start your own thread showing the examples of beautifully dressed feet you trim.

Lookout

Dec. 17, 2007, 12:22 PM

Dec. 17, 2007, 12:27 PM

This is nonsense. The foot is a three dimensional object, not one with planes.

X, Y, and Z planes make a 3-D object.

Lookout

Dec. 17, 2007, 12:29 PM

Daydream Believer

Dec. 17, 2007, 12:52 PM

So this technique has nothing to do with benefiting the horse per se, but rather is intended for use by trimmers whose tool technique and motor skills are so unreliable that they can't be trusted to trim normally?

:lol::lol::lol:

Since you asked...the technique is highly beneficial to the horse. Go back and read Irishcas last post as she does a great job explaining why. If the end result is the same, why does the technique matter anyway?

LarkspurCO

Dec. 17, 2007, 01:54 PM

I don't know about all the barefoot trimming banter, but I would add another point in answer to the OP's question (where are you OP?).

Sign of a good shoeing job: When the horse is unsound before the shoeing and then immediately sound, and remains sound, afterward.

I mention this because I am enjoying the the remarkable transformation in the hind end one of mine after my farrier worked his magic last Wednesday. The shoeing on this horse is the only thing that enables him to do the kind of work we both enjoy.

Auventera Two

Dec. 17, 2007, 01:57 PM

Lookout - wow, you're abnormally grounchy today. :lol: You're free to comment on my pics all you want. That's why I posted them! :yes: I've spoken to the comments earlier about the angle. I never said my camera was useless. I said it's very old and I can't just snap off a full set of pictures like I'd like to. Unless you want to send me 3 or 400 hundred bucks to buy a new one, I'll just keep posting the pics I "can" get with it.

Like I said - I posted these specific pics to show how I dress and finish hooves, versus leaving ragged rasp teeth. I didn't post them for the purpose of critiquing angles. If that was the intent, it would be prudent to take photos with the camera down on the ground, and in the correct position to limit distortion.

And my OPINION is that even if the toes were run way out in front of the horse, they could have been brought back adequately, and then the hoof dressed in more professional manner. But I guess that's where we differ.

I post pics expecting to hear negative and positive. After all, this is a public bulletin board. But I personally tune out people who rant on for months on end how everybody in the world has their head up their butt except THEM but yet we never see a single picture.

Auventera Two

Dec. 17, 2007, 01:58 PM

This is nonsense. The foot is a three dimensional object, not one with planes.

And what do you think defines a 3-D object?

Lookout

Dec. 17, 2007, 02:06 PM

And what do you think defines a 3-D object?
De planes, de planes. Except for the curvy parts.

(Read the rules, did you DD?)

Dec. 17, 2007, 03:15 PM

Sign of a good shoeing job: When the horse is unsound before the shoeing and then immediately sound, and remains sound, afterward.

Was it the shoes, or the trim? ;)

What if the horse is immediately sound after the shoes, but in a week the shoe falls off because the nails were set toooo low? What if, after some number of shoeings, there are heel problems developing because the farrier insists on using the rear-most nailholes every time? :)

Tom Stovall

Dec. 17, 2007, 05:06 PM

JB in gray

Was it the shoes, or the trim?

Most likely, the shoes. A trim is limited to the removal of tissue: a trim can't put anything back that needs putting back, replace anything that needs replacing, or protect anything that needs protecting.

What if the horse is immediately sound after the shoes, but in a week the shoe falls off because the nails were set toooo low?

With a similar lack of logic I might ask, "What if my aunt were differently endowed? Would she be my uncle?"

What if, after some number of shoeings, there are heel problems developing because the farrier insists on using the rear-most nailholes every time?

What if someone were silly enough to give credence to the mindless nattering of a BUAista proselyte, intent on denigrating farriers while extolling the alleged virtues of barefootedness, instead of having a farrier do whatever is necessary to give the horse whatever it needs to do whatever it does as best it can? :)

JHUshoer20

Dec. 17, 2007, 05:24 PM

George, it's not hijacked - not any more than many other threads on many other topics get hijacked. The point was made about how often the underlying trim made a difference in a good "shoeing" job, since MANY people who don't know better equate "shoeing" with the whole thing, trim included. Many people say "I need a farrier who can shoe my horse to make him sound" and then present a "well shod" foot on a horribly trimmed foot. Negative,
If a foot is horribly trimmed it cannot possibly be well shod.

A great deal can be accomplished with shoe design but to any competent horseshoer trimming is really the LEAST they oughta get right.
George

irishcas

Dec. 17, 2007, 06:51 PM

A great deal can be accomplished with shoe design but to any competent horseshoer trimming is really the LEAST they oughta get right.
George

HUH? Please tell me I'm reading this wrong, but if I'm understanding what you wrote that explains why so many Certified Farriers (in my area) put out such crappy trimming under shoes work!

Sigh.

Maybe I misunderstood.

Regards,

Staish14

Dec. 17, 2007, 07:02 PM

I don't know about all the barefoot trimming banter, but I would add another point in answer to the OP's question (where are you OP?).

I am here! I have been trying to follow this thread but have found myself in WAY over my head :confused:. I don't understand a lot about what is being discussed in here. I do, of course, understand that a good trim is the foundation for a good shoeing. Perhaps I just didn't phrase my question correctly. I was looking for input on what trim ANGLES are appropriate for different conformations. For example, "This trim is insufficient because too much _______ was removed and not enough _______, pitching the horse's leg _____ (forward/backward) and making it's pasterns too _______ (upright/horizontal)". That kind of thing. Maybe I should start a new thread?

Don't get me wrong - I'm sure everything you are all talking about is very informative - it is just way beyond my knowledge and I can't keep up:winkgrin:

irishcas

Dec. 17, 2007, 07:41 PM

I am here! I have been trying to follow this thread but have found myself in WAY over my head :confused:. I don't understand a lot about what is being discussed in here. I do, of course, understand that a good trim is the foundation for a good shoeing. Perhaps I just didn't phrase my question correctly. I was looking for input on what trim ANGLES are appropriate for different conformations. For example, "This trim is insufficient because too much _______ was removed and not enough _______, pitching the horse's leg _____ (forward/backward) and making it's pasterns too _______ (upright/horizontal)". That kind of thing. Maybe I should start a new thread?

Don't get me wrong - I'm sure everything you are all talking about is very informative - it is just way beyond my knowledge and I can't keep up:winkgrin:

Staish:

I think what most of us are saying is review the websites initially listed by Cookiepony.

Angles and Measurements are what get most horses in trouble. Pete Ramey tries to describe on his website how to read the hoof for good trimming.

The trim is insufficient because it is not addressing the excessive toe or excessive heel height. Look at the pix on the website's listed and imagine your horses feet getting towards that state.

Where are you located maybe we can find you a different farrier. There are some great farriers on this site with good connections.

Regards,

Appassionato

Dec. 17, 2007, 07:47 PM

OP was asking about shoeing. How did BUA manage to hijack this one?
George

Oh I don't know...good trimming is good trimming! And since the OP asked a very loaded question (doesn't EVERY horse owner?), it's natural to try to help people understand in the order that you yourself learned it. I would imagine farriers learn by recognition, they have to recognize good hoof form in order to maintain it. Not trying to be sassy here, but didn't you start by trimming, then shoeing? Or all at once?

Tom Stovall

Dec. 17, 2007, 07:58 PM

Staish in gray, deletia

I have been trying to follow this thread but have found myself in WAY over my head :confused:. I don't understand a lot about what is being discussed in here. I do, of course, understand that a good trim is the foundation for a good shoeing. Perhaps I just didn't phrase my question correctly. I was looking for input on what trim ANGLES are appropriate for different conformations.

There is no correct answer to your question. For example, phalangeal angulation in groups of light horses can vary as much as 10 degrees in paired fronts and hinds. "Normal" is considered by various authorities to be 45º-55º in hinds and 50º-60º in fronts, but your mileage may vary considerably from horse to horse and even veterinary text to text.

For example, "This trim is insufficient because too much _______ was removed and not enough _______, pitching the horse's leg _____ (forward/backward) and making it's pasterns too _______ (upright/horizontal)". That kind of thing. Maybe I should start a new thread?

You might as well ask, "How high is up?" Every horse is an individual and, despite the nonsense promulgated by wannabe authorities, there is no single way of trimming/shoeing, no one model, that's "best" for every horse, in every environment, in every activity, every time.

Don't get me wrong - I'm sure everything you are all talking about is very informative - it is just way beyond my knowledge and I can't keep up:winkgrin:

Did you go to the AFA's website? http://www.americanfarriers.org/documents/FCPtext2006.pdf If you'll download this .pdf file, print it out, and study it, you should get a good overview of what use- or need- based trimming/shoeing is all about. It's the certification guide for various classes of AFA certified farriers and there's quite a bit of good, general information on trimming and shoeing there, but none of it is specific to any individual. Beyond the basics, there are simply too many variables to give anyone shoeing/trimming advice unless one can actually see the horse, examine the horse, and watch it move. Please bear in mind that the certification guide is based on the AFA's testing standards, but, as the AFA is quick to point out, there is no one way to trim/shoe horses.

Dec. 17, 2007, 08:05 PM

JB in gray

Was it the shoes, or the trim?

Most likely, the shoes. A trim is limited to the removal of tissue: a trim can't put anything back that needs putting back, replace anything that needs replacing, or protect anything that needs protecting.
Now Tom, did I ever say, or imply, that the trim could put something back? No. But I can tell you COUNTLESS times I've seen in person, and in threads here, where people have touted the magical properties of shoes - "SHOES made my horse sound!!!" and then we see before pics of a horribly trimmed barefoot horse and a MUCH better trimmed shod horse. And, to be fair, it goes the other way - I'll be one of the first to point out that the trim was the magic, not going barefoot, when someone shows pictures of a horribly trimmed shod foot and a nicely trimmed bare foot.

With a similar lack of logic I might ask, "What if my aunt were differently endowed? Would she be my uncle?"
No, that's not the point. My point was in asking - just having a horse walk off sounder with shoes than without does not necessarily mean it was a well-shod foot. A well-shod foot doesn't lose shoes to loose nails a week later. A well-shod foot doesn't have shoes too big or too small or the wrong shape.

What if someone were silly enough to give credence to the mindless nattering of a BUAista proselyte, intent on denigrating farriers while extolling the alleged virtues of barefootedness, instead of having a farrier do whatever is necessary to give the horse whatever it needs to do whatever it does as best it can? :)
And your point here was....:confused: I am so sick and tired of anything that anyone says negative about any farrier work being turned into meaning that person is a BUA. Get over it please.

Negative,
If a foot is horribly trimmed it cannot possibly be well shod.

A great deal can be accomplished with shoe design but to any competent horseshoer trimming is really the LEAST they oughta get right.
George
Trimming is the LEAST they oughta do right? OMG...

Lookout

Dec. 17, 2007, 08:06 PM

There was nothing wrong with your questions and phrases. Most of the response has been from barefooters not shoers, and the techniques discussed are generally specific to barefoot. Just as you can't trim a foot for a shoe and then expect the horse to be sound barefoot, you can't do a correct barefoot trim onto which you can then attach a shoe. As to the angles, one example of a broken forward HPA was posted, two people thought so seeing it from two different angles and it's only on one leg (so unlikely to be from the camera), but the poster denies that it's so. Anyway you don't want an angle like that.

I am here! I have been trying to follow this thread but have found myself in WAY over my head :confused:. I don't understand a lot about what is being discussed in here. I do, of course, understand that a good trim is the foundation for a good shoeing. Perhaps I just didn't phrase my question correctly. I was looking for input on what trim ANGLES are appropriate for different conformations. For example, "This trim is insufficient because too much _______ was removed and not enough _______, pitching the horse's leg _____ (forward/backward) and making it's pasterns too _______ (upright/horizontal)". That kind of thing. Maybe I should start a new thread?

Don't get me wrong - I'm sure everything you are all talking about is very informative - it is just way beyond my knowledge and I can't keep up:winkgrin:

Dec. 17, 2007, 08:11 PM

There was nothing wrong with your questions and phrases. Most of the response has been from barefooters not shoers, and the techniques discussed are generally specific to barefoot. Just as you can't trim a foot for a shoe and then expect the horse to be sound barefoot, you can't do a correct barefoot trim onto which you can then attach a shoe. As to the angles, one example of a broken forward HPA was posted, two people thought so seeing it from two different angles and it's only on one leg (so unlikely to be from the camera), but the poster denies that it's so. Anyway you don't want an angle like that.

But the angles for one particular horse's foot comes down to the same thing, regardless of whether a shoe will be put on or not. That is the point most posters were trying to make, though some in a quite roundabout way. How the foot is finished will be different if it's to be shod vs not. But finishing it doesn't have a whole lot to do with how you balanced it in the first place. Balance is balance is balances. Shoes are just an extra.

irishcas

Dec. 17, 2007, 08:25 PM

Trimming is the LEAST they oughta do right? OMG...

Excellent post JB, I too am sick of the whinging by farriers about their brethren and blaming it on the "BUA". The farriers stick together like NYC Cops do :) I'm glad to see I'm not the only one appalled by George's statement.

Regards,

Tom Stovall

Dec. 17, 2007, 08:48 PM

JB in gray, deletia

Now Tom, did I ever say, or imply, that the trim could put something back?

I pointed out, quite correctly, the inherent limitations of trimming - anyone's trimming. If you read anything else into my response, that's your problem.

No. But I can tell you COUNTLESS times I've seen in person, and in threads here, where people have touted the magical properties of shoes - "SHOES made my horse sound!!!" and then we see before pics of a horribly trimmed barefoot horse and a MUCH better trimmed shod horse. And, to be fair, it goes the other way - I'll be one of the first to point out that the trim was the magic, not going barefoot, when someone shows pictures of a horribly trimmed shod foot and a nicely trimmed bare foot.

There are times that a shoe will make a lame horse sound, simply because a shoe affords sensitive structures protection from environmental hazards or achieves and maintains structural integrity, alignment, angulation, or balance of the hoof capsule. In reality, trimming is inherently limited in much of its pragmatic application while shoeing is not, primarily because shoeing is additive while trimming is subtractive.

No, that's not the point. My point was in asking - just having a horse walk off sounder with shoes than without does not necessarily mean it was a well-shod foot.

At my end of the sandpile, sound is as sound does and anyone's conjecture about the way things oughta be is irrelevant.

A well-shod foot doesn't lose shoes to loose nails a week later. A well-shod foot doesn't have shoes too big or too small or the wrong shape.

Your logic is a bit fuzzy. Whatever gave you the silly idea that a "well shod" foot would be poorly nailed? Or, that the shoe on a "well shod" hoof would be the wrong size or shape? "Well shod" means the horse got what it needed to do whatever it does as best it can, it doesn't mean "poorly nailed" or "shoes the wrong shape/size," as you wrongly - and somewhat disingenuously - imply.

And your point here was....:confused: I am so sick and tired of anything that anyone says negative about any farrier work being turned into meaning that person is a BUA. Get over it please.

Dare I suggest that YOU get over it? The gratuitous and unwarranted sniping at farriers may be considered business as usual on this forum - but don't expect us to roll over and play dead. :)

LarkspurCO

Dec. 17, 2007, 08:49 PM

Sign of a good shoeing job: When the horse is unsound before the shoeing and then immediately sound, and remains sound, afterward.

What if the horse is immediately sound after the shoes, but in a week the shoe falls off because the nails were set toooo low? What if, after some number of shoeings, there are heel problems developing because the farrier insists on using the rear-most nailholes every time? :)

My hypothetical criteria were that the horse remain sound, so I wouldn't count these examples as good shoeing.

With a similar lack of logic I might ask, "What if my aunt were differently endowed? Would she be my uncle?"

LMAO!

Dec. 17, 2007, 08:58 PM

JB in gray, deletia

Now Tom, did I ever say, or imply, that the trim could put something back?

I pointed out, quite correctly, the inherent limitations of trimming - anyone's trimming. If you read anything else into my response, that's your problem.
Then you comments to my commend were pointless. Your comments were fine, but in reply to mine made no sense.

No. But I can tell you COUNTLESS times I've seen in person, and in threads here, where people have touted the magical properties of shoes - "SHOES made my horse sound!!!" and then we see before pics of a horribly trimmed barefoot horse and a MUCH better trimmed shod horse. And, to be fair, it goes the other way - I'll be one of the first to point out that the trim was the magic, not going barefoot, when someone shows pictures of a horribly trimmed shod foot and a nicely trimmed bare foot.

There are times that a shoe will make a lame horse sound, simply because a shoe affords sensitive structures protection from environmental hazards or achieves and maintains structural integrity, alignment, angulation, or balance of the hoof capsule. In reality, trimming is inherently limited in much of its pragmatic application while shoeing is not, primarily because shoeing is additive while trimming is subtractive.
Again, your comments in and of themselves are fine, but in the context of mine make no sense.

No, that's not the point. My point was in asking - just having a horse walk off sounder with shoes than without does not necessarily mean it was a well-shod foot.

At my end of the sandpile, sound is as sound does and anyone's conjecture about the way things oughta be is irrelevant.
What?

A well-shod foot doesn't lose shoes to loose nails a week later. A well-shod foot doesn't have shoes too big or too small or the wrong shape.

Your logic is a bit fuzzy. Whatever gave you the silly idea that a "well shod" foot would be poorly nailed?
Finally, THAT was my point! The original comment was about well-shod being that the horse walks off sound (or sounder) than before the shoes. But it doesn't end there, THAT was my point!

And your point here was....:confused: I am so sick and tired of anything that anyone says negative about any farrier work being turned into meaning that person is a BUA. Get over it please.

Dare I suggest that YOU get over it? The gratuitous and unwarranted sniping at farriers may be considered business as usual on this forum - but don't expect us to roll over and play dead. :)

Who has snipped at farriers here? You are the one snipping at anyone who is pro-barefoot-but-not-anti-shoe and see no problem bringing that up into ever single thread where one of "us" dares to comment on how the trim is the most important thing to a healthy foot.

Dec. 17, 2007, 08:59 PM

Sign of a good shoeing job: When the horse is unsound before the shoeing and then immediately sound, and remains sound, afterward.

My hypothetical criteria were that the horse remain sound, so I wouldn't count these examples as good shoeing.
And that's fine, and that's partially why I typed what I did because it isn't simply about what happens immediately after a trim or shoeing :)

Appassionato

Dec. 17, 2007, 09:11 PM

I was looking for input on what trim ANGLES are appropriate for different conformations. For example, "This trim is insufficient because too much _______ was removed and not enough _______, pitching the horse's leg _____ (forward/backward) and making it's pasterns too _______ (upright/horizontal)". That kind of thing.

You might as well ask, "How high is up?" Every horse is an individual and, despite the nonsense promulgated by wannabe authorities, there is no single way of trimming/shoeing, no one model, that's "best" for every horse, in every environment, in every activity, every time.

Putting Staish14's part in bold myself, I can definately see why the OP is asking the question. Too long after Bo foundered (and explanations by my then farrier were not making any sense), I started researching correct hoof form since I had read it over and over here at COTH. It seemed like a good place to start, I mean my gosh, my guy mechanically foundered! :winkgrin:

That all said, do you have any personal pics of horses you've done Mr. Tom? I ask because you've got boatloads of experience, and since I learned best by researching failure compared to healthy, I wonder if such a thing would help the OP as well.

I should have said earlier and will now, kudos to you Staish14 for looking into hoof form and such. I'm hoping it's a curiousity of yours instead of researching to correct a failure like I did. And PLEASE feel free to ask questions. I ask "stupid" questions constantly...how else can I learn? PLEASE feel free to ask questions. Look at my philosophy: if it's such a dumb question, then why don't more people know the answer?

Lookout

Dec. 17, 2007, 09:28 PM

But the angles for one particular horse's foot comes down to the same thing, regardless of whether a shoe will be put on or not. That is the point most posters were trying to make, though some in a quite roundabout way. How the foot is finished will be different if it's to be shod vs not. But finishing it doesn't have a whole lot to do with how you balanced it in the first place. Balance is balance is balances. Shoes are just an extra.

Whatever. Somehow, I don't think the poster is being helped by this (as she herself stated). Little here is directing her how to evaluate a proper shoeing job.

Appassionato

Dec. 17, 2007, 09:39 PM

no iam saying that those that trim that arnt up to standards dont consider the horses at all there fore not taking his needs as it is a health issue into consideration
and like i said iam entitled to my opnion and none are up to standard its that simple mt farrier is due end of january so i post a piccy then

i have a view the same as you lot i can say if i dislike the same as you can say you liek something its a view an opnion and thats its

i was talking in general as a whole as all sites and all trims not getting at anyone in peticualar

enlctrnc -- we do that why we dont use trimmers with no qualifications

The part in bold by me for emphasis.

Since you can't/won't tell us what's wrong with a specific pic from the websites you've condemned...please keep us up-to-date on when your horses are to be shod/trimmed. That way, we can gently remind you to get a camera out for that day. Considering that not ALL hoof problems are from the trimming/shoeing, be prepared to show us many different body shots. You should know which shots are needed and why. Since they are your horses, this shouldn't be hard to do. We'll be waiting.

Tom Stovall

Dec. 17, 2007, 09:56 PM

Lookout in gray, deletia

Little here is directing her how to evaluate a proper shoeing job.

I posted URLs to the AFA's website and the Certification Guide in previous posts, perhaps you missed it. :)

JHUshoer20

Dec. 17, 2007, 10:16 PM

Who has snipped at farriers here? You are the one snipping at anyone who is pro-barefoot-but-not-anti-shoe and see no problem bringing that up into ever single thread where one of "us" dares to comment on how the trim is the most important thing to a healthy foot.

LMYAO Brings to mind some of the arguments horseshoers have. I can remember reading AFJ back in the very early '80s. there were always letters to the editor saying to get off of the forging and shoemaking, that the real deal was how to trim and level the hoof.

Now almost 30 years later I see the same thing. Seems then it was coming from people who couldn't forge. Now it's coming from people who cant shoe.

Have our standards declined that much?:confused:
George

Dec. 17, 2007, 10:27 PM

LMYAO Brings to mind some of the arguments horseshoers have. I can remember reading AFJ back in the very early '80s. there were always letters to the editor saying to get off of the forging and shoemaking, that the real deal was how to trim and level the hoof.

Now almost 30 years later I see the same thing. Seems then it was coming from people who couldn't forge. Now it's coming from people who cant shoe.

Have our standards declined that much?:confused:
George

I'm not really sure what this is supposed to mean. My point was the trim is first and foremost. Beyond that - shod, barefoot, boots - it depends on what the horse needs. Why is that so arguable? Why does it mean standards have declined? Why did YOU say that the trim was the "least they oughta do right"?

And FYI, because it's very apparent you haven't gotten this point, some of us "can't" shoe because we don't have, nor wish to undertake the training to do so. If we think shoes are needed, we go to a farrier. If I can't handle the complexity of a wiring or plumbing job, I hire an electrician or plumber.

Dune

Dec. 17, 2007, 10:59 PM

The needs of a pasture ornaments are neither as specific nor as critical as those of a puissance horse.

I think that the needs of a pasture horse are specific and critical to each individual animal.

Most likely, that will entail routinely taking lateral rads to insure phalangeal alignment and angulation at whatever the horse's connections have determined is optimum, facilitated turnover in front,

I'm hoping to clarify what you mean here...is this specific to a puissance horse versus a GP jumper? Is this because the toe needs "purchase", rather than breakover? :confused:

but NOT in back, and many other things that're unique to the individual and the exercise, all of which means the trimmed feet of a puissance horse, especially the hinds, usually look different than those of a pasture ornament.

Perhaps you could be more specific? How many puissance horses do you shoe versus pasture ornaments?

.l

Appassionato

Dec. 18, 2007, 12:00 AM

http://www.chronicleforums.com/Forum/showthread.php?p=2875321#post2875321

Here's a question to Pat Reilly about my own horse for some to investigate and ponder in regards to issues raised in this thread (horse has non-spetic pedal osteitis and sinking founder).

JHUshoer20

Dec. 18, 2007, 04:37 AM

Why did YOU say that the trim was the "least they oughta do right?"
I thought was pretty straightforward blunt and to the point. What part of it didn't you understand?
George

Tom Stovall

Dec. 18, 2007, 08:14 AM

Dune in gray, my old stuff in brown, deletia

The needs of a pasture ornaments are neither as specific nor as critical as those of a puissance horse.

I think that the needs of a pasture horse are specific and critical to each individual animal.

You digress. The salient point is that the use of the individual is a factor in determining an individual's needs and there exists a tremendous difference in use between pasture and puissance.

Most likely, that will entail routinely taking lateral rads to insure phalangeal alignment and angulation at whatever the horse's connections have determined is optimum, facilitated turnover in front,

I'm hoping to clarify what you mean here...is this specific to a puissance horse versus a GP jumper?

I compared the shoeing of a puissance horse with the trimming of a pasture ornament for contrast, but any horse engaged in an activity requiring and extreme level of athleticism - jumper, runner, barrel horse, working cow horse, etc. - will serve for comparison.

Is this because the toe needs "purchase", rather than breakover?

It has to do with shoeing specific to an activity. Fronts are trimmed and shod differently when biomechanical efficiency is at a premium because the primary function of fronts (support) and hinds (propulsion) differs.

but NOT in back, and many other things that're unique to the individual and the exercise, all of which means the trimmed feet of a puissance horse, especially the hinds, usually look different than those of a pasture ornament.

Perhaps you could be more specific?

In a nutshell, a pasture ornament would ordinarily be trimmed with a short lever and a radiused edge on all four corners, while most puissance horses would need a slightly longer lever behind to attain optimum biomechanical efficiency.

How many puissance horses do you shoe versus pasture ornaments?

I don't shoe any puissance horses at present. (Pin Oak, the largest multi-discipline horse show in Texas, dropped the puissance years ago.) As a former show farrier, I shod a few puissance horses in the past, but I don't recall ever shoeing a sound pasture ornament, most likely because sound pasture ornaments don't ordinarily need shoeing. :)

Daydream Believer

Dec. 18, 2007, 09:00 AM

, that the real deal was how to trim and level the hoof.

Now almost 30 years later I see the same thing. Seems then it was coming from people who couldn't forge. Now it's coming from people who cant shoe.

Actually that is not the case. Many of the people who started the "barefoot" movement were farriers who could shoe and forge but decided it was better for the horse to not put shoes on it, emphasized the importance of a trim/balance over anything else, etc...you know the story.

I spoke to one of our local farriers, who is my friend, the other night who was here at our barn shoeing a horse for a barrel racer and he told me that he was only shoeing horses still because he had to make a living still but when we had a moment in private he pulled Pete Ramey's book out of his truck and his eyes lit up and said "this is the way it ought to be done....it is so much better for the horses" And so change happens...people...and now farriers... with new ideas and new ways of doing things. Who knows what the future holds? :)

Auventera Two

Dec. 18, 2007, 09:11 AM

I feel it prudent to point out the fact, that on all these shoes vs. barefoot threads, it is the same 2 or 3 farriers giving the same viewpoints, and the same handful of non-farriers. When you actually talk to many farriers in real life, you quickly learn how MANY viewpoints there are. The term "BUA" is derogatory, and was invented in the fertile mind of a particular farrier at horseshoes.com. The term has no signifigance in real life. :lol:

I've used a farrier who was quite proud of his 300 dollar shoeing jobs, and never passed up a chance to put them on any horse, whether warranted or not, including pasture poofs. And I've had a farrier who thought most horses, even show horses, should be barefoot as much and often as possible. I specifically remember asking him about a toe crack on one of my mother's WBs. We wanted the horse shod to grow out the crack, but he said "Nah. I can do it without a shoe." And he did!

I started trimming a horse recently behind a well known farrier in our area. The horse had horrible flares. Come to find out, he NEVER, in 20 some years of trimming this horse, ever addressed flare from the top of the hoof. He never put the hoof on his knee - never used a hoof stand. I had to explain to the owner how she needs to please step back out of the way so I can bring the hoof forward and put it on the stand. ;) She had no clue and then said "Well, I've never seen that before. My farrier's never done that."

In contrast, the farrier I work with is adamant about flares, and sometimes takes off too much as far as I'm concerned, exposing the inner wall all around the hoof, and sometimes the quarters break out because there's just no wall thickness there.

And both these guys are AFA certified! :eek:

Every farrier is different. Just like every trimmer is different. Some trimmers don't even want to use boots because they think it's a crutch. Others faithfully use boots.

The OP would be well advised to talk to farriers, vets, and trimmers in real life, as well as do plenty of research from different texts and websites. Please DON'T, by any means, stop at the opinions stated on this thread. Do your own research and form your own education based upon a variety of resources.

Auventera Two

Dec. 18, 2007, 09:23 AM

Now almost 30 years later I see the same thing. Seems then it was coming from people who couldn't forge. Now it's coming from people who cant shoe.

Have our standards declined that much?:confused:
George

That's BS George. Pete Ramey, and KC LP were all farriers prior to ditching the practice. These are 2 of the foremost shoeless educators in the U.S. I don't know specific about Ramey's career, but KC was an AFA TB and harness racing track farrier (on Long Island I believe) for almost 20 years. He did jumper barns, and some of the top Paso horses in the world before he went the shoeless route.

From his site:

2005 - 2006 Simon Earle’s Racing Yard, The Beeches, England, UK Home of the Famous Barefoot Racehorse, Saucey Nights
2005 Nevado, Hall of Fame Paso Fino Stallion
2005 Gentil de la Vitrina, World Cup Champion, Fino Stallion
2002 The Lark Ascending, American Quarter Horse Super Horse 1991
1989 General 3, World Record Holder Standardbred 5/8 mile
Rosecroft Raceway, USTA
1989 I Envy Noah, World Record Holder Standardbred 5/8 mile
Rosecroft Raceway, USTA
1998 Don Marino Dos, Paso Fino Performance National Champion 3 year old coltYou are dead wrong in assuming that the barefoot movement was started by people who just didn't know how to shoe. That could not be farther from the truth. The barefoot movement was started, and has gained so much popularity, because people aren't satisifed with the results of shoeing, and quite frankly, the traditional farrier sciences have too often failed horses so miserably that people are looking for something else.

Daydream Believer

Dec. 18, 2007, 09:38 AM

Don't forget Jamie Jackson either A2. He was a farrier/shoer.

Tom Stovall

Dec. 18, 2007, 09:43 AM

Auventera Two in gray, deletia

I feel it prudent to point out the fact, that on all these shoes vs. barefoot threads, it is the same 2 or 3 farriers giving the same viewpoints, and the same handful of non-farriers.

One riot, one ranger.

When you actually talk to many farriers in real life, you quickly learn how MANY viewpoints there are. The term "BUA" is derogatory, and was invented in the fertile mind of a particular farrier at horseshoes.com. The term has no signifigance in real life. :lol:

In reality, the term BUA is applicable to anyone who says "No horse needs shoeing." Do you know anyone like that?

I've used a farrier who was quite proud of his 300 dollar shoeing jobs, and never passed up a chance to put them on any horse, whether warranted or not, including pasture poofs.

Anyone can invent mythical windmills with which to joust.

And I've had a farrier who thought most horses, even show horses, should be barefoot as much and often as possible.

In my experience, that'd cover the vast majority of farriers.

I started trimming a horse recently behind a well known farrier in our area. The horse had horrible flares. Come to find out, he NEVER, in 20 some years of trimming this horse, ever addressed flare from the top of the hoof. He never put the hoof on his knee - never used a hoof stand.

LMAO! This poor fellow must've been working himself to death because it's lots easier to clinch from the top than the bottom. If you're going to make stuff up, please research your subject more thoroughly.

I had to explain to the owner how she needs to please step back out of the way so I can bring the hoof forward and put it on the stand. ;) She had no clue and then said "Well, I've never seen that before. My farrier's never done that."

Sounds like a figment of your imagination.

In contrast, the farrier I work with is adamant about flares, and sometimes takes off too much as far as I'm concerned, exposing the inner wall all around the hoof, and sometimes the quarters break out because there's just no wall thickness there.

And both these guys are AFA certified! :eek:

Really? That's easy to check, just post their names.

The OP would be well advised to talk to farriers, vets, and trimmers in real life, as well as do plenty of research from different texts and websites.

Prithee, why would anyone wanting to know about shoeing talk to a trimmer?

Please DON'T, by any means, stop at the opinions stated on this thread. Do your own research and form your own education based upon a variety of resources.

On this point we can certainly agree. Supplicants are well advised to check out the bona fides of anyone offering advice about a horses' feet, somebody might even be offering advice after studying under a diploma mill PhD. :)

Dec. 18, 2007, 09:50 AM

In reality, the term BUA is applicable to anyone who says "No horse needs shoeing." Do you know anyone like that?
THIS is what makes me so mad about threads like these where you guys step in with the BUA argument about why these threads turn silly - AFAIK, there has been only one "doesn't need shoes" person replying on this thread, and her comments haven't been anything about that. The rest of "us" have made it publically clear on ALL these threads that we have no problem looking at shoes if a particular horse needs them for a valid reason.

Daydream Believer

Dec. 18, 2007, 09:57 AM

THIS is what makes me so mad about threads like these where you guys step in with the BUA argument about why these threads turn silly - AFAIK, there has been only one "doesn't need shoes" person replying on this thread, and her comments haven't been anything about that. The rest of "us" have made it publically clear on ALL these threads that we have no problem looking at shoes if a particular horse needs them for a valid reason.

Don't confuse them with the facts JB! :winkgrin:

elctrnc

Dec. 18, 2007, 10:03 AM

Tom, JHUshoer20, and any other farriers who want to chime in: Why do you think it is that some farriers are now doing barefoot trims only? This is an honest question. Obviously it is easier work to do a trim only and not have to deal with shoes. Do you think this is the main reason? I actually think that, when they went from a shoe and trim business to trims only, they lost many existing clients. Is it more money for them? Trims don't cost as much as shoes for the consumer, but for the farrier maybe it brings in the same money or more (since they don't need to buy shoes and nails)?

If the economic benefits for the farrier aren't that much different, why do they change?

Dec. 18, 2007, 10:07 AM

Don't confuse them with the facts JB! :winkgrin:

Apparently it IS confusing because that's the 2nd time I've made that point :rolleyes:

Tom Stovall

Dec. 18, 2007, 10:09 AM

Auventera Two in gray, deletia

Pete Ramey, and KC LP were all farriers prior to ditching the practice.

True.

These are 2 of the foremost shoeless educators in the U.S.

In reality, both of these gentlemen have discovered it's easier to fleece the suckers than it is to shoe horses. Both are great at marketing old stuff in a shiny new package, but one of them had to pimp up his portfolio with a phony PhD. Pity that, it kinda busted his credibility balloon.

From his site:

2005 - 2006 Simon Earle’s Racing Yard, The Beeches, England, UK Home of the Famous Barefoot Racehorse, Saucey Nights

LMAO, Before you go to bragging on Simon Earle, you might want to check his percentage of wins to starts, lack of stakes and allowance horses, and the number of maidens in his barn.

2005 Nevado, Hall of Fame Paso Fino Stallion
2005 Gentil de la Vitrina, World Cup Champion, Fino Stallion
2002 The Lark Ascending, American Quarter Horse Super Horse 1991
1989 General 3, World Record Holder Standardbred 5/8 mile
Rosecroft Raceway, USTA
1989 I Envy Noah, World Record Holder Standardbred 5/8 mile
Rosecroft Raceway, USTA
1998 Don Marino Dos, Paso Fino Performance National Champion 3 year old colt

No news here: Rail class horses and horses pulling a bike sometimes don't need shoeing. On the other hand, some horses engaged in similar activities need shoeing, the operative credo being, "It depends."

You are dead wrong in assuming that the barefoot movement was started by people who just didn't know how to shoe. That could not be farther from the truth.

The barefoot "movement" is a tribute to good marketing and owner gullibility.

The barefoot movement was started, and has gained so much popularity,

Popularity with whom? Since no one has ever pulled the shoes off a horse that needs shoeing to do whatever it does as best it can and had the horse perform at its best, it follows that the alleged popularity of the BUA is confined to horses that don't need shoeing and/or horses with owners in denial. As some owners have found to their chagrin, horses that need shoes to do whatever they do as best they can don't win anything when some BUAista pulls their shoes and gives 'em the latest designer trim: You can fool a fool, but you can't fool a stopwatch. :)

Auventera Two

Dec. 18, 2007, 10:19 AM

elctrnc - I think each person arrives at that decision individually and for different reasons. I know KC's reasons because he talks about it quite extensively. And believe me, it has NOTHING to do with money or time expenditure. It has to do with his years of research of the equine foot, and the findings of those studies. I know Pete Ramey basically says the same thing.

When my late mare was still alive, each shoeing usually cost around $200 average. The farrier took roughly 1 hour to complete the job. In contrast, his trimming fee was $30, and it took him about 20 minutes or so.

So clearly it would be more cost conscious to do shoes as often as possible. The farrier could do 3 trims in one hour and get $90, or he could do a full set of shoes in one hour and get $200. I'm obviously not a farrier so I have no idea if shoeing is harder than trimming, but if they do just trimming, they end up doing more of it in the same time period.

I found an old article in the Farrier's Journal instructing farriers on how many shoe jobs they need to do a day in order to make X amount of profit. Encouraging owners to go barefoot dropped your profit margin considerably because you were doing the same amount of work - or more - for less money. :lol: Subscribe to the Farrier's Journal, and Anvil Magazine if you really want to read a good eye popper to go with your coffee on a Saturday afternoon. :rolleyes:

But again, every farrier is different, and so are their goals, their business practices, and their clientelle. (As with trimmers :D)

Auventera Two

Dec. 18, 2007, 10:24 AM

Yeah, ok Tom. :rolleyes: The point was in reference to the comment that the barefoot movement was started by people who didn't know how to shoe. And that's a lie. It was started by FARRIERS who chose a different path for different reasons.

And you can continue to fight and kick and pee on trees till the sun goes down, but the fact is, times are changing and you can't handle it. :lol: :cool: Besides, what the heck do you care? You're retired.

CookiePony

Dec. 18, 2007, 10:26 AM

Don't confuse them with the facts JB! :winkgrin:

:lol: Yeah, JB-- personally, I myself am pretty confused about why the BUA name-calling starts up any time a pro-barefoot poster (even if he/she is not anti-shoe) starts talking about trimming. Why? Personally, methinks the "horseshoer" doth protest too much.

FWIW, both "trimmers" I have used are former farriers who decided to stop shoeing.

CookiePony

Dec. 18, 2007, 10:40 AM

Who has snipped at farriers here?

Well, in all fairness, I did snipe at farriers in my area, way back on page 1 or 2. I said that I have not seen any competent shoeing jobs in my area (well, OK, there was one decent farrier but he moved away). I will also say that the reason I deem these jobs bad is that the underlying trim has had serious problems: underrun heels, long toes, high heels, and/ or contracted heels. Then I said that I have contemplated needing shoes for my guy in case I need to put studs on (for the cross country phase of eventing), but I am worried about being able to find someone competent to do the job. I know that I have not seen the work of every farrier in Middle TN, so I will remain hopeful that there is someone good out there who could do the work. Otherwise, I might have to fly Larkspur CO's farrier out here! ;)

I see a serious crisis in the farriery industry that it is possible to have such widespread poor work. There, I said it.

CookiePony

Dec. 18, 2007, 10:49 AM

Staish, I hope you have not completely given up on us. If you are still here, and wondering who Pete Ramey is, here is his website:

www.hoofrehab.com

Just what you need... one more website to read through! ;)

Dec. 18, 2007, 10:52 AM

Well, in all fairness, I did snipe at farriers in my area, way back on page 1 or 2. I said that I have not seen any competent shoeing jobs in my area (well, OK, there was one decent farrier but he moved away). I will also say that the reason I deem these jobs bad is that the underlying trim has had serious problems: underrun heels, long toes, high heels, and/ or contracted heels.
Wow, imagine that, snipping about a very specific PERSONAL experience - whodathunk! Thank goodness you didn't snip at farriers in general! ;)

I see a serious crisis in the farriery industry that it is possible to have such widespread poor work. There, I said it.
I'll second that.

It is my impression that the farriers who post here frequently live in areas where farrier work is pretty good or better, with perhaps a few who shouldn't be farriers. That, unfortunately, is not what a majority of us on this board, and every other board I'm on, seem to face. Just because something looks good in your world doesn't mean my world is just as good.

LMH

Dec. 18, 2007, 10:59 AM

Good GRIEF!

Who CARES!

Who CARES if every farrier on the face of the earth thinks the "BUA" is a bunch of fringe lunatics...does it change what you do with your horse?

Who CARES what the BUA thinks of crappy farrier work...does it change what you do with your horse?

Honestly...for once I would LOVE to see just ONE of these threads actually provide some benefit to the OP rather than turning into a total embarassment to anyone involved.

If just ONE person on either side would stop responding or even acknowledging negatives post by the 'other side' the whole debate would be diffused.

Just post YOUR position and move on...is this so hard to do? Correct any misinformation based on fact and ignore the rest.

You might be amazed how uneventful these threads would become and MAY even answer a question.

I may not be the smartest kid on the block but I don't think 157 PAGES of this would change Tom Stovall's mind on his side or anyone one else's mind on any side.

So why beat your head against the wall until it is bruised or bleeding?

TO the OP, there were several sites offered early on, though barefoot, that show some lovely hooves and explain hoof form.

Read them, learn and decide if they were benefiicial to you or not.

Tom Stovall

Dec. 18, 2007, 11:00 AM

elctrnc in gray, deletia

Tom, JHUshoer20, and any other farriers who want to chime in: Why do you think it is that some farriers are now doing barefoot trims only?

Trimming is MUCH more profitable than is shoeing. Trimming takes less time, less inventory, and fewer tools.

Since a trimmer is transporting only himself and his tools, he can work out of an econobox, while most farriers must work out of a van or truck in order to haul their inventory and tools, all of which means trimmers have a lower first cost and operating costs for their transportation.

If one considers only the time involved, it takes about 15 minutes for any competent mechanic to trim a horse and about an hour to shoe a horse. At $40 a trim and $140 a shoeing, both the gross and net profit are greater for trimming.

LarkspurCO

Dec. 18, 2007, 01:58 PM

I feel it prudent to point out the fact, that on all these shoes vs. barefoot threads, it is the same 2 or 3 farriers giving the same viewpoints, and the same handful of non-farriers.

If this is an implication that the validity of the viewpoints here is inversely related to the frequency of those expressing them, then yours might be the least valid of all.

Wait -- what did I just say???:confused:

At any rate, I might add that "barefoot vs. shoes" threads were recently banned on this bulletin board. If the moderator had not quit, this would have been shut down a few pages back.

elctrnc

Dec. 18, 2007, 02:07 PM

At any rate, I might add that "barefoot vs. shoes" threads were recently banned on this bulletin board. If the moderator had not quit, this would have been shut down a few pages back.

how is this a barefoot vs shoes thread? just because both are mentioned, it doesn't mean that it has gone down the same road as the real barefoot vs. shoes threads.

LarkspurCO

Dec. 18, 2007, 02:16 PM

how is this a barefoot vs shoes thread? just because both are mentioned, it doesn't mean that it has gone down the same road as the real barefoot vs. shoes threads.

Let me try to answer this succinctly, and I mean you no offense, but it's the freaking content!

Auventera Two

Dec. 18, 2007, 02:23 PM

At any rate, I might add that "barefoot vs. shoes" threads were recently banned on this bulletin board. If the moderator had not quit, this would have been shut down a few pages back.

There was a new member - a farrier who was banned from horseshoes.com - who kept posting here, name calling, and personally attacking other people. He got banned from here, and the thread was locked. Also - Tom Stovall started a thread challening the "barefooters" directly to some kind of match. I guess Erin got sick of it. As long as people aren't name calling and flaming, then why can't shoes and shoeless be discussed here?

Manes&Tails

Dec. 18, 2007, 04:10 PM

Tried a new farrier, now I have two pigeon toed, cow hocked, unbalanced, no heel, too small hooves horses.

I have spent $300.00 on farrier just this month trying to get the back where they were. It will takes months of light trimming, pulling shoes, hoof oils and meds. to get them back. What a mess.

elctrnc

Dec. 18, 2007, 04:23 PM

Let me try to answer this succinctly, and I mean you no offense, but it's the freaking content!

wait--so if someone says "barefoot" and someone else says "shoes" in the same thread, it should be locked?? :confused: Just because the content is related to barefoot trimming and trimming for shoes, doesn't mean it's a barefoot vs. shoes thread.

Edited to add: Does that mean that every thread that *rationally* mentions slaughter should be locked too? There's that "killer prices at new holland" thread on off course. what do you think that content is?

Thomas_1

Dec. 18, 2007, 05:29 PM

That's BS George. Pete Ramey, and KC LP were all farriers prior to ditching the practice. These are 2 of the foremost shoeless educators in the U.S. I don't know specific about Ramey's career, but KC was an AFA TB and harness racing track farrier (on Long Island I believe) for almost 20 years. He did jumper barns, and some of the top Paso horses in the world before he went the shoeless route. . We all know about KCLP's career and education. He invented a CV and bought a Phoney Degree from a web site. He's a conman that sells training to suckers who fall hook line and sinker for his hard sell.

From his site:
[LIST]
2005 - 2006 Simon Earle’s Racing Yard, The Beeches, England, UK Home of the Famous Barefoot Racehorse, Saucey Nights. You have a nack of repeating garbage and ignoring fact. I've posted on this one before.

Whilst Simon Earle is indeed famous for having barefoot horses. His horses are neither famous or high level winners.

Despite all the 'blurb' about aforementioned's success by those who think barefoot is a religion of his total of 4 horses only one has ever won a race at all and that raced 27 times and won 4 mediocre races with highly favourable handicapping (in one race 6 horses entered were pulled up and he finished 1st of the remaining 6) and he didn't win a thing from October 2005 until mid 2006 despite having plenty of runs - oh and he had several pulled up and a few fallers! His total prize money for all his horses in 2005 was just £9,000 and in the past 2 years was just £18,000. He has yet to have a horse step up to the plate from hurdles to steeplechasing and do anything at all.

You are dead wrong in assuming that the barefoot movement was started by people who just didn't know how to shoe. That could not be farther from the truth. The barefoot movement was started, and has gained so much popularity, because people aren't satisifed with the results of shoeing, and quite frankly, the traditional farrier sciences have too often failed horses so miserably that people are looking for something else What absolute piffle. There's been some horses barefoot since equine domestication began. Some are unshod because they don't need shoes and some are barefoot because they're owners choose not to have them shod.

The BUA's demonstrably like to invent stories about poor farriers and wise owners making alternative choices.

In truth though if an owner is Toostupid to engage a decent farrier to provide the service the horse deserves, then they sure as heck aren't going to be able to find some limited skill so-called barefoot trimmer or equine podiatrist with a Phoney Degree to do what it needs.

As long as people aren't name calling and flaming, then why can't shoes and shoeless be discussed here? Yet every post you do makes mention of these terrible farriers you follow and the terrible work you have to do right because of these incompetent and ill-trained folks.

Lookout

Dec. 18, 2007, 05:32 PM

Enough.

What characterizes a good shoeing job vs. a bad one? Let's start with balance. Who would like to take this one? How can you tell if a foot is properly balanced?

Anyone?

rcloisonne

Dec. 18, 2007, 05:37 PM

How can you tell if a foot is properly balanced?

Simple. A full set of properly taken radiographs. ;)

Lookout

Dec. 18, 2007, 05:50 PM

Simple. A full set of properly taken radiographs. ;)

And- how can you tell if the feet are balanced when you see them on the xray :rolleyes: ?

So every time the farrier shoes the horse, you have to take xrays to see if the work is balanced?

Also there are non-boney parts of the foot that need balancing, that you wouldn't see on an xray.

Either way WHAT are you looking for?

Why is this so difficult?

goeslikestink

Dec. 18, 2007, 06:05 PM

There was a new member - a farrier who was banned from horseshoes.com - who kept posting here, name calling, and personally attacking other people. He got banned from here, and the thread was locked. Also - Tom Stovall started a thread challening the "barefooters" directly to some kind of match. I guess Erin got sick of it. As long as people aren't name calling and flaming, then why can't shoes and shoeless be discussed here?

haha and didnt you get banned from horseshoes doing the same thing

Lookout

Dec. 18, 2007, 06:08 PM

Are there any grownups in the house?

elctrnc

Dec. 18, 2007, 06:09 PM

haha and didnt you get banned from horseshoes doing the same thing

Oh, look, another constructive comment from goeslikestink. :rolleyes:

LarkspurCO, I was wrong. This did turn into a barefoot vs. shoes thing. Sigh.

goeslikestink

Dec. 18, 2007, 06:15 PM

Oh, look, another constructive comment from goeslikestink. :rolleyes:

LarkspurCO, I was wrong. This did turn into a barefoot vs. shoes thing. Sigh.

why not av2 mentioned it but forgot to tell you it was her

rcloisonne

Dec. 18, 2007, 06:48 PM

And- how can you tell if the feet are balanced when you see them on the xray :rolleyes: ?
Equal joint spacing between the pedal bone joints, good phalangeal alignment with adequate digital cushion, overall condition of PIII, medial/lateral length of PII, lack of side bone, good sole depth. Stuff like that. :winkgrin:

So every time the farrier shoes the horse, you have to take xrays to see if the work is balanced?
Don't have to but it helps. ;)

Also there are non-boney parts of the foot that need balancing, that you wouldn't see on an xray.
Such as? If the bones are correctly aligned and there has been no major trauma or damage the rest will usually fall into place.

Either way WHAT are you looking for?
What I look for is a slight heel first landing, free and lengthy strides, ~1/3 of the hoof in front of the widest part, ~2/3 behind, heel buttresses at the widest part of the frog, straight bars, tight white line, healthy frog on the ground, good spacing between the bulbs, adequate cup and horn.

Why is this so difficult?
Not so difficult...

Rick Burten

Dec. 18, 2007, 07:10 PM

Less' see. We talkin' about static balance or dynamic balance?

For me, conformational deficiencies and pathology excepted, a foot is in balance when the phalangeal lever is at its shortest practical length, p3 is parallel to the ground in its medial-lateral aspect(the "X" axis) the phalanges are in alignment with them being neither broken forward or broken backwards, the hoof capsule is centered around the distal end of the bony column, the hoof is coming to the ground slightly heels first to flat but not toe first, there is no jamming of the coronary band, the horse is equally weighting on pairs of hooves, from the widest part of the hoof, the hoof is in, at a minimum, 50-50 balance(50% ahead of the widest part of the foot/COA and 50% behind it and preferably a 1/3-2/3 ratio.

irishcas

Dec. 18, 2007, 07:37 PM

I have a few comments on numerous posts on this thread. I can't stand cutting and pasting each and everyone so I'm going to lump it all into one email. These are my thoughts on the latest discussions so read at your own risk :D

First off I find KC to be kind of a cocky Bast**d but that doesn't take away that he personally does a good job of trimming and bringing the hoof into balance. My thoughts on certification I put in another post earlier in this thread. But basically the trim of the teacher is only as good as the student. So I don't think anyone is a KC trimmer or a Pete Ramey trimmer or a JJ trimmer. They are students who have added their own flare and gift or lack thereof.

That KC says he has a degree from a phoney college is tired and old news. Who gives 2 sh*ts, except Thomas and others who like to bash A2. She's helping horses not harming them so leave her alone. She talks about KC a lot but again, who cares. KC is out to make money, who the frig isn't. If you have issues with him, call or email, his contact info is available on his website.

Pete Ramey is hardly a shuckster out to fleece the unsuspecting public. He gave up 3 years of his life to go out and spread the word on what makes a sound horse. He never EVER bashes farriers and just promotes what he believes in. He didn't get rich giving clinics and he isn't going to get rich selling a 10 DVD collection of his clinic. Why don't you watch it and see what you think. It is full of good info, it isn't lies and it isn't full of fleecing. He is trying to help the average owner who shouldn't be Unsuspecting. It is the owners responsibility to ensure their horses feet are in good health.

And a healthy hoof is not just in the non invasive trim it is looking at the WHOLE HORSE. Shoes do not make a sound healthy horse. If someone chooses to use shoes for whatever reason, their horse should be sound to start with(yes I don't believe in using shoes to fix founder, navicular and a few other pathologies). Otherwise you have issues elsewhere.

Now for what makes a foot balanced and how do you tell? I find balance can be achieved over time by a good non invasive trim and listening to the horse. If you come across a foot that is pathological balancing it in one trim/shoeing is not helpful. I like to go the barefoot route and achieve balance and health as fast as the horse can do it.

I look at Digital Cushion, Frog, Sole Depth, how the foot grows, how the horse moves, how the horse is ridden, what the horse eats, how the horse is stalled/turned out. I do like xrays but not all of my clients can get a set every 6 months. I do with my own, but that is an expense I'm willing to pay.

There are so many factors involved in balance. I don't try to balance a foot on concrete either. I agree with rcloisonne the only way to really tell is look at the joints in rads. I have some to share if anyone wants to see, feel free to email me and I'll match the photos of the foot to the xrays.

As for the OP is her horses feet balanced? I think we need photos of the foot from 4 months ago, a year ago and current to give an internet assessment.

If we are looking at just these photos and nothing else, then no the foot is not healthy or balanced. What would I do differently? Well I need to see the sole to give an opinion and if we are really lucky radiographs as well.

OP, I asked before but maybe you don't want to. If you really want help post the county, state you are in and I bet both farriers and trimmers will give references to people in your area.

Thats my thoughts...

Regards,

Appassionato

Dec. 18, 2007, 07:45 PM

At any rate, I might add that "barefoot vs. shoes" threads were recently banned on this bulletin board. If the moderator had not quit, this would have been shut down a few pages back.

LarkspurCO is absolutely correct. Guys, we are testing the new mods patience with this garbage. And I for one do NOT want to lose the ability of being able to discuss issues such as the OP's question here and we have lots of horse owners with hoof problems (some owners are aware and looking for help, and some aren't). Of course they can go over to horseshoes and discuss it, but what's the harm in discussing it here? Other than the rude comments, of course.

Tom Stovall

Dec. 18, 2007, 07:55 PM

Auventera Two in gray, deleita

Yeah, ok Tom. :rolleyes: The point was in reference to the comment that the barefoot movement was started by people who didn't know how to shoe. And that's a lie. It was started by FARRIERS who chose a different path for different reasons.

IIRC, one of these farriers couldn't pass the AFA Journeyman practical and had to gussy up his rap sheet with a phony PhD; the other seems to have simply proclaimed himself a guru - but both of these gentlemen are slam bang good at marketing. They've taken a relatively simple procedure, one with no significant difference from those described in texts more than 100 years old, surrounded it with meaningless "research" and buzzwords like "natural" and "wild horse," then successfully reinvented the wheel! From where I sit, the best part is that the suckers undergoing an ongoing walletectomy are defending the very folks who're fleecing them. I love it!

And you can continue to fight and kick and pee on trees till the sun goes down, but the fact is, times are changing and you can't handle it. :lol:

Funny, I hang out at race tracks, rodeos, ropings, barrel races, cuttings, cow camps, and the occasional H/J show - and if the "times are changing", it appears none of the folks who're winning/placing at these venues has gotten the word. I look down before I look up and as nearly as I can tell, the overwhelming majority of horses at these venues are shod. So, what's to handle? Despite all the mindless nattering from the barefoot camp, it's business as usual when there's stopwatches, cameras, cattle, and/or money involved because, as you learned in a previous lesson, you can fool a fool, but you can't fool a stopwatch.

:cool: Besides, what the heck do you care? You're retired.

I like horses well enough to have devoted a considerable portion of my life to keeping working horses (not work horses) sound. Because I like horses, I wouldn't want the misinformation, disinformation, disingenuousness, half-truths, and outright lies emanating from the barefoot camp to cause anyone to fail to meet their horse's needs.

7HL

Dec. 18, 2007, 08:11 PM

That KC says he has a degree from a phoney college is tired and old news. Who gives 2 sh*ts, except Thomas

Wrong!

I find what KC is doing along with his followers is at a minimum false advertising and borders on fraud.

They are not podiatrists in any form. The title that their self proclaimed guru has given to them is a marketing ploy to make the general horse owning public think that they are more then just trimmers. I know of so where a KC trimmer personally caused harm to at least two horse in the name of making the hoof look pretty.

For the record, I have three horses. Two are totally barefoot and one has front shoes only. I have a great farrier that works on all three. Trimming is the money maker, but because we are on a regular cycle with him taking care of all three, it's only $25 each. I agree the real work is in shoeing.

Ideally shoeless might be an ideal each horse, each situation should be judged on it's own merit.

I do believe there is way too much attention put on making the hoof look "pretty" and some barefoot ideals by some don't have any merit. The best line I ever heard from a barefoot trimmer was, that the horse may hurt for awhile and be in some pain, but it was worth what the horse would look like in the future.

The worst thing that barefoot movement has done, is make people thing they could do it themselves, all they had to do is make the hoof look like the pictures. So many discussion forums with people giving trimming advise to novices by look at pictures that the post in a thread.

I am all for certification for all farriers, trimmers, equine dentists, equine chiropractors and massage therapists. There are too many self proclaimed equine health and well being professionals out there. Some have no business in touching a horse.

7HL

Dec. 18, 2007, 08:12 PM

From where I sit, the best part is that the suckers undergoing an ongoing walletectomy are defending the very folks who're fleecing them. I love it!

AMEN!

irishcas

Dec. 18, 2007, 08:23 PM

[B]
I am all for certification for all farriers, trimmers, equine dentists, equine chiropractors and massage therapists.

Okay fair enough, but Barefoot Trimmers are fairly new to the scene so where do they start? In a new school no? By an experienced person?

Again, let me say I'm no fan of certification :D But some people value it so they have to get it from somewhere.

Regards,

7HL

Dec. 18, 2007, 08:46 PM

Barefoot Trimmers are fairly new to the scene

That's the number one point. With the exception of those that have come out of the farrier business, lots of trimmers out there think, that all they need is a rasp, knife and nippers.

Why is it that most trimmers don't choose to work a farriers? Farriers give trims. I believe its because , first, trims are less work. Some have bought into the propaganda that shoes and metal are "evil". Then there are those that do it because they can work around horses, make there hooves look pretty and make a lot of money. There is money to be made in the "barefoot" movement and you can see in any thread that discusses shoes, that this movement has its spokes people dishing out the propaganda. Everybody knows that people that own horses are rich, loaded with money and they want it.

Most states have ag schools. Most have Dept of Agriculture as well. It wouldn't be very hard to come up with a licensing / certification test for the fields I mentioned. Nobody asks where you learned how to drive, you just have to take some tests to get behind the wheel. Written practical and hands on,tests might be in order.

LMH

Dec. 18, 2007, 09:10 PM

So Tom, if trimming is such a relatively easy procedure (and I agree it should be just that), why do farriers of the respected AFA have such a reputation of tattooing the horse world with long toes and underrun heels?

This is actually a serious question. From where I stand, the work I see, the work I read about, AFA=LTLH.:(

Did someone forget to circulate the memo on short phalangeal levers?:confused:

What is reason for the gap from the simplicity written in these texts to the hands that hold the rasp?

If that wasn't such an issue, I dare say many of the dreaded BUA would never have even taken that fork in the road. I am willing to say many if not most of the recent converts never started with any wild horse political agenda...most probably had shod horses...and I bet many of those shoes were applied by well respected members of the AFA.

Finally things just got too bad so Miss Betty Ursula Assanine started googling and reading and learning and rasping.

At least the 'phony degrees' and self proclaimed gurus are teaching proper breakover for heaven's sake!

And here we all are. Betty, Belinda, Bonnie...join nippers and sing along.:lol:

Perhaps we should change the name from barefoot uber alles to simply barefoot uber afa.

Sorry...couldn't resist a little funnin';)

Carry on...

CookiePony

Dec. 18, 2007, 09:15 PM

Dec. 18, 2007, 09:16 PM

I am willing to say many if not most of the recent converts never started with any wild horse political agenda...most probably had shod horses...and I bet many of those shoes were applied by well respected members of the AFA.
*raises hand* Mine was a CJF - whole barns full of long toes and underrun heels. He was/is still respected as a "good farrier" around these parts.

Daydream Believer

Dec. 18, 2007, 09:22 PM

Tom Stovall

Dec. 18, 2007, 10:18 PM

LMH in gray, deletia

So Tom, if trimming is such a relatively easy procedure (and I agree it should be just that), why do farriers of the respected AFA have such a reputation of tattooing the horse world with long toes and underrun heels?

Counselor, no such reputation exists among the horsemen I know in Texas, Oklahoma, and Louisiana. Have you personally seen work that would be worthy of such a reputation? Work which, to your personal knowledge, was done by an AFA certified farrier? I ask because anybody can join the AFA, but certification takes a bit of commitment. I've seen lots of shoddy stuff come through the clinics here in Texas, but not much of it was from AFA or TPFA members and none of the really bad stuff has been from an AFA CF or CJF.

IME, lots of folks get confused because the BWFA and several other groups offer certification, but all creds are not created equal. Additionally, the AFA's higher levels of testing standards require toe clips on fronts, but even those shouldn't appear LTLH if the foot is properly dressed.

This is actually a serious question. From where I stand, the work I see, the work I read about, AFA=LTLH.:(

I don't doubt your word, but most of the work I see, from both AFA and non-AFA members alike, is pretty damn good. Bear in mind that good farriers gravitate to metro areas because that's where the horses are - and Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio are among the ten largest cities in the country, so I can kick over a rock and find a good farrier here. Plus, I don't see many backyard horses, which could probably account for my seeing mostly good farriery.

Did someone forget to circulate the memo on short phalangeal levers?:confused:

I dunno. Since the mid-80s, short phalangeal levers on fronts have been de rigueur on most of the better short footed show and perfomance horses here in Texas.

What is reason for the gap from the simplicity written in these texts to the hands that hold the rasp?

Quien sabe?

If that wasn't such an issue, I dare say many of the dreaded BUA would never have even taken that fork in the road. I am willing to say many if not most of the recent converts never started with any wild horse political agenda...most probably had shod horses...and I bet many of those shoes were applied by well respected members of the AFA.

I don't mean to sound elitist, but maybe the answer lies in the class of horses being serviced by those farriers. The best horses are most often shod by the best farriers; the converse is also true.

Finally things just got too bad so Miss Betty Ursula Assanine started googling and reading and learning and rasping.

Pity the poor horse!

At least the 'phony degrees' and self proclaimed gurus are teaching proper breakover for heaven's sake!

No, they're not. They're teaching what's proper for horses that're not engaged in activities in which biomechanical efficiency is at a premium, they don't make much distinction between fronts and hinds, and their levers are often too short behind.

And here we all are. Betty, Belinda, Bonnie...join nippers and sing along.:lol:

Perhaps we should change the name from barefoot uber alles to simply barefoot uber afa.

Sorry...couldn't resist a little funnin';)

Not a problem, but I don't think your experience is typical. I know it's not typical of the work of any of the AFA or TPFA members of my acquaintence - and I know a bunch of farriers.

Carry on...

Likewise. :)

7HL

Dec. 18, 2007, 10:26 PM

why do farriers of the respected AFA have such a reputation of tattooing the horse world with long toes and underrun heels?

OK, one accusation or should I say generalization.

*raises hand* Mine was a CJF - whole barns full of long toes and underrun heels. He was/is still respected as a "good farrier" around these parts

Example one ... One respected and good farrier that someone that doesn't use him commenting on his work. If he is so bad why do people use him?

I should take pics of the one shod horse in my barn and post the pics. He fits that mold quite well. it really is the truth. I see way way more of that than anything else in the shod horses in our area.

Example two... one farrier, one horse. Sounds like an epidemic.

This thread started to talk about shoeing. Quickly the barefooters arrive to ad their two cents in. Then they complain when someone talks about shoeing.

With statements like this why do you wonder when people question barefooters.

"The hoof is so perfect in its design. And I truly believe that AEP is the only science that really understands that, and respects what the hoof is meant to do."

Dr. Hiltrud Strasser of Tuebingen, Germany has demonstrated, by means of her clinical work, research and publications over the last 20 years, that the horseshoe is an unnecessary evil.

I love absolute statements.

irishcas

Dec. 18, 2007, 10:46 PM

Well 7HP:

You obviously haven’t read the WHOLE thread:

Here is an excerpt from the original OP’s first post (see Post #1 in this thread)

Would anyone care to enlighten me? I would also love pictures with explanations. Or if you know of any good sources where I could read up on this kind of thing, please direct me to them! Thanks.

Post #3 said this…

There is a good tutorial here: http://www.hopeforsoundness.com/natb...uidelines.html
There is a section on recognizing healthy and distorted hoof form.

The above site is a shoes-and-barefoot site; the following sites are barefoot only but have excellent information on healthy hoof form:
www.ironfreehoof.com
www.barefoothorse.com
www.barefoottrim.com
www.clickandtrim.com

So looks to me like someone offered a shoeing and barefoot sites for review.

From there it went on to hash out KC’s PHd and other BS.

This thread started to talk about shoeing. Quickly the barefooters arrive to ad their two cents in. Then they complain when someone talks about shoeing.

No it started by talking about the OP's horses CRAPPY shoeing job (really the underlying trim) Others posted on how to find out how important the trim is under the shoe or without.

Then it degenerated into the usual crapola.

So you can apologize anytime now.

The barefooters (myself included) did not start this s**t, nice try though.

7HL

Dec. 18, 2007, 11:19 PM

Post #3 said this…

Quote:
There is a good tutorial here: http://www.hopeforsoundness.com/natb...uidelines.html
There is a section on recognizing healthy and distorted hoof form.

The above site is a shoes-and-barefoot site; the following sites are barefoot only but have excellent information on healthy hoof form:
www.ironfreehoof.com (http://www.ironfreehoof.com/)
www.barefoothorse.com (http://www.barefoothorse.com/)
www.barefoottrim.com (http://www.barefoottrim.com/)
www.clickandtrim.com (http://www.clickandtrim.com/)
So looks to me like someone offered a shoeing and barefoot sites for review.Actually only one shoeing site there, followed by 4 barefoot self serving propaganda sites. Actually promoting businesses

Then it degenerated into the usual crapola.

So you can apologize anytime now.No thanks

Coming from someone that appears to be dedicated to promoting only barefoot how can you be objective? Noticed in another thread where someone just wanted to say something good about their farrier you rush to asked her to send pictures. Why so you can rip them apart?

Why is you barefooters need to form organizations? The legitimize what you are doing?

KCs orginization only has about 27 listed trimmers.

And lets talk about yours Kim, the one you are the board of directors for. Only found 13 members

If it is such a movement don't you think there would be many more then there is?

Also when someone really wants to talk about shoeing, they don't want to talk to a trimmer. It's like if I want someone to pour me a concrete patio, I won't talk to the guy that mows lawns.

But see you don't understand that. You see farriers can trim horses, but trimmers can't shoe horses.

LMH

Dec. 19, 2007, 08:09 AM

Well I can't argue with most of your points Tom...I have never been to Texas (well once...when looking at colleges...just a couple of years ago:lol:)...and never seen the work of farriers in that area.

Perhaps it is a southeast thing...JB is in the SE, so am I...but I seem to recall reading some complaints of the very same thing in other places.

I know personally I am talking the work of certified members...but of course can't speak for everyone.

It could be demand. While where I live in GA is the 'horsey' area, Georgia sure can't compete with other areas in terms of bigtime quality. So maybe you have a point...

I am a little confused on your comments that trimmers don't make much distinction between fronts and hinds or trim the hinds too short. This is not what I have been taught? Perhaps you could elaborate?

LMH

Dec. 19, 2007, 08:11 AM

Why is you barefooters need to form organizations? The legitimize what you are doing?

Why do farriers have the AFA?
Are there not farrier organizations in the UK as well? Why have these?

Doesn't MOST of anything out there about anything doing anything have organizations?

7HL

Dec. 19, 2007, 08:17 AM

Why do farriers have the AFA?
Are there not farrier organizations in the UK as well? Why have these?

Doesn't MOST of anything out there about anything doing anything have organizations?

Most farrier organiztaions I have found are much larger then 13-27 members. They formed to share information and to set standards.

Guess my point is there is nor real consensus on technique in the barefoot world. And most of their organiztaions are very small. When you look up the organization that people claim to be on the board of directors on or holding a high position and only find 13 members in a few states, it looks like the position is only a self serving title. Certification by a very small like minded group to me doesn't make one qualified.

I do look at the organization, size, standards etc when choosing someone that claims to be certified by that organization.

LMH

Dec. 19, 2007, 08:18 AM

Also Tom, I honestly don't think my experience is as rare as you may believe...I am not disagreeing that YOU know good farriers...but take a look over this forum alone...the complaints about farrier work...the search for a good farrier.

And this is only one forum. Goodness bad farrier work seems to keep horseshoes.com in business! Otherwise there would be no need for the Farriers Helping Owners Forums.

Now I know it is ONLY a matter of time before there are more and more complaints about bad trimmers...let's face it, the more of something there is out there, the greater the chance the overall work group will become mediocre...

I just think the reality is if you take 100 farriers (fill in the blank...100 trimmers, 100 attorneys;), 100 golfers) most are not going to be outstanding. That is what makes the awesome ones such a find.

If it wouldn't get my hands cut off I would love to go to a big show here and just start snapping photos and posting them for comment. That might be fun one day:lol:

LMH

Dec. 19, 2007, 08:19 AM

Most farrier organiztaions I have found are much larger then 13-27 members. They formed to share information and to set standards.

Well when they started I bet at one point they had 13-27 members and then grew from there...

share information and set standards...what a novel concept-sounds just like the trimmer organizations.

next complaint?

LMH

Dec. 19, 2007, 08:23 AM

Final thought (for now)...

Farriers would you please give a succinct definition of the word "propoganda?" That seems to be the word of the day when farriers talk about the BUA.

Since propogranda is often a misused and misunderstood word, I thought it best to all be on the same page with that definition so long as we are going to accuse someone of circulating propoganda.

irishcas

Dec. 19, 2007, 08:39 AM

[B]
Coming from someone that appears to be dedicated to promoting only barefoot how can you be objective?

Where in this thread did I tell the OP to pull shoes? I said what is most important is the underlying trim!

Why is you barefooters need to form organizations? The legitimize what you are doing? LMH answered this nicely.

And lets talk about yours Kim, the one you are the board of directors for. Only found 13 members

No we haven't "found" 13 members, 15 members FOUNDED the organization. Instead of letting in any person with a pulse, we've spent a year hashing out what our standards should be and how the organization will work in the future. I watch what is going on with the AFA and they have issues that they are trying to fix. Rick B can elaborate on his thoughts on this if he'd like. I've talked to him about the pains the AFA are having now with membership.

Right now we have over 200 people in the process of applying. With a small Evaluation Committee we need to proceed carefully and review the submissions. It's not easy volunteering your time, working without getting paid. But we are doing it and will see where it ends up. Who knows what will happen, unfortunately I can't predict the future. At least though we are trying to set standards. Do we really want to continue to watch the Strasserites and Martha O invasive sole trimmers run around unchecked?

If it is such a movement don't you think there would be many more then there is? Ugh, it's not a movement.

But see you don't understand that. You see farriers can trim horses, but trimmers can't shoe horses.

The word can't has nothing to do with it. It is really DON'T WANT TO

If someone wants to put shoes on their horses, I don't fall to the ground and kick and scream "Don't do it" I tell them the resources I know to find a farrier. I advise them to go see some of the farriers work and make sure they are competent. Just like I would advise someone who wants to get a concrete patio to get referrals and look at the work to make sure they will get good service!

I choose not to apply shoes. I'm sure if I wanted to I could easily learn how to do it. I understand the anatomy of the foot, I understand the mechanics of a horses body. I never ever stop learning. I love to learn. If I were going to apply shoes, I'd fly out to see Rick Burten and spend a week with him. At least then I'd have someone who KNOWS what their doing based on his sharing of photos.

Why don't you share your horses feet and show us what you consider good. I will NOT rip you apart, not my style. Make sure to start a new thread though because now we really are far Off Topic.

I'm done for now, have fun.

LMH

Dec. 19, 2007, 08:51 AM

If I were going to apply shoes, I'd fly out to see Rick Burten and spend a week with him. At least then I'd have someone who KNOWS what their doing based on his sharing of photos.

now THIS idea has potential...we should organize a little Rendez vous with Rick...you know gather all the barefootin' babes for Burten and have a little soiree with a shoer for a weekend. :lol:

I have one condition though. Tom must come. :cool:

I think we would have to promise to provide the boys lots of adult beverage though for them to live through it.:winkgrin:

I bet, on the serious side, it would be one heck of an educational (and humorous) weekend for all!

Auventera Two

Dec. 19, 2007, 09:52 AM

now THIS idea has potential...we should organize a little Rendez vous with Rick...you know gather all the barefootin' babes for Burten and have a little soiree with a shoer for a weekend. :lol:

I have one condition though. Tom must come. :cool:

I think we would have to promise to provide the boys lots of adult beverage though for them to live through it.:winkgrin:

I bet, on the serious side, it would be one heck of an educational (and humorous) weekend for all!

:lol: Now that's an idea! Rick lives pretty close to me, so I can drive down. :D The farrier I work with said my trim is good enough to nail a shoe on, so anytime I want to learn shoeing, he'd be happy to teach me. :lol: Thanks but I'm doing fine for now. Glue ons interest me for rehab purposes, but I seriously have no desire to pound metal.

I only scanned a few posts on this page, because the magnitude of this thread is overwhelming. A person could sit here for days trying to read it all.

So I'll just say this - GOOD farrier work is hard to find where I live. I work with a pretty good farrier. I like much of what he does. He trimmed and shoed my horses for 3 years before I went off on my own. He's a CJF and is pretty up on continuing education. He's a good guy, and one of the few that doesn't allow flares and LTLH to run rampant. Even at that, he still doesn't approach the hoof from the viewpoint that I do.

Too much emphasis is put on breed show standards in regard to hoof care. Gaited horses (and even some Arabs) are commonly trimmed to be "long footed" as is the "correct" term in AFA world. Some farriers advertise themselves as being a long footed shoer. Articles are written on trimming and shoeing the long footed horse because it's different than.....what....the "short" footed horse??

When I read articles written by farriers on balancing the hoof, and their first recommendation is to "check the breed standard" then that's a big red flag that there's a serious breakdown with the care and trimming of hooves. Check the breed standard?! What the h*** is that all about? I don't give a crap what the breed standard says my horse's toes should measure. I care what the live sole plane tells me. But unfortuantely, owners, and farriers just don't care.

I watched this farrier that I like so much, shoe a TN Walker. He leaves as much toe as possible, and fits him "full" with a flat shoe, so the breakover is forced at the dorsal tip of the toe. He explained to me how he would never bring the toe back, or use a NB or Eventer shoe, because it creates a toe rocker, and makes them breakover quick. He said on "long footed" horses you want the foot on the ground as long as possible to exagerate the stride.

I never realized how much breakover an eventer type shoe creates, until you see a horse going in flat shoes. Have you ever examined the two types next to each other? The shoes that most of us sporthorse people have on our horses is completely different from what pleasure horses, and gaited horses wear. Maybe I've just seen too much horrendous farriery because I'm originally from the armpit of the universe (ahem, TN) amidst walking horse central. Accccck. Even the flat shod ones are acccck. They might not be weighted, but they're 4 miles long. Take a Saturday afternoon to visit a walking horse show, go home, puke, try to get the picture out of your head, and continue on with life....

I told him I totally disagree with what he's doing, and he just laughed. Good thing we have a good relationship....

What I want to know is - whatever happened to what's best for the horse, and not the breed image?!

In any case - LTLH causes so many problems with equines, yet it's become the signature trait of AFA farriers.

Rick Burten

Dec. 19, 2007, 09:53 AM

Any or all of you(including Jacko) are always welcome here. Be warned though, you won't get to just stand around, you'll be working/demonstrating too.

Daydream Believer

Dec. 19, 2007, 09:54 AM

I think it would be fun and I'd come if I could afford the plane ticket!

Auventera Two

Dec. 19, 2007, 09:57 AM

Any or all of you(including Jacko) are always welcome here. Be warned though, you won't get to just stand around, you'll be working/demonstrating too.

Hey I'm from WI - the beer and cheese capital of the world :lol: We've got some great micro breweries here and I could load up my car on the way down! :D After a few hours we wouldn't care about hooves anymore. LOL

Daydream Believer

Dec. 19, 2007, 10:00 AM

Hey I'm from WI - the beer and cheese capital of the world :lol: We've got some great micro breweries here and I could load up my car on the way down! :D After a few hours we wouldn't care about hooves anymore. LOL

Don't forget some Cheese Curd! :D

Tom Stovall

Dec. 19, 2007, 10:04 AM

irishcas in gray, deletia

You obviously haven’t read the WHOLE thread:

Here is an excerpt from the original OP’s first post (see Post #1 in this thread)

[With reference to shoeing] Would anyone care to enlighten me? I would also love pictures with explanations. Or if you know of any good sources where I could read up on this kind of thing, please direct me to them! Thanks.

It appears you haven't read the whole thread. As I recall, I twice posted the URL to the AFA's website, which includes an illustrated general overview for judging shoeing in its certification section. Perhaps you missed it.

So looks to me like someone offered a shoeing and barefoot sites for review.

Why would anyone go to a barefoot site to find expertise in the evaluation of shoeing?

The barefooters (myself included) did not start this s**t, nice try though.

Funny, I could've sworn some barefoot proselyte posted a bunch of barefoot sites in response to the OP's request for help in evaluating shoeing. :)

Auventera Two

Dec. 19, 2007, 10:06 AM

Beer and cheese curds! That's how you know if you're a true wisconsinite. Spotted cow, fat squirrel, blue moon, leinenkugels....submit your order in advance and I'll do my best to deliver. :cool:

Tom Stovall

Dec. 19, 2007, 10:07 AM

LMH in gray

now THIS idea has potential...we should organize a little Rendez vous with Rick...you know gather all the barefootin' babes for Burten and have a little soiree with a shoer for a weekend. :lol:

I have one condition though. Tom must come. :cool:

I think we would have to promise to provide the boys lots of adult beverage though for them to live through it.:winkgrin:

I can stand damn near any company with a little help from 15-year-old Liphroag. :)

Auventera Two

Dec. 19, 2007, 10:07 AM

To the God of Deletia -

Could you please provide some kind of color coded wheel I can access to decipher your posts? You know, like the Ovaltine decoder.

Or else I might have to shoot your eye out. ;) :cool: :D

Rick Burten

Dec. 19, 2007, 10:10 AM

Too much emphasis is put on breed show standards in regard to hoof care.
When one is shoeing a horse that is going to compete, it is wise to know the parameters/regulations and to stay within them. Remember, we are talking about horses going to the show ring, not the rest of the breed.
Gaited horses (and even some Arabs) are commonly trimmed to be "long footed" as is the "correct" term in AFA world.
The term is correct whether one is a member of the AFA or not.
Some farriers advertise themselves as being a long footed shoer.
That includes, me. Not every farrier has the skill, knowledge, ability or desire to correctly trim and shoe a long footed horse.
Articles are written on trimming and shoeing the long footed horse because it's different than.....what....the "short" footed horse??
Yes.
When I read articles written by farriers on balancing the hoof, and their first recommendation is to "check the breed standard" then that's a big red flag that there's a serious breakdown with the care and trimming of hooves.
No ma'am, no breakdown at all. As noted, that recommendation is for those farriers who shoe show ring horses.
Check the breed standard?! What the h*** is that all about?
See above.
I don't give a crap what the breed standard says my horse's toes should measure. I care what the live sole plane tells me.
That's because you don't shoe show horses for a living.
But unfortuantely, owners, and farriers just don't care.
Demonstrably incorrect.
I watched this farrier that I like so much, shoe a TN Walker. He leaves as much toe as possible, and fits him "full" with a flat shoe, so the breakover is forced at the dorsal tip of the toe. He explained to me how he would never bring the toe back, or use a NB or Eventer shoe, because it creates a toe rocker, and makes them breakover quick. He said on "long footed" horses you want the foot on the ground as long as possible to exagerate the stride.
Apparently he as forgotten ,never learned or doesn't understand, Rule #1: "It Depends"
I told him I totally disagree with what he's doing, and he just laughed.
Go figure....
What I want to know is - whatever happened to what's best for the horse, and not the breed image?!
Hmmm, you might try asking the owners, trainers and those who set the regulations for the show ring.
In any case - LTLH causes so many problems with equines, yet it's become the signature trait of AFA farriers.
I agree with the first part of your statement(right up to where the comma is), the second part of your statement is ludicrous, ridiculous , slanderous, erroneous, misinformed, tunnel visioned, and a demonstrable logical fallacy.

And you wonder why farriers take umbrage with the BUA.....ROTFLMFAO!

Tom Stovall

Dec. 19, 2007, 10:14 AM

Auventera Two in gray, no deletia

To the God of Deletia -

Could you please provide some kind of color coded wheel I can access to decipher your posts? You know, like the Ovaltine decoder.

Or else I might have to shoot your eye out. ;) :cool: :D

Is the ability to make the distinction between gray, black, and brown type considered to be an accomplishment in your end of the sandpile? :)

Lookout

Dec. 19, 2007, 10:14 AM

It could be demand. While where I live in GA is the 'horsey' area, Georgia sure can't compete with other areas in terms of bigtime quality. So maybe you have a point...

You mean, as compared to TX, Oklahoma and Louisiana??

Lookout

Dec. 19, 2007, 10:17 AM

I never realized how much breakover an eventer type shoe creates,
How 'much' breakover it creates? How much does it create? How do you quantify breakover?

Rick Burten

Dec. 19, 2007, 10:32 AM

How do you quantify breakover?
Hmm, interesting question. In several ways. Mathematically, the time from heel lift from the ground to the last portion of the toe to leave the ground. Also, the force moments applied to the various soft and hard structures of the hoof and limb. Practically, as the amount of effort expended by the horse to initiate and maintain forward motion and the effect on stride length of the location of the toe breakover.

elctrnc

Dec. 19, 2007, 10:48 AM

No, they're not. They're teaching what's proper for horses that're not engaged in activities in which biomechanical efficiency is at a premium, they don't make much distinction between fronts and hinds, and their levers are often too short behind.

Tom, can you please elaborate on the last point? I'm very interested in this one. I haven't seen much info specifically on the hinds in the barefoot literature, and the farriers I have seen don't seem to spend a lot of time evaluating the hinds either. Can you suggest any sites that talk about this? Or if someone else can chime in too, that would be great.

7HL

Dec. 19, 2007, 10:52 AM

The barefooters (myself included) did not start this s**t, nice try though.

Funny, I could've sworn some barefoot proselyte posted a bunch of barefoot sites in response to the OP's request for help in evaluating shoeing. :)

Here lies my problem with it all. I am not a farrier, but I use one who I am very satisfied with his work with my horses. He both trims them and shoes one of them. When asking a question about shoeing why is it necessary for the barefoot armies to chime in? I firmly believe that all this hype is just there way of advertising their product. And the first rule is to tear down who they see as their competition. Most barefooters that are posting here have websites listed and post them often to try and promote their product.

So when I and other ask about shoeing it would seem logical that the one that would respond is a farrier not a trimmer.

Auventera Two

Dec. 19, 2007, 10:58 AM

Here lies my problem with it all. I am not a farrier, but I use one who I am very satisfied with his work with my horses. He both trims them and shoes one of them. When asking a question about shoeing why is it necessary for the barefoot armies to chime in? I firmly believe that all this hype is just there way of advertising their product. And the first rule is to tear down who they see as their competition. Most barefooters that are posting here have websites listed and post them often to try and promote their product.

So when I and other ask about shoeing it would seem logical that the one that would respond is a farrier not a trimmer.

Well, as is typical with bulletin board conversations, they start out one thing and turn to another. That's just the way it works. For another thing, it was pointed out that the most import part of a shoeing job is the trim underneath it. Hence the discussion about trimming.

Next, those of us who have websites and post them do so to show the photos, or the info detailed on the site instead of retyping and re-pasting every bit of info and photos here. That's the whole point of developing a website generally - to lay out all the info you want to share with the world into an organized format to refer people to.

Finally, since trimming is a hands-on service offered, I doubt much business can come of showing your website to people who live 1,000 miles away from you. What are they going to do? Call you up and order a trim to be rush delivered to them by this weekend? :rolleyes: The chance that your business is going to boom because of ALL the people who found out about my trimming from this BB, and just so happen to live in my town is probably slim to none.

How many of the farriers here have websites? If they do - post them. Lets see them!

Dec. 19, 2007, 11:05 AM

Example one ... One respected and good farrier that someone that doesn't use him commenting on his work. If he is so bad why do people use him?
Which part of "my farrier, mine" did you not understand? I DID use him, for 15 years. So did the entire barn I boarded at. So did many other entire barns. Unless he was trimming "QH box feet", then they were long toes and underrun heels. All of them. Why do people still use him? Have you not understood a single word on this thread? Because people have no friggin' clue what feet should look like! All they know is "horse is sound + shoes stay on for the required length of time = good farrier". I have heard more than a few folks comment on how good their farrier is because shoes stay on for 12 weeks.

This thread started to talk about shoeing. Quickly the barefooters arrive to ad their two cents in.
The "barefooters" (who, btw, have no trouble with shoes if that's what the owner/horse needs/wants) chimed in with sites that show what balanced feet should look like because the discussion was quickly turning into the trim being the basis for a good shoeing job.

Then they complain when someone talks about shoeing.
Who complained about shoes? Quote it please.

Well I can't argue with most of your points Tom...I have never been to Texas (well once...when looking at colleges...just a couple of years ago:lol:)...and never seen the work of farriers in that area.

Perhaps it is a southeast thing...JB is in the SE, so am I...but I seem to recall reading some complaints of the very same thing in other places.
That was exactly my point however many posts ago and it was chosen to be ignored because it doesn't suit Tom's or George's agenda. Your world does not mean my world is wrong. Tom and George seem to conveniently forget many of the threads on this board that they have participated in - threads which show horribly trimmed feet. They aren't onesy-twosy examples.

I am a little confused on your comments that trimmers don't make much distinction between fronts and hinds or trim the hinds too short. This is not what I have been taught? Perhaps you could elaborate?
I would love an elaboration on this because every trimmer who's worth anything that I've talked to knows the two have different mechanical functions, therefore look different.

Also Tom, I honestly don't think my experience is as rare as you may believe...I am not disagreeing that YOU know good farriers...but take a look over this forum alone...the complaints about farrier work...the search for a good farrier.

And this is only one forum. Goodness bad farrier work seems to keep horseshoes.com in business! Otherwise there would be no need for the Farriers Helping Owners Forums.
The 2 other boards I'm on also have thread after thread of horribly trimmed feet. Alabama, Tennesse, Maine, N/S Dakota, it's all over the country. Now, granted, some of those folks only have 1-2 farriers within a couple hundred miles to choose from, so when you have bad and worse to choose from, things get difficult. I would highly suspect that more densely populated areas with more dense horse populations have a larger variety of farriers/trimmers to choose from and the worst of them get weeded out sooner rather than later. But that still does NOT mean there isn't a plethora of really awful farriers out there (trimmers too).

If it wouldn't get my hands cut off I would love to go to a big show here and just start snapping photos and posting them for comment. That might be fun one day:lol:
I am sooo tempted to do that. I live in a not-sparsely-populated area - my county has the highest horse population of any in the state. I may just do this at the next A show that's in my backyard. It's scary. No identifying features of the horse will be seen.

It must tough to be so thick. The word can't has nothing to do with it. It is really DON'T WANT TO
I pointed this out too several of my posts back, but it doesn't fit their agenda so it gets ignored. Nice try though :)

If I were going to apply shoes, I'd fly out to see Rick Burten and spend a week with him. At least then I'd have someone who KNOWS what their doing based on his sharing of photos.
I've already threatened Rick that if I'm out there, or I hear he's out here, there's gonna be a meeting :D

I think we would have to promise to provide the boys lots of adult beverage though for them to live through it.:winkgrin:
Them, or us :lol::cool:

Lookout

Dec. 19, 2007, 11:09 AM

Hmm, interesting question. In several ways. Mathematically, the time from heel lift from the ground to the last portion of the toe to leave the ground. Also, the force moments applied to the various soft and hard structures of the hoof and limb. Practically, as the amount of effort expended by the horse to initiate and maintain forward motion and the effect on stride length of the location of the toe breakover.
OK, but I don't think you can describe it in terms of 'a lot', or 'a little'. Or more or less. Fast or slow, yes.

LMH

Dec. 19, 2007, 11:12 AM

What "product" are they promoting?

Many hoof care professionals (shoers or trimmers) have invested a lot of time and money in educating themselves on the form and function of the hoof as a whole and each of the independent structures of the hoof.

Just because I can't nail a shoe on a hoof (well I suppose I "could" but it darn well wouldn't be pretty since I have never been trained to do it)...doesn't mean I don't know about proper balance and trimming.

In good farrier work, *I* think the trim is what matters...nailing on the shoe is the icing if you will, but lack of a good trim and no shoe is going to help much.

So...if someone asks about shoeing, unless it is specific to where you put a nail or how to forge the stell...well trimmers are fair game for offering answers.

If you were not so brainwashed into thinking it is all 'propoganda' 7HL, you might be impressed with the knowledge some trimmers do have.

Lookout

Dec. 19, 2007, 11:17 AM

Just because I can't nail a shoe on a hoof (well I suppose I "could" but it darn well wouldn't be pretty since I have never been trained to do it)...doesn't mean I don't know about proper balance and trimming.

Someone at a barn where I was working the other day, asked if I could nail her horse's shoe back on so she could get to the show. I declined. ;)
Life is so much easier without shoes ...

LMH

Dec. 19, 2007, 11:19 AM

You mean, as compared to TX, Oklahoma and Louisiana??

Ok that was funny:cool:

Dec. 19, 2007, 11:21 AM

It appears you haven't read the whole thread. As I recall, I twice posted the URL to the AFA's website, which includes an illustrated general overview for judging shoeing in its certification section. Perhaps you missed it.
I didn't miss it. I find it interesting that one criteria for judging listed as being "good" is that "Paired feet match each other." How many times have you guys stated that it's not a rule that front feet match? Yet it's a criteria for being judged. No wonder some club footed horses are made sore. No wonder some farriers hack off the heels of the club foot, or hack off the toes of the regular foot. Now granted, maybe it's in the interpretation of that as being "necessary", but it is what it is.

The site does a good job of explaining what a good shoeing job looks like, from nail placement to shoe width to clips to trailers, etc.

Why would anyone go to a barefoot site to find expertise in the evaluation of shoeing?
Can you point out any farrier sites that go through the steps of how to trim the foot?

Funny, I could've sworn some barefoot proselyte posted a bunch of barefoot sites in response to the OP's request for help in evaluating shoeing. :)
Yes, post #3, in response to post #2 from a NON-BAREFOOTER stating that the underlying trim is the first step.

Auventera Two

Dec. 19, 2007, 11:36 AM

I stand by my opinion that the reason all the farrier panties here are in a twist is because they can't handle change. They were taught from Butler's Horseshoeing texts from the 1800s and they just can't bear to think that new technology, new research, and new viewpoints are becoming mainstream.

Now let me see....who moved my cheese.....

http://www.whomovedmycheese.com/

Lookout

Dec. 19, 2007, 11:43 AM

What new technology?

Barefoot is older than shoeing.

I stand by my opinion that the reason all the farrier panties here are in a twist is because they can't handle change. They were taught from Butler's Horseshoeing texts from the 1800s and they just can't bear to think that new technology, new research, and new viewpoints are becoming mainstream.

Now let me see....who moved my cheese.....

http://www.whomovedmycheese.com/

Tom Stovall

Dec. 19, 2007, 11:47 AM

elctrnc in gray, deletia

Re: They [the self-styled barefoot gurus] are teaching what's proper for horses that're not engaged in activities in which biomechanical efficiency is at a premium, they don't make much distinction between fronts and hinds, and their levers are often too short behind.

Tom, can you please elaborate on the last point? I'm very interested in this one. I haven't seen much info specifically on the hinds in the barefoot literature, and the farriers I have seen don't seem to spend a lot of time evaluating the hinds either.

The primary functions of fronts and hinds, support and propulsion respectively, are quite different. For horses not engaged in activities requiring significant athleticism, fronts and hinds can be treated much the same; however, when efficiency of movement becomes an important factor, it becomes incumbent on the operator to make sure the energy stored in the horse's muscles is efficiently transformed into motion through the system of levers that comprise a horse's bony column. The lever one is most able to influence is the phalangeal lever, the lever formed by the phalanges, which is measured by an imaginary line that runs from the distal/dorsal portion of the canon bone to the point of turnover, not the distal/dorsal portion, of the hoof capsule.

We're talking hinds now.

Perhaps oversimplified, when the phalangeal lever of a hind is too short, turnover is initiated before the energy stored in the extensor muscles has been fully utilized to propel the horse, the hoof turns over prematurely, timing is disrupted, and energy is wasted. When the lever is too long, the hoof remains on the ground after energy from the extensors has been utilized, turnover is delayed, timing is disrupted, and energy is wasted. For this reason, it's always been more difficult for me to "dial in" a speed horse behind than in front because the lever of a hind usually needs to be slightly longer and its angulation slightly lower than a front - but, slightly how much? For me, the operative credo of good farriery, "It depends", is never more evident than on the hind end of speed horses.

I don't have any problem with folks wanting to use their barefooted horses in any activity of their choosing, but when it comes to setting a horse up for speed, trimming both ends alike is the antithesis of biomechanical efficiency and I don't think the current set of self-styled gurus is making the Faithful aware of the difference.

Can you suggest any sites that talk about this? Or if someone else can chime in too, that would be great.

We've pretty much done it to death on horseshoes.com, it's been a component of most of the NB vs traditional farriery discussions.

elctrnc

Dec. 19, 2007, 11:51 AM

We've pretty much done it to death on horseshoes.com, it's been a component of most of the NB vs traditional farriery discussions.

Tom, thanks for the explanation. That makes sense. I will head over to horseshoes.com and see what is said about it there.

Tom Stovall

Dec. 19, 2007, 11:59 AM

Auventera Two

I stand by my opinion that the reason all the farrier panties here are in a twist is because they can't handle change. They were taught from Butler's Horseshoeing texts from the 1800s and they just can't bear to think that new technology, new research, and new viewpoints are becoming mainstream.

It appears you know almost as much about textbooks as you do trimming and shoeing. Butler's first edition of "Principles of Horseshoeing" was copyrighted in 1974. Perhaps you had reference to Dollar, 1885 (?) and Lungwitz, 1897.

While I'm aware of various new materials and techniques in the world of applied farriery, I'm haven't seen any science that suggests barefoot is better for all horses, in all environments, engaged in all activities. Have you? If so, please point it out - but, please don't be silly enough to cite Bowker, Tesky, or any or the other usual suspects. :)

Auventera Two

Dec. 19, 2007, 12:01 PM

For horses not engaged in activities requiring significant athleticism, fronts and hinds can be treated much the same; however, when efficiency of movement becomes an important factor, it becomes incumbent on the operator to make sure the energy stored in the horse's muscles is efficiently transformed into motion through the system of levers that comprise a horse's bony column.

You think that because a horse is "only" a pleasure horse or "only" a trail horse, or "only" a pasture puff, that it can receive substandard care for 25 years and remain healthy, happy, and sound? You are absolutely wrong. I agree that a GP jumper NEEDS the best care possible to do his job. But I disagree that anything less than that level of competition can get by with a crappy trim, crappy shoeing, and crappy care.

Fronts and hinds can be treated the same, if the horse isn't engaged in a high performance discipline?! What a crock of BS Tom. Perhaps this is why our horses have had so many foot problems over the years? You know, because we only show lightly and aren't top level competitors therefore farriers gave us substandard care.

This is the mindset that leads to so many threads posted here - and on horseshoes.com - and on the other hoof forums I read - of Suzy's trail horse who has navicular, or Bobby's pleasure hack that is always "off" on the right front, please help me. And so forth...

You post stuff like this, and then go on to defend farriers, and what they do? THIS is precisely why the owners of said "non-performance" horses have started trimming their own! If you want the job done right, you darn well better do it yourself, apparently! :eek: What the fruitbat....

EVERY horse on the planet has FRONT and HIND feet with distinctive functions and subsequent form, whether he's a top level competitive athlete, or Suzy's backyard pleasure pony. I don't believe that the DNA discriminates and creates "universal" feet on non-performing horses.

A GP jumper or puissance horse may have special shoeing to help him perform the job given to him, but certain things are just bare bones basics to any horse. And that would most certainly include a correct trim with proper respect to front and hind feet, since the respective P3s are distinctly different, as is the function of each.

Auventera Two

Dec. 19, 2007, 12:13 PM

I don't have any problem with folks wanting to use their barefooted horses in any activity of their choosing, but when it comes to setting a horse up for speed, trimming both ends alike is the antithesis of biomechanical efficiency and I don't think the current set of self-styled gurus is making the Faithful aware of the difference.

Wrong Tom. I have about 10 pages of handwritten notes specifically regarding the energy utilization of the horse in the limbs, throughout the body, and within the hoof capsule with regard to locomotion, biomechanical efficiency, and speed, the role of soft tissue within this process, and the affects we can have on the above stated. The education I received actually talked quite extensively about energy utilization, limb angulation, and the function of front and hind limbs respectively, and the effects of changes on propulsion.

Don't assume that you and your kindred are the only people who know anything at all about trimming the horse for the greatest efficiency and speed possible.

Rick Burten

Dec. 19, 2007, 12:17 PM

You think that because a horse is "only" a pleasure horse or "only" a trail horse, or "only" a pasture puff, that it can receive substandard care for 25 years and remain healthy, happy, and sound?
Where ever did Tom say this?
You are absolutely wrong. I agree that a GP jumper NEEDS the best care possible to do his job. But I disagree that anything less than that level of competition can get by with a crappy trim, crappy shoeing, and crappy care.
Then explain how the ferals get by with a crappy trim and crappy care. Fronts and hinds can be treated the same, if the horse isn't engaged in a high performance discipline?!
Ummm I believe he said "Much the same" and then went on to explain the whys and wherefores. Did you miss that part or just ignore it because it sinks your theory and argument(s).
Perhaps this is why our horses have had so many foot problems over the years? You know, because we only show lightly and aren't top level competitors therefore farriers gave us substandard care.
Easy to speculate, hard to substantiate. Of course, there could not possibly be any other factors that might have influenced or caused the predicament your horse's find themselves in, right?
You post stuff like this, and then go on to defend farriers, and what they do?
And I must say, quite eloquently and logically too. While you continue to engage in argumentum absurdum, Tom relies on argumentum logicum.
EVERY horse on the planet has FRONT and HIND feet with distinctive functions and subsequent form, whether he's a top level competitive athlete, or Suzy's backyard pleasure pony.
IIRC, Tom has already said that, and more.
A GP jumper or puissance horse may have special shoeing to help him perform the job given to him, but certain things are just bare bones basics to any horse. And that would most certainly include a correct trim with proper respect to front and hind feet, since the respective P3s are distinctly different, as is the function of each.
So if that's what your horses were getting(the "bare bones basics"), why all the whining and sniveling?