How "Natural" trimming methods can be dangerous.

[Equibrit]

Court hears Strasser welfare case

H&H staff writer
13 July, 2006
A woman has been accused of causing unnecessary suffering to a laminitic pony after applying the Strasser trim to its hooves
A Suffolk woman has appeared in court accused of causing unnecessary suffering to a pony by using the Strasser barefoot method of hoofcare.

In a trial over two days in March and one day last week at South East Suffolk Magistrates Court, Mary Jo Kowalski, 52, of Lower Street, Baylham, denied two charges of causing suffering to Brambles between 3 June and 20 July 2004.

Brambles came into Mrs Kowalski's care in January 2004 after her previous owner could do nothing more to treat her laminitis. The pony was seized by the RSPCA on 20 July 2004 when she was found with "mutilated" hooves, walking with crossed legs and barely able to move.

The court heard Mrs Kowalski had undergone training in the Strasser technique and had kept horses for about 35 years.

Mr Rogers, prosecuting, told the court the soles of Brambles' hooves had been trimmed away too thinly by Mrs Kowalski.

"The bone had rotated within the foot to an abnormal angle, so it protruded into the sole," he said, adding that there were abscesses present in the hoof and that a farrier had described it as the worst case of lameness he had ever seen.

Brambles was taken into the care of the International League for the Protection of Horses (ILPH), but despite five months of intensive care, was put down after failing to respond.

Mr Vass, acting for Mrs Kowalski, said: "Mrs Kowalski wanted to give the pony a chance using the Strasser technique because it was clear conventional treatment had not worked."

Mr Vass admitted a vet was not called to treat Brambles, but stressed that the pony was well
fed, well housed and given the freedom to roam.

He added: "With the benefit of hindsight, Mrs Kowalski may have taken on slightly more than she could handle."

Mr Rogers said: "We are not suggesting Mrs Kowalski was deliberately trying to hurt this pony, but her treatment was the incorrect treatment for the pony and caused her to suffer additional pain."

He said the Strasser method was the "inappropriate method of treatment", and had "resulted in mutilation and caused extreme pain".
"In this case the court is head-to-head with alternative methods," Mr Rogers said.

[DocHF]

thats unusual and so sad.
I'm not a fan of Dr. Strasser, but even she says that in bad cases, the trims should be done in constant consultation with a vet, not on one's own...

[Equibrit]

The story is a CAUTIONARY TALE about encouraging simpletons to use methods they do not fully understand.

[Aggie4Bar]

I don't associate anything "natural" with invasively carving a hoof into the desired shape, which is why I'm no fan of the Strasser Method. That's really too bad for the pony. Perhaps the trimmer will re-evaluate her skill set and adopt a more patient approach to hoofcare.

[Cherry]

Equibrit, what are you implying?

The story is a CAUTIONARY TALE about encouraging simpletons to use methods they do not fully understand.

There are always going to be simpletons that do stupid things with or without encouragement because they surely must lack common sense! As Dirty Harry so aptly put it: "A man's got to know his limitations!".... ;)

[Spoilsport]

The story is a CAUTIONARY TALE about encouraging simpletons to use methods they do not fully understand.

Thank you. I've come across my share of simpletons and fanatics when it comes to barefoot trimming :( .

[Rt66Kix]

In a case this severe, the pony should have been placed in a clinic setting with a certified, trained Strasser professional. NOT left in the hands of a well-meaning, but uneducated owner.

A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing, as in this case. Unfortunately most people will associate Strasser with "BAD", "INVASIVE", and "CRUEL". Talk about throwing the baby out with the bathwater!

[snopbobil]

There is nothing "natural" about the strasser method of butchering a hoof. There is also no need to be in constant contact with your vet when it comes to trimming your horse's feet, you do need to get someone who's been trained, not someone who's gone to a weekend course. I've seen plenty of vets who don't have a clue about how a foot should get trimmed!!!!!!!

[Equibrit]

"Equibrit, what are you implying?"


No implication required.

[slb]

While this is a reflection on the poor judgement of the pony's caretaker, I don't see how it is a reflection on Strasser. Yes, Strasser has a controversial trim and yes, it has been accused of being more harmful than beneficial....but in WHO's hands?

Wasn't part of the focus of this case about not getting a vet to oversee the treatment of this pony? How does that reflect on a "natural" trim or Strasser? Isn't this a simple case of poor judgement/mismanagement on the part of the caretaker? While there is a brief implication of the "mutilated" hooves.....the detailed description included "rotation", "abscesses" "bad lameness" and near sole penetation.....COMMON symptoms of severe founder....not necessarily a reflectin on the trim job or Strasser method.

This has nothing to do with "natrual" trim methods.

[JB]

Thank you. I've come across my share of simpletons and fanatics when it comes to barefoot trimming :( .

One could say the same thing about farriers ;)

[slb]

I thought that I should come back and put this up as food for thought....

If a conventional farrier were working on this case.....and their method of shoeing/trimming only severed to add to the condition of the feet rather than benefit/improve them (which was implied in the hearing), who is to blame then? No one makes a court case and hauls the farrier off to be fined/jailed and no one removes the horse from the caretaker.

And who broght charges on this woman....a disgruntled owner or farrier? Who made the "discovery" that a person with 35 years expeirence with horse management was willfully mistreating this pony?

[Lgd1]

And who broght charges on this woman....a disgruntled owner or farrier?

RSPCA - Royal Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals - brought the case to court

[MayS]

The person who trimmed was new to trimming. If this was a person new to farrier work and he tried to help the horse with shoes with the same results, would you be saying how "shoeing" methods can be dangerous?

The horse was a worst case scenario. His former owner gave up on him. Once he was seized, they spent 5 months trying traditional methods and he was STILL so lame he had to be put down. Clearly this mini could not be saved with any method.

[slb]

RSPCA - Royal Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals - brought the case to court

But, they were the vehicle for the charges.....who actually reported it to them? The RSPCA didn't just "happen" into this person's (with decades of experience in horse care) barn and suddenly say she was harming the pony. IIR, wasn't there something in the first article on this that indicated that it was the owner that brought them in?

[nohafoot]

the simple point is that the person whos taking care of a horse should know when to have a vet step in....strasser...farrier.....at this point it does not matter it was a case of non experienced person working on something out of his/her league. a horse owner of 35 years should know how to handle something going bad wrong...imo...telling me she had horses 35 years...she should have known better...swallow your pride and call a vet..farrier...or some one who know something about strasser other than a weekend wonder...jmo

farrier

[MBPearls]

I agree about this not being about natural hoofcare. This story is the exception, not the rule, in natural hoofcare. I'll continue to keep my mare barefoot and have confidence in the woman who takes care of her (who went to several week-long Jaime Jackson courses, as well as her husband, and have done wonders for both my horse and theirs).

[Equibrit]

QUOTE "The court heard Mrs Kowalski had undergone training in the Strasser technique" endQUOTE


Which obviously led her to believe that she could undertake the treatment of this pony.
THAT IS THE DANGER!

[CookiePony]

the simple point is that the person whos taking care of a horse should know when to have a vet step in....strasser...farrier.....at this point it does not matter it was a case of non experienced person working on something out of his/her league. a horse owner of 35 years should know how to handle something going bad wrong...imo...telling me she had horses 35 years...she should have known better...swallow your pride and call a vet..farrier...or some one who know something about strasser other than a weekend wonder...jmo

farrier

:yes:
This seems to me to be the heart of the matter.

[nohafoot]

I'll continue to keep my mare barefoot and have confidence in the woman who takes care of her (who went to several week-long Jaime Jackson courses, as well as her husband, and have done wonders for both my horse and theirs).


i did not mean for my comment to be a dig at barefooters..... if you thought it was i was in no way trying to get you to put shoes on your horse...if you like a barefoot horse i love it.....in any course of anything its takes years to be of high standards in the same as horses feet the more you see work with and such im sure thier are alot of very good trimers out thier and thier are alot very good shoers out thier...but this case we are talking about had a trimer in over her head..no not really mabey she was a good trimer on a sound horse with not much needs...but that makes her a poor horse owner for 35 years who knows what all happened on that farm in 35 years this time they just got caught because they where to proud to call someone in that knew what they where doing,

[EqTrainer]

While this is a reflection on the poor judgement of the pony's caretaker, I don't see how it is a reflection on Strasser. Yes, Strasser has a controversial trim and yes, it has been accused of being more harmful than beneficial....but in WHO's hands?

Wasn't part of the focus of this case about not getting a vet to oversee the treatment of this pony? How does that reflect on a "natural" trim or Strasser? Isn't this a simple case of poor judgement/mismanagement on the part of the caretaker? While there is a brief implication of the "mutilated" hooves.....the detailed description included "rotation", "abscesses" "bad lameness" and near sole penetation.....COMMON symptoms of severe founder....not necessarily a reflectin on the trim job or Strasser method.

This has nothing to do with "natrual" trim methods.

Absolutely agree.

Not to mention, that the procedures Strasser recommends for these types of cases are meant to be done in a clinic, under the supervision of a veterinarian. Sounds like this was done in the barn aisle :(

[Silk]

The Strasser method has been outlawed in Sweden, and I believe (but not sure) parts of the UK. Have you seen it in practice? Its pretty horrifying. I left a barn once becasue a woman was using this method to try to rehab a rotated horse. Four years later, she is still cutting his poor little feet to nubs and forcing him to walk up and down the roads and trails. Last I saw him, he was still not sound. One summer, he was so lame he could barely stumble (slowly and ouchily) across the field to get to the water. It was tragic to watch.

[Rt66Kix]

OK, let's get some facts straight about Strasser.

1. If someone is billing themselves as a "Certified Strasser Hoofcare Professional," then they are accredited by Dr. Strasser herself. In order to become a SHP, you must attend intense training for approximately ONE YEAR, and then pass a rigid certification testing.

You do NOT get certified by attending a few weekend clinics, as is the case with some other barefoot trimmers. This course is extremely challenging, in-depth and thorough. The participants are required to trim cadaver feet as well as live horses, all under the supervision of other SHP's.

2. In order to maintain your certification, you must be re-certified every year. No exceptions. You are required to present a certain amount of case studies, and once again, need to demonstrate on cadaver feet and live horses your ability to trim. Dr. Strasser is the only one that I know of that requires "CEU" hours in order to practice her methods.

3. Only certified Strasser Hoofcare Professionals are listed on Dr. Strasser's website, www.strasserhoofcare.com (http://www.strasserhoofcare.com). If someone is claiming to "know how to do the Strasser trim," see if their name is listed on the site. If not, I wouldn't trust them to trim my horses.

I have personally been studying this method of trimming for 4 years. I've attended many a clinic and demo day, and feel relatively comfortable trimming my horses. However, when I get a new one, or have a reoccuring issue with a current one, I LET MY SHP DO IT. I know my limitations. My SHP says my trims are pretty darn good, but I don't know as much as she does. She is the expert; she can see things that will cause issues down the road far better than I can. My trims are better than any farrier's trims I've seen so far. Am I brilliant? Not necessarily; I've just had a great teacher.

And one more point in closing. I don't know every SHP personally, but I do know that they all love and care deeply for horses. My SHP was drawn into this because she kept seeing the horses in her barn go lame, and be sent away around the age of 12 or so. She thought there had to be a better way. Trimming is HARD work. Do you honestly think these people would work that hard just to maim, screw up or otherwise damage horses?

Don't judge the Strasser method until you've spoken to a real, live, CERTIFIED SHP. Anything else will just not do. Sometimes a little bit of information is extremely deadly.

[slb]

OK, let's get some facts straight about Strasser.

1. If someone is billing themselves as a "Certified Strasser Hoofcare Professional," then they are accredited by Dr. Strasser herself. In order to become a SHP, you must attend intense training for approximately ONE YEAR, and then pass a rigid certification testing.

You do NOT get certified by attending a few weekend clinics, as is the case with some other barefoot trimmers. This course is extremely challenging, in-depth and thorough. The participants are required to trim cadaver feet as well as live horses, all under the supervision of other SHP's.
Has the certification process changed? It used to be about 80% long distance (ie mail/web) training. The student was required to attend a total of 3 weeks personal contact with Strasser or her top instructors. So, hands-on instruction under the direct supervison of Strasser amounts to 2-3 weeks for those lucky enough to get her full attention.

3. Only certified Strasser Hoofcare Professionals are listed on Dr. Strasser's website, www.strasserhoofcare.com (http://www.strasserhoofcare.com/). If someone is claiming to "know how to do the Strasser trim," see if their name is listed on the site. If not, I wouldn't trust them to trim my horses.

An excellent suggestion! I agree, there are far too many trimmers that imply they use the method...but are not certified.

I have personally been studying this method of trimming for 4 years. I've attended many a clinic and demo day, and feel relatively comfortable trimming my horses. However, when I get a new one, or have a reoccuring issue with a current one, I LET MY SHP DO IT.
How long has your SHP been trimming? Not much longer than you have been studying the method I am betting....

And one more point in closing. I don't know every SHP personally, but I do know that they all love and care deeply for horses.
I would totally agree with that....I don't know too many people that would pay $10K++ to learn to trim horses for self-serving purposes.

Trimming is HARD work. Do you honestly think these people would work that hard just to maim, screw up or otherwise damage horses?

No, I don't personally believe that....nor do most people, but with the shoe on the other foot (no pun intended)....it appears that SHPS feel this way about farriers.

Don't judge the Strasser method until you've spoken to a real, live, CERTIFIED SHP. Anything else will just not do. Sometimes a little bit of information is extremely deadly.
Most people on this board have since there is at least one SHP here.

[poopoo]

Can someone give a brief synopsis of what the Strasser method is and how/why it's done? I can see from the website that this is all about making money - Strasser certified flooring, are they for real?????

[slb]

Can someone give a brief synopsis of what the Strasser method is and how/why it's done? I can see from the website that this is all about making money - Strasser certified flooring, are they for real?????
Since I'm here, I'll give you the basics...others can fill in the details.

First the biggest difference between Strasser and other methods is that it isn't just about the "trim". It is about a whole "natrual" lifestyle for your horse. The horse is supposed to be out 24/7, no blanketing, no wraps, no drugs, no commercial feedstuff, no shoes.

Now for the meat...the trim: The hoof is mapped to determine balance and symetry. The hoof is trimmed to attain optimal biomechanical function asap. The primary focus of the trim is to attain balance from the "inside out".by invisioning or using x-rays to set the coffin bone at its optimal spacial orientation, then the exterior of the hoof is trimmed over a few trimmings to attain form...ie to match the coffin bone. This is a fairly common protocol with most "natural" or otherwise correctly balanced/aligned trims. The focus on attaining optimal function asap is the part that is often misunderstood and the most controversial. In attaining hoof mechanism, the sole and bars may be agressively trimmed beyond the liking of some people. The guidelines of the trim provide for a very strict set of measurements...ie toe angle, hairline angle and heel height. The mechanism that is focused on is mainly at the expansion of the hoof capsule upon weight bearing.

During this process, if a person is not fcompetent in the application and knowlegable of hoof anatomy, there is a chance that they may cut too deep or remove too much hoof material causing the horse to be lame for a period. That is why a previous poster warned about checking the credibility of a person calling themselves a "Strasser trimmer".

While there are plenty of horses in Strasser style trims that are sound and doing well, there are also those that have been lamed for several months to a year or more. There are warnings from organizaions that impy the trim can be cause for concern. There are horror stories of owners permanently damaging their horses after attending a clinic....likewise, there are success stories of owners that have healed their and their friend's horses after conventional farrier failed them (more correctly, an unskilled farrier rather than the entire science of farriery).

Hope that helps.

[Kaydence]

.
Has the certification process changed? It used to be about 80% long distance (ie mail/web) training. The student was required to attend a total of 3 weeks personal contact with Strasser or her top instructors. So, hands-on instruction under the direct supervison of Strasser amounts to 2-3 weeks for those lucky enough to get her full attention.


An excellent suggestion! I agree, there are far too many trimmers that imply they use the method...but are not certified.


How long has your SHP been trimming? Not much longer than you have been studying the method I am betting....


I would totally agree with that....I don't know too many people that would pay $10K++ to learn to trim horses for self-serving purposes.


No, I don't personally believe that....nor do most people, but with the shoe on the other foot (no pun intended)....it appears that SHPS feel this way about farriers.


Most people on this board have since there is at least one SHP here.

Ya, what SLB said, except one of the last gals I talked to who was studying the strasser method was telling a friend of mine about how much more studying she was doing than any farrier does. My friend is a farrier and enjoys a quiet smile to himself so asked her a few polite questions. Her studies included attending a weekend clinic once per month (yes, both cadavers and live trimming) for a year and then having to fly to Germany to be certified directly by Strasser. Even after only one weekend course she was required to start working on a specific number of horses to build toward her next clinic. She indicated it was only a Sat, Sun course so 2 days times 12 months provides less than a month of training. I went to school for a number of months then got out and apprenticed with a number of farriers for a few years. Hmmmm, that could explain the blood on the ground as the horse she was working on limped off and why the horse was euthanized less than 12 months later: her training still not quite complete. But her intentions were good.

Can someone confirm the current number of hours of training for SHP's?

[PaulBunyon]

Last I checked, Strasser had 'borrowed' elements of farrier science and incorporated them into her protocol, which protocol is deeply rooted in junk science and the gullibility of those who are captivated by her performance.
And, like so many others who have no real 'leg to stand on', Strasser only presents worst case scenarios of shoeing gone wrong, whether or not either the shoes or the farrier were at fault.

In reading the contract between potential course graduates and Strasser, a few things jumped out. If a graduate ever even suggests that shoes might be an option, their credential is permanently lost. Those two to three week hands-on gabfests include several hours of discussion on subjects other than hoofcare and pracapplication. So, lets say that over a three week period, class in in session for 10 hours a day, six days a week giving us a total of 180 hours of potential instruction. Since several hours each day are devoted to classroom study of subjects other than hoofcare and/or hands-on work, it becomes apparent that the much promoted 'training for trimming' is rather less than advertised.

As to what the strasser trim consists of, from what I have read and seen, it involves an invasive, unnecessary, dangerous and unwarranted approach to hoofcare. Any trim that advertises that the trim might kill the horse is a "thanks but no thanks" approach for me. Especially when there are fairly decent alternatives available.

any trim that has practitioners who tell one and all that they have a 100% success rate, causes not only skepticism on my part, but sends me right out the door, never to return.

Any approach that relies on the guillibility and lack of knowledge of its target group gets the consideration it deserves from me.

Anyone who believes that someone who only trims horses is a true full care hoofcare professional, is deluding themself.

Anyone who thinks that a SHP has more knowledge and/or ability than a farrier of equal education and experience needs to get a reality check.

Anyone who believes that the barefoot condition is the do all, be all and end all for every horse in every situation, should take up knitting rather than equine management and/or ownership.

[Tree]

How much training did Mrs. Kowalski have in the Strasser methods? It seemed rather generalize in the OP rather than specific. I also PRACTICE the Strasser methods. They are not so easy to learn. Prior to this I had only be doing a "pasture trim" which involved much less training or thought to hoof function and a horse's physiology. I learned it from my last farrier in order to see to the hoof needs of my own. As people heard I did my own trimming they would ask me to trim their's. Seeing an opportunity for more income, I gladly accepted. When I started being asked to work on more difficult hoof issues I soon found what I knew inadequate and this is what caused me to look for more info regarding barefoot methods. One thing led to another and today I'm full-time practicing the Strasser methods. I do know my limits and thanks in part to practical experiences. I am not nor have I ever been certified by Strasser.

The "butchery" idea is simply biased. Why is it that no one seems to object strongly to farriers resecting hoof walls to blood? Why is it no one objects to Veterinarians performing tenotomies? I think it's due to the thought that these techniques are acceptable. Then comes along Strasser who tilts the cart the other way and suddenly her methods are labeled as butchery, too aggressive and the list goes on. It boils down to pitting what her methods call for against the widely accepted practices.

The Strasser methods are based on the horse's physiology and how the hooves should be shaped in order to perform and preserve bone health and mass in addition to less stress to the overal structures. As someone else (SLB?) has already mentioned, lifestyle is a big part of this with hoof care being only a part of it.

I wish there were more details pertaining to the UK pony's case like it's age and health, pics showing the conditions of its feet when Mrs. K took it on and pics showing how the hooves looked during the time she had the pony in her care. Oh and pics showing what treatments it began to receive once the League seized it. I think everyone involved, including Mrs. K were trying to HELP the pony but had conflicting ideas for its care. I know that with the Strasser methods the heels are lowered in an effort to regain a ground parallel coffin bone. SOME Farriery methods do the same while other methods require the raising of the heels and possibly surgery like cutting the DDFT's IF those in charge believe in the pull of the DDFT's causing coffin bones to rotate and penetrate the soles. Well, without more details, I can only wonder what the League's treatments consisted of and would bet it was based on conventional practices.

Those of us who believe in the Strasser methods do so because we've seen living proof. Providing an animal has enough bone structure to work with and the metabolism to support the healing process, it can be helped if the people involved know what they're doing. And most cases are those who's owners have EXHAUSTED the conventional treatments only to try one more thing before ending the animal's life. It's really, really the lucky animals who still have something left of themselves to work with by that time. Oh but we don't go taking all of the conventional practicioners to court because what they did didn't work. No. We'll go after the last ones holding the bag, so to speak. They are not allowed to make any mistakes, for some reason. Why IS that?

Tree

[Tree]

Last I checked, Strasser had 'borrowed' elements of farrier science and incorporated them into her protocol, which protocol is deeply rooted in junk science and the gullibility of those who are captivated by her performance.

Like who and which "junk" science? When she was asked to speak at Tuft's University and trim a horse they provided for her to see, Farriers were overheard commenting that they would have, "trimmed the same way". If she is borrowing elements from farrier science, how come she is so controversial? There are gullible people all around and many continue to go along with methods not practiced by Strasser. ;)

And, like so many others who have no real 'leg to stand on', Strasser only presents worst case scenarios of shoeing gone wrong, whether or not either the shoes or the farrier were at fault.

As far as having a 'leg to stand on', it depends on a person's POV. IF Strasser presents the worst cases people have ever been exposed to, this could also reflect how long it takes people to TRY her methods. By that time, things can be quite extreme. Do you really think she specifically selects only the worst conditions to make an example of Farriery or Veterinary practices? I seriously doubt she would think it was the fault of one single person and yet, she gets the blame. There seems to be a double-standard.

In reading the contract between potential course graduates and Strasser, a few things jumped out. If a graduate ever even suggests that shoes might be an option, their credential is permanently lost.

I don't know that suggesting shoes consistutes a foul in the SHP program. The contract I have states that if a SHP shoes horses, they are in violation of their contract agreement. So SHP's can't be shoeing horses. The horse owners are FREE to have their horses shod if they no longer wish to keep them barefoot.

As to what the strasser trim consists of, from what I have read and seen, it involves an invasive, unnecessary, dangerous and unwarranted approach to hoofcare. Any trim that advertises that the trim might kill the horse is a "thanks but no thanks" approach for me. Especially when there are fairly decent alternatives available.

This sounds like a personal opinion and it's based on what...a comparison to what you know to do? And there is much more to that "kill" part. A counter point to this would be to ask, how many horses die with shoes on their hooves or nail holes still showing in the lower wall? I'm no longer impressed with many of the "alternatives" available particularly when they are focused on treating the symptoms vs the cause(s).

any trim that has practitioners who tell one and all that they have a 100% success rate, causes not only skepticism on my part, but sends me right out the door, never to return.

ANYONE who says they have a 100% success rate should be regarded carefully.

Anyone who believes that someone who only trims horses is a true full care hoofcare professional, is deluding themself.

And anyone who would assume this BEFORE checking the practicioner out would be quite narrow minded.

Anyone who thinks that a SHP has more knowledge and/or ability than a farrier of equal education and experience needs to get a reality check.

I think this would depend on the farriery resources one has to compare each trimmer to. There would no doubt be a variety of educational backgrounds to compare with. Even if you just restricted the field to trimmers or farriers, you'd find differences.

Tree

[PaulBunyon]

One thing led to another and today I'm full-time practicing the Strasser methods. I do know my limits and thanks in part to practical experiences. I am not nor have I ever been certified by Strasser.
So there is no way of knowing how vast your knowledge is or how correctly you are following the Strasser approach. Its convenient that you can claim to be a practitioner but do not have to prove it even to the good doctor herself.
The "butchery" idea is simply biased.
Nah, its a self-evident fact.
[Why is it that no one seems to object strongly to farriers resecting hoof walls to blood? Why is it no one objects to Veterinarians performing tenotomies?
Apples to oranges. Neither farriers nor veterinarians routinely go ripping out the sole. Neither farriers nor veterinarians find opening cuts, particularly all the way to blood, to be a beneficial practice. Neither farriers nor reputable veterinarians beleive that all horses must have either a 30 degree hairline or a zero degree palmer angle for p3(IOW, only an idiot believes that every horse should have coffin bones with a spatial orientation that on the ground surface is ground parallel). Neither farriers nor reputable veterinarians believe or preach that all front hoof angles should be 45 degrees. Hell, even Strasser babbles out of both sides of her mouth on that issue, first demanding that angulation, then waffling and allowing that a few degrees upwards is acceptable. Junk Science, Stupidity and Invasively Unnecessary trimming approach. Makes for a great way to trim feet don't you think?
I think it's due to the thought that these techniques are acceptable.
Rather, its a fact that in certain instances they are not only acceptable but warranted.
Then comes along Strasser who tilts the cart the other way and suddenly her methods are labeled as butchery, too aggressive and the list goes on.
Butchery is as butchery does. And that long ongoing list is spot on. Except for those who are too blind to see, and too addlepated to think.
It boils down to pitting what her methods call for against the widely accepted practices.
Absolutely. And since her methods are not even remotely accepted in either the farrier or veterinary professions, this non-acceptance speaks quite loudly and should give anyone pause for long thought before they embark on a journey of unnecessary pain, misery, damage and potentially, death, for those horses in their care.
The Strasser methods are based on the horse's physiology and how the hooves should be shaped in order to perform and preserve bone health and mass in addition to less stress to the overal structures.
BULL! thats a load of self-serving hyperbole that has never been either proven or accepted.
And who is the arbiter who decides how a horse's hooves should be shaped? Strasser? I think not.

The feral horse? I think not. Besides, Strasser also refers to the feral horse's hoof shape yet she has , to my knowledge, never done any actual hands-on examinations of even a small percentage of the ferals in the US or anywhere else. And, looking at them from afar, does not count as hands-on examination or investigation. Besides, ferals are a poor representative when comparing them with the designer original, domestic horses of today.
As someone else (SLB?) has already mentioned, lifestyle is a big part of this with hoof care being only a part of it.
And what of those horses who, for whatever reason(s) don't live this idyllic lifestyle?
I know that with the Strasser methods the heels are lowered in an effort to regain a ground parallel coffin bone.
Strike one.
SOME Farriery methods do the same while other methods require the raising of the heels and possibly surgery like cutting the DDFT's IF those in charge believe in the pull of the DDFT's causing coffin bones to rotate and penetrate the soles.
You have fairly succinctly noted some of the important differences between Strasser and good hoofcare. NO absolutes on the part of farriers and veterinarians. Each case is treated individually, right down to each foot being evaluated and given what care/treatment is indicated.
Those of us who believe in the Strasser methods do so because we've seen living proof.
And those of us who don't have seen the living proof too.
Providing an animal has enough bone structure to work with and the metabolism to support the healing process, it can be helped if the people involved know what they're doing.
Ah, now we get to a crux of the matter. You have predetermined guidelines for insuring success. Rather self-serving and duplicitious don't you think?
And you have the temerity to ask for examples of the Junk Science that pervades the Strasser approach! ROTFLMAO!!!!!!
And most cases are those who's owners have EXHAUSTED the conventional treatments only to try one more thing before ending the animal's life.
I would argue that those owners have only explored and employed some of the 'other than Strasser' treatments available.

By the way, when one of you Strasser followers gets one of these cases, are you always successful? If no, why not? And do try to avoid the contrivance that "Oh, if I had only been consulted sooner" claptrap. Thats a dog that just won't hunt among knowledgeable and non-gullible folks.
It's really, really the lucky animals who still have something left of themselves to work with by that time.
OOPS! I spoke too soon! You've already made with the excuses. Why am I not suprised?
Oh but we don't go taking all of the conventional practicioners to court because what they did didn't work. No. We'll go after the last ones holding the bag, so to speak.
Perhaps thats because your method is unnecessary, uninformed, unnecessarily invasive, dangerous, damaging, ill conceived, improper, foolish, and wrong.
They are not allowed to make any mistakes, for some reason. Why IS that?
Perhaps because their entire trimming approach is already ONE BIG MISTAKE and folks get somewhat upset when it is continually compounded.

Paul "N Babe(the big blue ox)

[PaulBunyon]

Like who and which "junk" science?
asked and answered previously.
When she was asked to speak at Tuft's University and trim a horse they provided for her to see, Farriers were overheard commenting that theywould have, "trimmed the same way".
Yep, she gave the audience exactly what it wanted. And, considering how little hoof there was to trim, just about anyone who had even a rudimentary understanding of what good trimming consists of, would have done the same thing. Especially considering the audience she was playing to.

She was asked to speak at Tufts so that questions about her approach could be asked and answered. Instead, the audience left without gaining any information on what she really and routinely does. Of those who were in attendance that I have spoken with, none felt that she accurately represented herself.
If she is borrowing elements from farrier science, how come she is s
o controversial?
Because she misuses them to suit her hoofcare hypothesis. She has 'cherry picked' that which serves her purposes. And, her reliance on the less than scientific non-experiment and observations by one Bracy Clark has been routinely and often debunked.
There are gullible people all around and many continue to go along with methods not practiced by Strasser. ;)
And thank GOD for that!
As far as having a 'leg to stand on', it depends on a person's POV. IF Strasser presents the worst cases people have ever been exposed to, this could also reflect how long it takes people to TRY her methods.
Nah. Strasser's examples in her various and sundry flights of written fancy are examples of owner neglect. She parades them as being caused by "the evil of shoes", but that self-serving nonsense is believed only by those who like to be easily persuaded and have a lemming mentality.
Do you really think she specifically selects only the worst conditions to make an example of Farriery or Veterinary practices?
In a word, YES!
I seriously doubt she would think it was the fault of one single person and yet, she gets the blame. There seems to be a double-standard.
No double standard. She is the leader of the pack. Her contract states "Certification of a Hoofcare Specialist may be revoked at any time if the individual deviates in his/her hoofcare practices from the principles and methods developed by Dr. Hiltrud Strasser......."
So, the blame ultimately comes squarely to rest on the shoulders of one and
only one person. Dr. H. Strasser. And in the true spirit of the Trickle Down process, each and every one of her disciples and practitioners, Certified or not.
I don't know that suggesting shoes consistutes a foul in the SHP program. The contract I have states that if a SHP shoes horses, they are in violation of their contract agreement. So SHP's can't be shoeing horses. The horse owners are FREE to have their horses shod if they no longer wish to keep them barefoot.
You are basically correct, though I wonder what the response from the office would be were it learned that a SHP had even the temerity to suggest shoeing any given horse. After all, that condition which I quoted above, goes on to say, .....Certification of a Hoofcare Specialist may be revoked at any time..........
or for any other reasonable cause..." One can only wonder what such an unreasonable person might consider 'reasonable cause'.

One last thing on this subject. The contract states that the certification is revoked immediately if the individual(SHP).........shoes or has shod his/her own horse(s)."

What we have here folks, is a franchise. The McDonalds(though on a very, very smaller scale) of the hoofcare profession.
This sounds like a personal opinion and it's based on what...a comparison to what you know to do?
In part, but the rest is based on evidence and facts presented, especially by Strasser and her loyal group of groupies. The admonition "Never underestimate the power of Stupid People in large groups" comes to mind and seems appropriate here.
And there is much more to that "kill" part. A counter point to this would be to ask, how many horses die with shoes on their hooves or nail holes still showing in the lower wall?
A logical fallacy of a comparison. Strasser and her followers state that the application of their specific trim may kill the horse. No other trimming and/or shoeing protocol makes such a statement. Further, the presence of either shoes or nail holes on/in the hooves of a dead horse do not, in any way, shape or form, indicate the cause(s) of death, nor are they routinely indicted as the cause, either primary or secondary, of death.
I'm no longer impressed with many of the "alternatives" available particularly when they are focused on treating the symptoms vs the cause(s).
Good, because I've never been impressed(in case you haven't noticed)with Strasser's butchery. And, most all the good farriers, veterinarians, and alternative hoofcare providers of my aquaintance are focused on treating both the cause(s) and the symptoms. Something that apparently has escaped your notice or experience.
ANYONE who says they have a 100% success rate should be regarded carefully.
And, suspiciously. But, we are, at last, in agreement on something.
And anyone who would assume this BEFORE checking the practicioner out would be quite narrow minded.
Narrow minded is not the term that comes into my mind. Foolish, inexperienced, lacking adequate information/knowledge, and in some cases, stupid,gullible, do however come to mind
I think this would depend on the farriery resources one has to compare each trimmer to. There would no doubt be a variety of educational backgrounds to compare with. Even if you just restricted the field to trimmers or farriers, you'd find differences.
No doubt about it.

[slb]

Like who and which "junk" science? When she was asked to speak at Tuft's University and trim a horse they provided for her to see, Farriers were overheard commenting that they would have, "trimmed the same way". If she is borrowing elements from farrier science, how come she is so controversial? There are gullible people all around and many continue to go along with methods not practiced by Strasser. ;)
While this is quite true of that particlar day's perspective of Strasser trimming (what...one foot, IIRC), the panel of hoofcare experts that sat in question of her "theories" agreed overwhelminly that her model of the hoof and its function, as well as, the feet that she present pictures of "as shoes are harmful" were dissatisfied with her "theories and refuted each one of them.

When it is evident that "one's science" is founded on a study done at the turn of the century that was a) not finished, b) had no controls and was done on one horse, and c) was not acceptable science for its time , then it is generally refered to as "junk".

[poopoo]

O.K. Thanks all, I get the picture now. It is one of those money making schemes (as expected) and sounds like the horse takes the hit... too bad. Anything that may kill a horse is not for me. And taking the sole way down is not for me either. My god, I want to make my horses more comfortable, not less..... You have to wonder about methods that use the same "formula" for every horse, when every horse has different legs, different body types, different feet..... that's just stupidity to think that they must all use the same formulas, dimensions. It's just like when they put corrective shoes on me as a kid for being pigeon-toed - that didn't work - that's how my bones were lined up - gotta use a different "formula" there. Only this sounds like it's maiming horses. Why do people fall for this crap?

[barngirl]

I think some horses can do barefoot and some can't... and I really dislike how the "natural" or "barefoot" people seem to make those who chose to shoe their horse feel like we are bad owner. I spend anywhere from 100-150 dollars to have my horse shod...and I learned the hard way what happens if you don't have a good farrier. Just because one farrier did a bad job dosn't mean they are all incompetent.

I am not saying that all horse need shoes, but not all horse can be barefoot. I would love to have a $40 trim every 5-8 weeks, but that wouldn't work for my boy. I love that my farrier pretty much won't trim unless I am there... I am told to give him feedback.. he watches my horse go, asks how he is doing and even works with the Chiropractor when needed. My horse is happy and sound and has never had a day of lameness due to his shoeing. I have seen my farrier make diagnosed navicular horses who when barefoot are completely lame go soundly by shoeing them with heel pads. Its not magic and quick fixes.. I have had wedges on my horse till he grew the right heel angles... I have a very funky looking back shoe on my horse, but that is the way his hoof grows. Find a farrier who knows and has studied anatomoy and has tons of experience. Then decide if your horse would benefit from shoes or not. A good farrier should be able to trim and leave barefoot or shoe and make corrections. my same farrier trimmed a club footed yearling into soundness, we did have the tendon surgery to realses the tendon, but the vet gave the foal no hope, said he would be unsound and never a good mover. With monthly trimming ( mainly of his heel) he was sound and quite the mover. I sold him to a dressage rider who says he just floats over the ground. I don't trust my horse to anybody but this guy. I just wish everyone was so lucky... I dread the day when I move from the region or he retire. But I am lucky to have had him, because I now know what to do and I will be able to relaize when the next farrier isn't doing it right.

Sorry to rant, but that's my (rambling) 2cents. :)

[cowgirljenn]

For those of you who do not like the Strausser trim, do you like any of the other barefoot trim/methods/whatever?

I learned about Strausser several years ago, and I haven't like her methods. I can agree that many horses do well (maybe even better!) barefoot, but I don't agree with some of the severe cutting back of feet.

I also really don't like the attitude of a lot of her followers. When I started trying to learn about the Strausser trim, I was told that if I wasn't willing to keep my horses out 24/7, feed only a grass/hay diet, and follow other 'natural horsekeeping principles' then I shouldn't even bother. Unfortunately, I was boarding at the time and now have several horses on limited acreage. My older stallion -will not- keep his weight on hay & grass only, and we don't have enough grass to keep weight on several of the other horses. We don't have enough space for them to be out 24/7, so we do the best we can.

I'm learning to trim my own now and do keep them barefoot (although if things change and my mare goes into reining training, she will get sliders on!) but it isn't a Strausser trim.

[MayS]

I really dislike how the "natural" or "barefoot" people seem to make those who chose to shoe their horse feel like we are bad owner.

And I dislike how some people think all "barefooters" are anti-shoe and out to pick on owners who do shoe. :D

[Appassionato]

And I dislike how some people think all "barefooters" are anti-shoe and out to pick on owners who do shoe. :D

But, I have yet to see a person who ok's shoes go after barefooters saying they are hurting their horses. I have seen it the other way around though, and have been personally attacked by such.

I don't slam barefoot. Every horse at my farm IS barefoot, and I'd LOVE for my guy to be barefoot. But he can't. And for some of the barefooters here to have attacked me and especially mock my horse's poor condition based on the fact he wears shoes...you're right, it put a bad taste in my mouth. I do remember those that have done such and I don't take it out on others who like barefoot methods. Nor have I seen anyone else do so. I could be wrong, but I've never seen it.

[Aggie4Bar]

For those of you who do not like the Strausser trim, do you like any of the other barefoot trim/methods/whatever?Yes.

I think it's important to point out the "natural" and "barefoot" can encompass a very wide range of theories. Just because one theory sets off the alarms doesn't mean every theory is bad. You have to look at each style of trimming and evaluate it for what it is. If it works for you, great. If it doesn't, find one that does. Or shoe.

Where Strasser is concerned, the best comparison I can offer is smashing a fingernail or toenail. The nail is ugly and damaged as a result. Do you opt to cut the nail out so that you'll immediately begin to grow normal nail? Or do you patiently and consistenly continue to trim the nail until the damage grows out, making minor corrections as needed to encourage normal regrowth? To my mind, the Strasser method seeks out an immediate correction or "quick fix", if you will, and the result can be devastating to the horse. There are many other trim styles that encourage patient and consistent trimming to acquire a healthy foot. The end result could turn out identical, but it's the means of getting there that makes me curl my toes and tuck my feet underneath me.

[Appassionato]

For those of you who do not like the Strausser trim, do you like any of the other barefoot trim/methods/whatever?

Yes!

www.hopeforsoundness.com (http://www.hopeforsoundness.com)

I really like what this site has to say and it makes a lot of sense to me.

[LaraNSpeedy]

This article is not saying enough. I read Strassers info and went to several clinics when I transitioned all my horses barefoot and started rehabbing OTTBs using barefooting - and it was essential and really helpful. I admit I do not follow her outline to a T and sort of stop way short - incorp Jackson, wild horse and some of my own methods instead - I feel I am more the guide to help the horse transition to natural shape and condition. However, I will say that from experience from reading and seeing different cases - Strasser and from other trimmers - that sometimes the transition period is hardest on a horse - and if a horse is coming from a very bad place where the vets are giving up on the horse - sometimes the rehab looks downright abusive to those who do not have context or subjectivity. I would like to hear from the trimmer WHY the horse was trimmed like he was and I would like to see before and after pictures. I have seen a lot of horses go through strasser methods from an extreme unsoundness and be totally sound in less than a year - vets previously saying to put the horse down. For someone not understanding the situation, they may have viewed the initial trim as abusive.

I do agree that for these extreme cases, the hroses should be on the property of the trimmer and under the care of the professional. For the horse's sake but also so that someone not understanding the situation doesn't happen by and make an unfair accusation.

It is possible that the horse was trimmed too extremely. And I think when that happens it is abusive and wrong. Perhaps sort of sad both ways because you know the person had the right heart when trying to save the horse. Unlike 'abuse' where someone loses their temper and purposely hurt an animal to hurt him.

My point I guess is - I would have to know more about this than what is said here. However, I do not trim according to Strasser's guidelines. I do take into consideration all the principles why she does. I think those are valid. I think her methods often go farther than needed for most horses.

[pawsplus]

This article is not saying enough. I read Strassers info and went to several clinics when I transitioned all my horses barefoot and started rehabbing OTTBs using barefooting - and it was essential and really helpful. I admit I do not follow her outline to a T and sort of stop way short - incorp Jackson, wild horse and some of my own methods instead - I feel I am more the guide to help the horse transition to natural shape and condition. However, I will say that from experience from reading and seeing different cases - Strasser and from other trimmers - that sometimes the transition period is hardest on a horse - and if a horse is coming from a very bad place where the vets are giving up on the horse - sometimes the rehab looks downright abusive to those who do not have context or subjectivity.

Absolutely. When a horse's feet are screwed up, it's NOT an easy path back. My TB hasn't had an easy transition but in the long run it is going to be wonderful for him. I, too, use a combination of NB, Jackson, Ramey, and Equinextion, and I learned a lot from Strasser as well.

My point I guess is - I would have to know more about this than what is said here. However, I do not trim according to Strasser's guidelines. I do take into consideration all the principles why she does. I think those are valid. I think her methods often go farther than needed for most horses.

Again, I think this is true. The SHP I used for a short time did a good job for the most part and I learned a lot from her before going forward to trimming myself, but she seemed to have trouble with NORMAL feet, LOL! She helped me a good bit w/ Peregrine, but trimmed Destiny (perfect, textbook-lovely always-bare, hard-as-rocks feet) too close and caused almost 2 weeks of ouchiness in a previously completely impervious horse. ?? She admitted that she was more accustomed to working on serious problem feet, not normal ones!

[Auventera Two]

I've talked to way too many people (my farrier being one of them) who have used the term "butcher" to describe Strasser. My farrier said that no human being should ever think they can trim a horse as evasive as Strasser does. He just shook his head and said the thought of that woman infuriates him. In my quest for barefoot knowledge, I read everything I could about Strasser and I have to say about 90% of it has been negative. I guess I have no desire to learn any more about her or her method. It seems I've heard enough already.

[Tree]

So there is no way of knowing how vast your knowledge is or how correctly you are following the Strasser approach. Its convenient that you can claim to be a practitioner but do not have to prove it even to the good doctor herself.

To know is to find out. That would rule out making assumptions. ;) If it is of any interest, you'll find that the hooves of the animals I trim will have toe angle ranges within the Strasser perameters, hairlines at 30 degrees and mechanism. Not all would have xrays but those that do would show how right on the coffin bones are to ground parallel or are just off that mark. Convenience is not what I was trying to achieve in here any more than your input was going to condemn Strasser or her methods.

When I attend Strasser taught Seminars, she has the opportunity to view my work each time I present a hoof to her with questions I have had about conditions I've found. To gain her approval has not been the goal of such efforts. I do not claim to be a SHP and never have. I do enjoy my freedoms though. I am a practicioner of hoof trimming which just happen to be focused on the Strasser methods.


Neither farriers nor veterinarians find opening cuts, particularly all the way to blood, to be a beneficial practice.

There are farriers who do make opening cuts. They may not use that term to identify the act of cleaning out the collateral groove (or commissures) exits between the frog and heels. Where does it suggest in Strasser's teachings that one must hit blood while making opening cuts? She does state that if you hit blood you've gone too far. In the clinic, hitting blood may be a different matter altogether compared to field trimming methods.

Neither farriers nor reputable veterinarians beleive that all horses must have either a 30 degree hairline or a zero degree palmer angle for p3(IOW, only an idiot believes that every horse should have coffin bones with a spatial orientation that on the ground surface is ground parallel).

Well, if you were to ask 10 Farriers and 10 Veterinarians about toe angles I believe you'd find more answers than if one asked about hairlines. I've had more farriers who would check toes angles than those (none to date) what would consider hairlines as having any specific angle and how it could relate to the coffin bone orientation. They only checked hairlines for balance (lateral).

According to your opinion, it would benefit horses to have more owners who are "idiots" when it comes to coffin bone spatial orientation. It's been a common practice to maintain them with a caudal angle than not. I suspect this lends itself to being a part and party to the many lameness issues that develope. There's room for improvement, IMO.

Neither farriers nor reputable veterinarians believe or preach that all front hoof angles should be 45 degrees. Makes for a great way to trim feet don't you think?

Edited this down some to stick to what's more important. Reading books on horse conformation tend to state, routinely, that shoulders should be at 45 degrees. Farriery texts speak about matching hoof angles to pasterns and shoulders. Is this junk? What is it based on? Strasser has dissected a lot of hooves (for lack of a specific number), and has found the angles based on what the bones showed, respective to hinds and fores. She also notes that remodeled coffin bones will alter those findings. She provides a range for fores and hinds. As for her findings and teachings providing a great way to trim hooves, yes, I have found them to be so. She also acknowleges materials taken from others in her books. I don't feel she is trying to say she did it all by her lonesome.

If I were to ask 10 Farriers or 10 Veterinarians about hoof angles, I am not sure what to expect. Through the years I've seen no evidence of any real standard past what those conformation books stated was the IDEAL.

Butchery is as butchery does. And that long ongoing list is spot on. Except for those who are too blind to see, and too addlepated to think.

The label seems based upon what one thinks qualifies as such. So there would be acceptable forms of butchery and unacceptable forms of the same. It's in the eye of the beholder. Blindness depends upon one's education.

Absolutely. And since her methods are not even remotely accepted in either the farrier or veterinary professions, this non-acceptance speaks quite loudly and should give anyone pause for long thought before they embark on a journey of unnecessary pain, misery, damage and potentially, death, for those horses in their care.

To all or to some? The nonacceptance appears rooted in sticking to what's acceptable (conventional treatments). Those who take an interest, like myself, have done so because conventionality was lacking. It's the norm to treat symptoms much of the time....to help horses live WITH their problems vs doing something that would treat the actual cause(s) of their symptoms.

The part about unnecessary pain goes along with hiding it from them. Misery? Is that related to humans and their hang ups with pain or horses? Damage...how does hiding a horse's issues from it address the damage that will continue when the cause(s) is not being remedied? Death? That's a part of life. Why do some horses die prematurely? Can it all be blamed on genes? Why do race horses break down so often?

You do like to paint a dark and dismal picture of what barefoot is about. Going back to the UK pony case, just what was this animal's life like prior to a barefoot person taking it on?

BULL! thats a load of self-serving hyperbole that has never been either proven or accepted.
And who is the arbiter who decides how a horse's hooves should be shaped? Strasser? I think not.

Who decided coffin bones should be maintained with a palmar angle? Who decided rotated coffin bones needed the heels to be raised higher? There is quite a bit of hyperbole about and long before Strasser's name became widely known. Browsing through my Farrier text books I am not sure what a healthy hoof should look like when most examples are contracted/narrow. Thanks to people like Strasser, Redden, Jackson and others who have studied various hooves, coffin bone orientation has gotten more attention than before, particularly when it comes to feral horses living on harsh terrains.

(There are) NO absolutes on the part of farriers and veterinarians. Each case is treated individually, right down to each foot being evaluated and given what care/treatment is indicated.

Beyond what a particular horse would require, consulting with more than one Farrier, Vet or Hoof Trimmer would result in atleast that many ways to go about treating just one horse. It still boils down to what each knows to do.

Ah, now we get to a crux of the matter. You have predetermined guidelines for insuring success. Rather self-serving and duplicitious don't you think?

I am self-employed and my own boss. I don't have a 100% success rate. So what is your point?

I would argue that those owners have only explored and employed some of the 'other than Strasser' treatments available.

By the way, when one of you Strasser followers gets one of these cases, are you always successful? If no, why not? And do try to avoid the contrivance that "Oh, if I had only been consulted sooner" claptrap. [QUOTE]

I was a horse owner long before I ever heard about Strasser. I went along with the idea that if you're going to ride horses they have to have shoes. We boarded our horses at a barn with limited pasture space so turnout was limited. I was always told my horse had good feet. If you'd asked me what that meant back then, I'd say it meant she didn't lose shoes. ;) That they were big enough for her size (14.3) and breed (old-time QH). What does this mean? I've been around the barn more than once so I didn't just arrive at Strasser as some inexperienced horse person.

As far as successes, it would depend on how you define "success". I think most would define it as returning a horse to work. Well, dealing with horse owners has shown me that there is more than that one definition.

For me personally, a success seems based upon helping the horse improve as far as it can. Pleasing the owners isn't a goal but it's nice when it happens. It's what is right for the horses that concerns me. I also learn a lot from those I have helped some but not enough. Some were beyond my help before I met them. It's not an excuse but a fact. Now, if I am asked to see a horse that I feel is beyond my ability to help, I tell the owner so. I don't waste my time or their money. I do want to make a difference in a positive way in my work or there's little else to motivate me to do this work. I'm not motivated by $.

[QUOTE=PaulBunyon]Perhaps because their entire trimming approach is already ONE BIG MISTAKE and folks get somewhat upset when it is continually compounded.

Paul "N Babe(the big blue ox)

Again, that's your opinion. I give more credit to my clients as having the intelligence to know right from wrong than you do.

I had the thought to ask after your big blue ox while making rounds today...noting your nom de plume. LOL!

Mine was earned playing softball (1st base)...tree-like in that I could reach high, stretch out and nab anything close enough.

Tree

[Tree]

But, I have yet to see a person who ok's shoes go after barefooters saying they are hurting their horses. I have seen it the other way around though, and have been personally attacked by such.

'They' would suggest that those who use particular barefooting method are causing undo misery, pain, over trimming, over thinning.....blah, blah, blah. So I guess it depends on your POV as to what you have seen. To me, this is a way of saying "you're hurting horses".

I know that there will be people who think I over trim, cause misery, pain and take more off feet than they would. I don't work for these types. I'm often fired by those types and it's no problem for me when they have a perfect right to decide who works on their horses' hooves and what methods they feel comfortable with.

Personal attacks? I guess I find it hard to imagine posts packing all that much punch when list owners watch over such things. The attack is in writing. Maybe I'm not all that sensative. I think it comes from knowing what I do vs others who think they know but don't.

Tree

[Appassionato]

'They' would suggest that those who use particular barefooting method are causing undo misery, pain, over trimming, over thinning.....blah, blah, blah. So I guess it depends on your POV as to what you have seen. To me, this is a way of saying "you're hurting horses".

I've yet to see a person who has a shod horse(s) chase down barefooters here.

I know that there will be people who think I over trim, cause misery, pain and take more off feet than they would. I don't work for these types. I'm often fired by those types and it's no problem for me when they have a perfect right to decide who works on their horses' hooves and what methods they feel comfortable with.

Farriers get fired too. It's not personal. Nor is it in line with anything I was talking about.


Personal attacks? I guess I find it hard to imagine posts packing all that much punch when list owners watch over such things. The attack is in writing. Maybe I'm not all that sensative.

Attacking a poster by mocking their horse's condition is uncalled for and just plain sick. It takes a really low person to do such a thing. Then again, I had raising and my parents were extreme about manners towards others. Yes, I'm aware it's the internet. I'm also aware of what's called an "internet badass". But the irony of it when they pick on the animal to get at me...pity for them I suppose.

I think it comes from knowing what I do vs others who think they know but don't.


I'm sure most people feel this way. Accusations still fly, don't they? But again, it's one thing to attack the poster. It's another to go after their animal to get at the poster. That's a clear indication to me of emotional instability.

[Tree]

Where Strasser is concerned, the best comparison I can offer is smashing a fingernail or toenail. The nail is ugly and damaged as a result. Do you opt to cut the nail out so that you'll immediately begin to grow normal nail? Or do you patiently and consistenly continue to trim the nail until the damage grows out, making minor corrections as needed to encourage normal regrowth?

Smashed nail? Some doctors will remove the nail while others would not. Those who would not might just drill a hole through the nail to relieve the pressure caused by the blood filling a limited area. Another doctor may only prescribe taking pain meds and do nothing to the nail. There is more than one option in other words. I think it should depend on the person's health as to what choices they would have available to them. From there it can be narrowed down to what the patient thinks they could handle.

To my mind, the Strasser method seeks out an immediate correction or "quick fix", if you will, and the result can be devastating to the horse. There are many other trim styles that encourage patient and consistent trimming to acquire a healthy foot. The end result could turn out identical, but it's the means of getting there that makes me curl my toes and tuck my feet underneath me.

As I understand Strasser, she would opt for what allows the quickest healing to take place based upon the patient's overal condition, not just the hooves. In her clinic setting, she CAN make the quick adjustments and provide the daily support needed to help the horse. In the field, her methods provide adjustments which can be made to suit the circumstances. Before any trimming takes place, the horse is examined to determine if it's body has the ability to heal. If the vital organs are over taxed, restoring their function is the priority or healing can't be expected to take place.

So if a near death patient comes in with a smashed finger nail and that's the least of their troubles, the nail will be lower on the list of priorities until other more important issues are taken care of.

Tree

[Tree]

Attacking a poster by mocking their horse's condition is uncalled for and just plain sick. But the irony of it when they pick on the animal to get at me...pity for them I suppose.

I guess I've missed reading what you're talking about. Would you mind pointing to where I should look? If you'd rather not, don't worry about it.


I'm sure most people feel this way. Accusations still fly, don't they? But again, it's one thing to attack the poster. It's another to go after their animal to get at the poster. That's a clear indication to me of emotional instability.

I don't know how other people feel. I know that when I ask questions of people they get the idea that I'm attacking them. Can't anyone just simply read the questions and answer them?

Yes, accusations fly both ways from what I've seen. By "going after an animal", I'd have a problem with someone physically doing this vs using a typed post to do it. You know the old saying about sticks and stones? ;)

Tree

[Appassionato]

Yes, accusations fly both ways from what I've seen. By "going after an animal", I'd have a problem with someone physically doing this vs using a typed post to do it. You know the old saying about sticks and stones?

Yes, I've heard of sticks and stones. I've also heard of internet predators. I consider these one and the same. Why? Because they are saying what they truly feel behind anonymity (safety). As a former officer, I also understand that until there is a crime commited, no foul for the most part. Thing is, threats are a crime.

Am I making a mountain out of a mole hill? Possibly. And possibly not. In any case, getting at me through my horse really says something about an individual. One, that they were wrong in the argument period. Two, that they are truly sick. That was all my point was about. That, and that I have yet to see anyone here at COTH screaming that someone having a horse barefoot is detrimental to the said horse's health. I have seen it the other way around.

[Tree]

Yes, I've heard of sticks and stones. I've also heard of internet predators. I consider these one and the same. Why? Because they are saying what they truly feel behind anonymity (safety). As a former officer, I also understand that until there is a crime commited, no foul for the most part. Thing is, threats are a crime.

Speaking honestly and saying what one truly feels can be one in the same but I feel like I'm missing out when it comes to actual threats made to your horse. If you feel truly threatened by something someone writes in cyber space then you should take the apropriate actions against them.

Am I making a mountain out of a mole hill? Possibly. And possibly not.

That's your call. Take apropriate actions if you feel threatened.

That, and that I have yet to see anyone here at COTH screaming that someone having a horse barefoot is detrimental to the said horse's health. I have seen it the other way around.

I've not noticed any cyber screaming (all caps used). It seems only an issue when a certain method is discussed but not screamed. I've missed out on any posts on COTH where screaming threats took place evidently. I feel fortunate.

Tree

[PaulBunyon]

If it is of any interest, you'll find that the hooves of the animals I trim will have toe angle ranges within the Strasser perameters, hairlines at 30 degrees and mechanism.
A 30 degree hairline and a ground parallel palmer surface of p3 mandates a 45 degree capsular dorsal wall angle. Demonstrably a bad thing when applied to every horse. Strasser tries to have it both ways, mandatory parameters and then an allowance for caudal elevation of p3. That dog won't hunt.
Not all would have xrays but those that do would show how right on the coffin bones are to ground parallel or are just off that mark.
Fitting all the pegs, round or not, into a round hole is demonstrably incorrect and deletorious to the horse.
Convenience is not what I was trying to achieve in here any more than your input was going to condemn Strasser or her methods.
Even worse, you are attempting uniformity when uniformity is not correct or proper. And, my input did/does indeed condemn Strasser and her methods.
Well, if you were to ask 10 Farriers and 10 Veterinarians about toe angles I believe you'd find more answers than if one asked about hairlines. I've had more farriers who would check toes angles than those (none to date) what would consider hairlines as having any specific angle and how it could relate to the coffin bone orientation.
Thats because toe angle directly relates to p3's spatial orientation and HPA alignment. Hairlines vary in accordance with conformation. A fact that Strasser must have missed that day in class.
They only checked hairlines for balance (lateral).
Wrong answer. Farriers and vets look at hairlines for much more than M/L balance, especially if you are only referring to the hairline's relationship to the horizon.
According to your opinion, it would benefit horses to have more owners who are "idiots" when it comes to coffin bone spatial orientation.
No ma'am/sir? Quite the opposite in fact. Educated horseowners are immune mostly immune to the nonsense spouted by Strasser and have investigated what the normal spatial orientation of p3 should be.
It's been a common practice to maintain them with a caudal angle than not.
Rather, its common practice to maintain the spatial orientation of p3 according to the dictates of the individual hoof. In most cases this is caudally elevated. Occasionally, it is with zero caudal elevation.
I suspect this lends itself to being a part and party to the many lameness issues that develope. There's room for improvement, IMO.
What you suspect is not germane. That research and field anecdotal evidence evidence exists that routinely counters your suspicions and assertions is a fact. That no recognized equine anatomist or researcher agrees with or supports Strasser's contention regarding ground parallel coffin bones is a fact. Said individuals include Bennett, DeNoix, Page, Rooney, Myers, ad infinatum.
Edited this down some to stick to what's more important. Reading books on horse conformation tend to state, routinely, that shoulders should be at 45 degrees.
Old out of date texts and information.
Farriery texts speak about matching hoof angles to pasterns and shoulders. Is this junk?
Generally speaking, YES!
What is it based on?
Old information and observations, now shown to be just that. Old and dated.
Strasser has dissected a lot of hooves (for lack of a specific number), and has found the angles based on what the bones showed, respective to hinds and fores.
Bull. If she disected all those feet then she surely saw that not every one had a p3 spatial orientation of zero palmer angle. Might want to ask her why she never reported those findings.
She also notes that remodeled coffin bones will alter those findings.
ROTFLMAO! I suppose she feels that any foot with a coffin bone that is caudally elevated is one with a remodeled coffin bone then.
She provides a range for fores and hinds.
Then defacto, she has debunked her own protocol. Ain't science grand!
She also acknowleges materials taken from others in her books.
I would certainly hope so. Stealing the intellectual property of others is not only a no-no, but also a crime. Too bad she cherry picks that information which can be erroneously used to support her debunked theory and protocol.
I don't feel she is trying to say she did it all by her lonesome.
Good thing because then we would add "Liar" to her dubious attributes.
If I were to ask 10 Farriers or 10 Veterinarians about hoof angles, I am not sure what to expect.
You should expect to hear that "it depends". And then when pressed, given the answers of what it depends on, and why/
Through the years I've seen no evidence of any real standard past what those conformation books stated was the IDEAL.
That's because the standard is "It Depends". And again, you are relying on dated and outdated materials. Unfortunately you are not alone in this.
So there would be acceptable forms of butchery and unacceptable forms of the same.
When it comes to horse's hooves, no form of butchery whether performed by a barefoot trimmer or a farrier is acceptable.
It's in the eye of the beholder.
No ma'am/sir(?). Its in the actions and reactions of the horse. The horse, and only the horse is the final arbiter.
Blindness depends upon one's education.
Intellectual blindness depends not only on one's education and intellectual capacity, but also on the individual's experience(s) and the experience(s) of the collective. And it is as damaging as the loss of one's visual acuity.
The nonacceptance appears rooted in sticking to what's acceptable (conventional treatments).
Appearances can and often are, deceiving. The nonacceptance of the Strasser butchery as regards hoofcare is rooted in doing what is right for the horse and not accepting Junk Science as acceptable and useable.
Those who take an interest, like myself, have done so because conventionality was lacking.
Not quite. Strasser takes from convention and if the trim she displayed at Tufts represents her work, then she is far more conventional than she preaches or teaches.
It's the norm to treat symptoms much of the time....to help horses live WITH their problems vs doing something that would treat the actual cause(s) of their symptoms.
What a major crock of bvovine effluence. Symptoms enable a diagnosis. Diagnosis enables treatment. As a component of treatment, symptoms are both remediated and palliated.
The part about unnecessary pain goes along with hiding it from them. Misery? Is that related to humans and their hang ups with pain or horses? Damage...
Your mantra grows old and hackneyed. You chant the same chant and are refuted and rebuffed at every turn.
how does hiding a horse's issues from it address the damage that will continue when the cause(s) is not being remedied?
Wherever did you acquire the silly notion that the causes are not being identified and a treatment protocol then instituted?
Death? That's a part of life.
Not when it is hastened by some misguided trimming protocol.

And, put another way, what you stated means I think, When you have livestock, you have deadstock.....

Make of that, what you will.
Why do some horses die prematurely?
I lost my Tarot card deck and my crystal ball needs new batteries.
That said, the reasons for that unhappy circumstance are myriad and well documented.

But I forgot until just now, Strasser would blame these untimely events on poor hoof form, non-strasser trimming and anything else under the sun. But wait, Strasser herself warns that her trim can kill. Would this not also be considered a premature death? The mind boggles.
Can it all be blamed on genes?
Nah. And you know that for a fact, right?
Why do race horses break down so often?
Any animal, human or otherwise who engages in high level athletics, is going to be more prone to injury, and often catastrophic injury, than your average human or equine couch potato.
You do like to paint a dark and dismal picture of what barefoot is about.
No ma'am/sir(?). I like to paint an accurate picture of what the Strasser butchery is all about. Many horses enjoy a life of ease and comfort in the barefoot condition. but that has been so since long before Strasser and her nonsense entered the picture. Many horses enjoy a life of ease and comfort because they wear shoes, either full time or part time. and that has been true pre-Strasser and still remains true inspite of Strasser's worst efforts.
Going back to the UK pony case, just what was this animal's life like prior to a barefoot person taking it on?
Don't know. Perhaps you can enlighten me/us? but whatever it was, it damn sure couldn't have been worse than after the Strasser devotee performed her gentle ministrations.
Who decided coffin bones should be maintained with a palmar angle?
Ummm, the horse?
Who decided rotated coffin bones needed the heels to be raised higher? Circumstance and research. And it is imortant to note that elevating heels of foundered horses is not for every horse. Again, there's that pesky "It Depends" rearing its head on the hoofcare continuum.
There is quite a bit of hyperbole about and long before Strasser's name became widely known.
Thats because even those 'old timers' recognized that "It Depends"

Only Strasser makes rigid adherence to her Junk Science mandatory for her followers. Its not only a franchise, but its like a religion with its rigid dogma.
"I am God. Thou shalt have no idols or false gods before me. If I say it, it must be so." etc, etc, etc.

Remember that contract the SHPs sign. No deviation from the Strasser dogma allowed or tolerated.
Thanks to people like Strasser, Redden, Jackson and others who have studied various hooves, coffin bone orientation has gotten more attention than before, particularly when it comes to feral horses living on harsh terrains.
First, Strasser deserves no thanks(JMO). As regards the ferals, so what. Even if its so, and there is no real proof of that(remember, Redden did his studies while the horses were in lateral recumbancy) it has little to do with the modern designer made domestic horses of today.
Beyond what a particular horse would require, consulting with more than one Farrier, Vet or Hoof Trimmer would result in atleast that many ways to go about treating just one horse.
Well, I think you'd find that most uptodate farriers and veterinarians would be in close accord. But then again, you make the case of "It Depends" for me.
Interesting though how even these potentially divergent groups are mostly united in their opinion of the Strasser trim protocol.
It still boils down to what each knows to do.
Actually, it boils down to doing the correct thing(s) for the individual horse. One foot at a time.
I am self-employed and my own boss. I don't have a 100% success rate. So what is your point?
That being the case, perhaps you are more human than the rest of the Strasserites who apparently consider themselves god-like and able to heal the sick and raise the dead(so to speak).

I would argue that those owners have only explored and employed some of the 'other than Strasser' treatments available.

By the way, when one of you Strasser followers gets one of these cases, are you always successful? If no, why not? And do try to avoid the contrivance that "Oh, if I had only been consulted sooner" claptrap. [QUOTE]

[quote]I was a horse owner long before I ever heard about Strasser. I went along with the idea that if you're going to ride horses they have to have shoes.
Times, ideas and realities change. Surely you don't hold me responsible for your then personal lack of information and knowledge?

We boarded our horses at a barn with limited pasture space so turnout was limited. I was always told my horse had good feet. If you'd asked me what that meant back then, I'd say it meant she didn't lose shoes. ;) That they were big enough for her size (14.3) and breed (old-time QH). What does this mean?
Don't know. Why don't you tell me?
I've been around the barn more than once so I didn't just arrive at Strasser as some inexperienced horse person.
Merely owning horses for a length of time is not a qualification for being an experienced horse person.
As far as successes, it would depend on how you define "success".
Darn it all! Now you've gone and done it. You've made me say, once again, "It Depends"
I had the thought to ask after your big blue ox while making rounds today...noting your nom de plume. LOL!
Babe is busy hauling all that misinformation thats been chopped down off to the burn pile. Its a never ending job. I keep chopping, she keeps a haulin'
Mine was earned playing softball (1st base)...tree-like in that I could reach high, stretch out and nab anything close enough.
Whew! Glad you clarified that!. I was beginning to think it was because like an old oak tree, you were quite dense.

[Appassionato]

Speaking honestly and saying what one truly feels can be one in the same but I feel like I'm missing out when it comes to actual threats made to your horse. If you feel truly threatened by something someone writes in cyber space then you should take the apropriate actions against them.



That's your call. Take apropriate actions if you feel threatened.



I've not noticed any cyber screaming (all caps used). It seems only an issue when a certain method is discussed but not screamed. I've missed out on any posts on COTH where screaming threats took place evidently. I feel fortunate.

Tree

I think you've missed my point. I've yet to see where someone has gotten nasty with a "barefooter" over their horse being barefoot, regardless of barefoot method. I HAVE seen some barefooters get nasty to COTHers with shod horses, even to the point of personal attacks, over the shoe itself. Nothing real specific about the shoe, just that there was a shoe on the horse at all. Nor was I talking about all caps being used. I'm talking about someone getting their panties in a wad and attacking posters through their horses. What part of that can't be comprehended?

And thanks for the advice, but no offense, you're not in a position to adivse me on the law and especially threats. I was pointing something out. I wasn't asking for your help.

[poopoo]

Quote:
Mine was earned playing softball (1st base)...tree-like in that I could reach high, stretch out and nab anything close enough.

Whew! Glad you clarified that!. I was beginning to think it was because like an old oak tree, you were quite dense..[/quote]

Bah-ha-ha-ha! Good one! Anytime someone of "science" talks of absolutes, they're wrong, wrong, wrong. That is not "scientific" thinking, that is godlike thinking..... There are exceptions to every rule, right?

[poopoo]

Whew! Glad you clarified that!. I was beginning to think it was because like an old oak tree, you were quite dense.[/QUOTE]

[Tree]

A 30 degree hairline and a ground parallel palmer surface of p3 mandates a 45 degree capsular dorsal wall angle. Demonstrably a bad thing when applied to every horse.

Not all hooves having 30 degree hairlines will have 45 degree angled toes. Fronts could range between 45 to 50 degrees (healthy coffin bones) while hinds can range between 50 to 60 degrees and either will have 30 degree hairlines. It just depends.

Even worse, you are attempting uniformity when uniformity is not correct or proper. And, my input did/does indeed condemn Strasser and her methods.

Oh, I stand corrected. I should have said that your opinion has no affect on Strasser herself or her methods. As far as uniformity, it is based on the equine physiology maintaining healthy bone form and function and where changes have taken place, according to those conditions.

Thats because toe angle directly relates to p3's spatial orientation and HPA alignment. Hairlines vary in accordance with conformation.

The coffin bone relation to the ground surface dictates how the forces are distributed. The HPA alignment can change. Hairlines are more directly affected by coffin bone orientation within the hoof capsule which goes along with hoof form and function.

Wrong answer. Farriers and vets look at hairlines for much more than M/L balance, especially if you are only referring to the hairline's relationship to the horizon.

I have yet to meet some that note more than what I'd stated.

No ma'am/sir? Quite the opposite in fact. Educated horseowners are immune mostly immune to the nonsense spouted by Strasser and have investigated what the normal spatial orientation of p3 should be.

Again, we have the conventionally educated horseowners and those who have that education but also look beyond those practices. It's ma'am, btw. I think our views just reflect our experiences. What's considered to be "normal" is often based on what is found more often or what people are used to finding. This is why healthy hoof examples in many text books are frontally loaded contracted feet. It's the norm. Is it truly normal though? Normal from whose perspective?


ROTFLMAO! I suppose she feels that any foot with a coffin bone that is caudally elevated is one with a remodeled coffin bone then.

She reports them as she finds them. You should speak directly to her vs supposing how she feels.

You should expect to hear that "it depends". And then when pressed, given the answers of what it depends on, and why/

Yes but do the answers make any sense. Again I've found that the causes go unnoticed while the symptoms gain all of the attention. It is a pleasant surprise to find horse care professionals who hit the cause target.

When it comes to horse's hooves, no form of butchery whether performed by a barefoot trimmer or a farrier is acceptable.

I agree.

Its in the actions and reactions of the horse. The horse, and only the horse is the final arbiter.

A horse can't react to things it cannot feel such as hoof pathology and therapeutic shoeing techniques designed to keep the horse servicably sound. As soon as it loses a shoe or they are pulled for resets, they are immediately aware again of their issues. Owners will give more bute (if they are already doing so) just to help the horse be more comfortable to have its shoes done. That's just one example that comes to mind.

Appearances can and often are, deceiving. The nonacceptance of the Strasser butchery as regards hoofcare is rooted in doing what is right for the horse and not accepting Junk Science as acceptable and useable.

Yes, I'm well aware of appearances. The acceptance of Strasser's methods, in my case, is based upon no longer accepting the "norm" for treatments and looking outside the conventional box. This is how I learned founder isn't permanent or necessarily chronic and navicular syndrome and disease are just kissing cousins. Keep a horse imbalanced long enough with heel pain issues (syndrome) and it can lead to the navicular disease. Improper hoof form is the culprit. The ideas of elevating the heels to treat heel pain and navicular just alter blood flow (Pollitt) and reduce blood to the painful regions thereby allowing the horse to appear sound. Yes, appearances can be deceiving.

Not quite. Strasser takes from convention and if the trim she displayed at Tufts represents her work, then she is far more conventional than she preaches or teaches.

A one-shot trim to one hoof isn't much of an example to show her work.

I'm not sure which outfit did this but I rather liked the insert used to show cadavers trimmed by various hoof professionals, including Strasser, as it allowed another comparison opportunity. This had nothing to do with Tufts.

Your mantra grows old and hackneyed. You chant the same chant and are refuted and rebuffed at every turn.

Funny, I was having similar thoughts about your own.

Wherever did you acquire the silly notion that the causes are not being identified and a treatment protocol then instituted?

Oh, quite simply....observation. Then the other experiences happen when I meet an owner for a lameness/hoof consult being told that their previous trimmer or shoer couldn't find anything to explain why their horse was doing this or that. I was waiting at a large animal Vet's office for coggins/health certificates for a horse I was transporting and got to watch as the head Vet examined a horse with a "mystery" hind end lameness. He did all of the flexion tests and didn't touch upon the sheered heel contracted foot belonging to that same leg. Did the sheered heel result from something higher up in the limb or was it the actual root of the limb issues? Leave a hoof issue long enough and it's hard to tell which happened first. No hoof, no horse.

And, put another way, what you stated means I think, When you have livestock, you have deadstock.....

I have 15 head of live equines (ponies and horses). I have several freezers full of cadavers...mostly lower limbs of horses from slaughter houses or carcass removal people oh and one bovine lower leg from a client that slaughtered their steer for meat. I also will harvest limbs and heads from ones we've had to euth through the years. With the exception of one horse, renal failure, all were old (25+).

But I forgot until just now, Strasser would blame these untimely events on poor hoof form, non-strasser trimming and anything else under the sun. But wait, Strasser herself warns that her trim can kill.

If the hooves were morphed in some way, how could they not contribute or be a symptom of how the horse lived? After all, hooves change and adapt accordingly. I wouldn't blame all deaths on poor hoof form. I can't speak for Strasser and I don't believe you can either. Do you know the details behind why Strasser warns that horses can die? I'd be interested in reading what you have to say on the subject and how it compares to what I heard during her Seminars.

Any animal, human or otherwise who engages in high level athletics, is going to be more prone to injury, and often catastrophic injury, than your average human or equine couch potato.

Ah, I've heard this mentioned again more recently thanks to Barbaro's misfortunes. That's a whole nuther discussion...the racing of immature horses. There could well be some hoof issues linked to their injuries as well. Sounds like an excuse to explain the occurance and frequency of injuries and have people accept it as par for the course.

I like to paint an accurate picture of what the Strasser butchery is all about.

Yes, according to Paul Bunyon.

Many horses enjoy a life of ease and comfort in the barefoot condition. but that has been so since long before Strasser entered the picture.

She notes how horses lived and were cared for back in the days of Xenophon and Alexander the Great and when horse shoes entered history and the circumstances that created a need for hoof protection.

Many horses enjoy a life of ease and comfort because they wear shoes, either full time or part time. and that has been true pre-Strasser and still remains true inspite of Strasser's worst efforts.

Yes, horses can't react to what they don't feel happening. For some, comfort simply means keeping their lame horse serviceably sound with shoes or barefoot methods. Strasser may have helped to bring attention once again to lameness and their causes in addition to hoof function that seemed lost to most.

Only Strasser makes rigid adherence to her Junk Science mandatory for her followers. Its not only a franchise, but its like a religion with its rigid dogma.

Well, she is a humanbeing as far as I'm concerned. I don't quite see the rigitity part other than what is best to maintain the overal health of the horse. Certainly there are so many variable within her methods to give those who practice her methods plenty to learn and apply. To each their own forms of dogma!

Remember that contract the SHPs sign. No deviation from the Strasser (perameters) allowed or tolerated.

When it's her name on the line, I should think she has the right to say how it will be used....Strasser Hoofcare Professional (SHP). No one is forced to sign if they don't agree and certainly, if any student finds a need to enrole, they do. As far as it being a franchise, I'm not seeing enough evidence of it yet. How long did it take McD's to spread world wide?

As regards the ferals, so what. Even if its so, and there is no real proof of that(remember, Redden did his studies while the horses were in lateral recumbancy) it has little to do with the modern designer made domestic horses of today.

How would unweighted ground parallel coffin bone orientation change to that of having a palmar angle, when weighted? The boney structures of feral horses aren't different from healthy domestic horses any more than the unhealthy feral horses are all that different from unhealthy domestic horses. Lifestyle certainly has an affect on how well horses develope.

Well, I think you'd find that most uptodate farriers and veterinarians would be in close accord. But then again, you make the case of "It Depends" for me.

There never was any doubt that it depends. That's always the case.

Interesting though how even these potentially divergent groups are mostly united in their opinion of the Strasser trim protocol.

And it's interesting to note how much the more widely accepted barefooting methods come closer to resembling Farrier methods of trimming and balancing feet. So I can see why how it would work out this way. Those who are reluctant to change would naturally gravitate to methods which don't deviate as much from what they're used to while the more adventuresome would not let this limit them.

That being the case, perhaps you are more human than the rest of the Strasserites who apparently consider themselves god-like and able to heal the sick and raise the dead(so to speak).

I don't personally care to be around people who think of themselves in that way. This is not limited to hoof care professionals either.

Times, ideas and realities change. Surely you don't hold me responsible for your then personal lack of information and knowledge?

LOL, no, of course not. The only "Paul Bunyon" I knew of in the past was a character found in the storybook.

Merely owning horses for a length of time is not a qualification for being an experienced horse person.

No, of course not. However, there is a cummalative affect of being someone with a strong interest in learning about them. My knowlege base is quite diversified with the experiences I've had through the years.

Whew! Glad you clarified that!. I was beginning to think it was because like an old oak tree, you were quite dense.

Nice to see you have a sense of humor. How refreshing. Oak is a good wood but of course, it depends on circumstances. Oaks are strong, burn slowly and make lovely flooring. I've never specified what sort of Tree I was though. I'm just "Tree".

[Tree]

I think you've missed my point. I've yet to see where someone has gotten nasty with a "barefooter" over their horse being barefoot, regardless of barefoot method. I HAVE seen some barefooters get nasty to COTHers with shod horses, even to the point of personal attacks, over the shoe itself. Nothing real specific about the shoe, just that there was a shoe on the horse at all. Nor was I talking about all caps being used. I'm talking about someone getting their panties in a wad and attacking posters through their horses. What part of that can't be comprehended?

The point is well taken but more important to you than it is to me.

It's more likely, in my position, to find people becoming more nasty about the methods I use vs whether or not my horses are barefoot. It's more likely that my clients could run into "attacks" from their own Vet, Trainer or Friends for sticking to barefoot methods and particularly Strasser's. On the forums, it's more likely I'll be "attacked" for seemingly not to understand what someone else is saying. ;) I wish I had a dime for all the times I've seen instances of people getting their "panties in a wad" over something said on a forum or list. So you felt attacked through your horse. Ok. I still don't have an example of what qualifies as such so please, if you see an example, IM me and let me know so I can understand what you're talking about.


And thanks for the advice, but no offense, you're not in a position to adivse me on the law and especially threats. I was pointing something out. I wasn't asking for your help.

You just kept repeating it so I was acknowleging it. None taken.

Tree

[Kaydence]

Not all hooves having 30 degree hairlines will have 45 degree angled toes. Fronts could range between 45 to 50 degrees (healthy coffin bones) while hinds can range between 50 to 60 degrees and either will have 30 degree hairlines. It just depends. .

It just depends? Where have I heard that before? I can't even finish reading the rest of the post till I stop laughing.

[Tree]

According to Paul,

You should expect to hear that "it depends". And then when pressed, given the answers of what it depends on, and why/


:D I agree whole heartedly with this. :D

Tree

[Appassionato]

The point is well taken but more important to you than it is to me.

It's more likely, in my position, to find people becoming more nasty about the methods I use vs whether or not my horses are barefoot. It's more likely that my clients could run into "attacks" from their own Vet, Trainer or Friends for sticking to barefoot methods and particularly Strasser's. On the forums, it's more likely I'll be "attacked" for seemingly not to understand what someone else is saying. ;) I wish I had a dime for all the times I've seen instances of people getting their "panties in a wad" over something said on a forum or list. So you felt attacked through your horse. Ok. I still don't have an example of what qualifies as such so please, if you see an example, IM me and let me know so I can understand what you're talking about.


And we're back at square one. And exactly my point to start with. Why was it made so painful to get here?

I didn't feel attacked, I WAS attacked. the person had nothing left to offer in a debate, so they went through my horse. And why would I repost them? 1) If I did and it was a "friend" of yours (it is), why would I subject myself to hashing it out again but with a new member or the both of you? You're going to defend the person regardless because of situational priorities. 2) After providing the information, then what? Are you going to slap them? What would be the point?



You just kept repeating it so I was acknowleging it. None taken.

No it wasn't, it was advice. Read your own post.

[PaulBunyon]

Not all hooves having 30 degree hairlines will have 45 degree angled toes.
If they have a ground parallel coffin bone and no separation of the white line at the toe they damn sure will. Perhaps you should revisit triginometric functions?
Fronts could range between 45 to 50 degrees (healthy coffin bones) while hinds can range between 50 to 60 degrees and either will have 30 degree hairlines.
Only if the coffin bone is caudally eleveated. Further, research has shown that in the modern light horse, the mean angle of the dorsal wall is 53 degrees. And befoe you ask, no, I don't have the cites infront of me but if I were so inclined, I could find them for you.
It just depends.
For a Strasserite, that is the demonstrably incorrect answer. Straser's protocol demands a 30 degree hairline, ground parallel coffin bone, as necessary, artificially induced concaving of the sole to create hoof mechanism, ad naseum. There is no room for deviation from that except that by allowing for a range of coffin bone spatial orientation degrees, above a zero palmer angle, Strasser herself does not follow her own dictates.

But as I stated and you so correctly reiterated, "It Depends". I thnk that perhaps you are not as true a Strasser adherant as you loudly proclaim.
Which fact pleases not only me, but the horses under your care, to no end.
Oh, I stand corrected. I should have said that your opinion has no affect on Strasser herself or her methods
Perhaps not. But every single person who reads my position and then takes pause for thought and/or decides not to inflict that madness on their horse(s), is one person and one or more horses that is saved from the dark side.
As far as uniformity, it is based on the equine physiology maintaining healthy bone form and function and where changes have taken place, according to those conditions.
What a load of crap. Nothing new or different here. Nothing special either.
Every other brand/flavor of either farriery or BUAism is working towards those same goals. We just try not to maim or kill the horse along the way. Nor do we make the statement that our trim(s) could kill the horse. Only one person I know of makes that claim. Care to tell us who that is?
The coffin bone relation to the ground surface dictates how the forces are distributed.
Way too much of an oversimplification. You/Strasser fail to account for the role of fluids, soft tissues, hard tissues, joint spaces the outer wall, and the myriad of structures above the level of the coronary band. But your oversimplification does show one thing. The further evidence of the Junk Science upon which Strasser is building her house of cards.
The HPA alignment can change. Hairlines are more directly affected by coffin bone orientation within the hoof capsule which goes along with hoof form and function.
Dear lady, HPA is directly affected by coffin bone orientation. How are hairlines more directly affected. And all these things and many more are involved with hoof form and function. Somehow, it seems that part of your knowledge base is in need of repair and upgrading.
[quote]I have yet to meet some that note more than what I'd stated.
just my opinion, but you really do need to get out more.
It's ma'am, btw.
So noted.
I think our views just reflect our experiences.
Perhaps yours, but mine reflect education, intellect, exoperience, common sense, good sense and horse sense.
What's considered to be "normal" is often based on what is found more often or what people are used to finding.
Perhaps that is just your experience?
This is why healthy hoof examples in many text books are frontally loaded contracted feet. It's the norm. Is it truly normal though? Normal from whose perspective?
As you learned in an earlier lesson, those books are dated and outdated. Those who continue to reference them alone are on a fool's errand.
Forrest Gump might opine that "normal is as normal does"
She reports them as she finds them.
From where I stand/sit, she reports them as best suits her contentions.
I've found that the causes go unnoticed while the symptoms gain all of the attention.
BULL! No self-respecting vet ignores trying to correctly diagnose causes. As for hoofcare professionals, and here we're talking about farriers because barefoot only trimmers are unable to provide the full range of hoofcare required in any given circumstance so while they may be trimming feet, they are not true hoofcare professionals, know better than to diagnose. That is the sole province of the veterinarian. If you, as a BUA trimmer are offering advise, opinion or diagnostics as to causes of hoof pathologies, then unless you are concurrently a licensed equine veterinarian, you are way outside the boundaries and are practicing veterinary medicine without a license. Only fools venture into the realm of the veterinarian if they themselves are not veterinarians.
It is a pleasant surprise to find horse care professionals who hit the cause target.
When the cause has been correctly identified, farriers( the only true hoof care professionals) then and often in concert with the veterinarian, develop and implement a trimming or trimming and shoeing protocol to address both the cause and the symptoms.
A horse can't react to things it cannot feel such as hoof pathology and therapeutic shoeing techniques designed to keep the horse servicably sound.
Therapeutic trimming and shoeing is designed to address the cause and the symptoms. I do admit that it is also designed for pain palliation, which most consider a good thing.
And Dear Lady, all farrier instituted trimming and shoeing is designed to keep the horse sound. What? you think that its designed to make sound horses unsound and keep unsound horses unsound? ROTFLMAO!
As soon as it loses a shoe or they are pulled for resets, they are immediately aware again of their issues.
Some are, some are not. Regardless, that is because the orthotic is doing its job, to wit: addressing both the cause(s) and the symptom(s). Take away that orthotic and you remove the remediation. When you severly sprain your ankle and the doctor applies an ankle brace and within a short time you are both able to walk and remain pain free, and then you remove said brace and the pain comes flooding back and you are limping yet again, would you say that that happens because the brace is masking the cause and symptoms ? Or would you opine that perhaps the cause was still being remediated and the brace was infact aiding in both the cause remediation and the pain palliation and the soundness exhibited?

If you have carpal tunnel syndrome , diagnosed by the doctor, and the doctor prescribes a specific orthotic to address the cause and the symptoms, and the orthotic, while inplace, does just that, are you contending that the orthotic is merely a masking device? If when you remove the orthotic, the symptoms return, leading the doctor to conculde that the cause(s) have not been fully remediated, would you again argue that the orthotic removal was the reason the symptoms returned? If on the other hand, at some time in the future you removed the orthotic and there were no symptoms of CTD, would you then conclude that the orthotic had indeed done its job and correctly addressed the cause(s) and in so doing, ended the symptoms?
Owners will give more bute (if they are already doing so) just to help the horse be more comfortable to have its shoes done. That's just one example that comes to mind.
So? There are many avenues used to deal with the issues. When you have your teeth drilled for cavity removal, do you get novacaine? When you have surgery, do they use pain killers/numbing agents? When you get headaches, do you take anything for them? If you have severe arthritis somewhere in your body, what do you do for pain remediation and to address the causes of the arthritis? Have you ever used a cane, crutches, a walker or a wheelchair or suggested that someone you know should do so? Do you wear eyeglasses or contact lenses? A hearing aid? Have you ever, in any way, shape or form, altered your physical environment to accomodate any fraility, injury or degradement of your mind or body?
This is how I learned founder isn't permanent or necessarily chronic
Truely! Have the horses been informed of this yet? My own POV is that founder can be managed and kept in recession most of the time.
and navicular syndrome and disease are just kissing cousins.
First of all," Navicular Syndrome" is a broad term for a whole host of hoof issues including but not limited to, sprains of the impar ligament, inflammation of the soft tissues of the caudal region of the hoof, inflammation of the navicular bursa, undiagnosed corns and other bruised. Which is why so many people farriers or otherwise are able to claim success when treating Navicular Syndrome. I have yet to see any proof that a Strasserite has actually 'cured' a veterinarian diagnosed incident of true Navicular Disease which actually involves both soft tissue and bone insult.

And, IIRC, there is a farrier down in Texas who has made a standing offer and open challenge to any of the BUA to show that their method is more effective than a farrier's in remediating the causes and symptoms of Navicular Disease. To date, none of the brave souls and loud proclaimers of the BUA have taken him up on that matter. Perhaps you would like to be the first? Or perhaps you could induce Strasser or one of her SHP's to take up the challange?
Keep a horse imbalanced long enough with heel pain issues (syndrome) and it can lead to the navicular disease.
You just now figuring it out? Perhaps you should demand a refund from the Strasser camp for witholding this information for so long. Or perhaps, had you consulted with a hoofcare professional(aka: a farrier) and/or a well trained equine veterinarian, or both, you would have learned this lesson sooner and at a far lesser financial expense.
Improper hoof form is the culprit.
Not all by itself it isn't. And if you believe that, then you haven't done your homework. What caused the incorrect hoof form? And don't lay it at the doorstep of shoes or shoes alone. Nope, you've been hoodwinked and mind screwed.
The ideas of elevating the heels to treat heel pain and navicular just alter blood flow (Pollitt) and reduce blood to the painful regions thereby allowing the horse to appear sound.
Like your mentor, Strasser, you have cherry picked from Pollitt's work and have twisted and skewed the results to fit your demonstrably incorrect paradigm.
A one-shot trim to one hoof isn't much of an example to show her work.
So you concur! Her work is much different that that which she presented. Hmmmmm.
I'm not sure which outfit did this but I rather liked the insert used to show cadavers trimmed by various hoof professionals, including Strasser, as it allowed another comparison opportunity.
That would be the American Farriers Journal. If you want, I will try to find the year and issue number for you.
Then the other experiences happen when I meet an owner for a lameness/hoof consult being told that their previous trimmer or shoer couldn't find anything to explain why their horse was doing this or that.
Perhaps because said individual was not a trained diagnostician? And why should they be? Had that individual provided a diagnosis they would have committed a felony.
I was waiting at a large animal Vet's office for coggins/health certificates for a horse I was transporting and got to watch as the head Vet examined a horse with a "mystery" hind end lameness. He did all of the flexion tests and didn't touch upon the sheered heel contracted foot belonging to that same leg.[
Regardless of profession, some folks are educated beyond their level of intelligence. Or, perhaps said individual just wasn't educated or experienced enough and either didn't realize that or could not admit, even to himself, that possibility?
Once again proving the adage "Not all(fill in the blank) are created equal".
Did the sheered heel result from something higher up in the limb or was it the actual root of the limb issues?
That is a rhetorical question, right?
Leave a hoof issue long enough and it's hard to tell which happened first. No hoof, no horse.
Doesn't really matter so long as the problems are identified and correctly addressed. And, on that last point we do agree.:)
I have 15 head of live equines (ponies and horses). I have several freezers full of cadavers...mostly lower limbs of horses from slaughter houses or carcass removal people oh and one bovine lower leg from a client that slaughtered their steer for meat. I also will harvest limbs and heads from ones we've had to euth through the years. With the exception of one horse, renal failure, all were old (25+).
So? Proves nothing and adds nothing to the conversation.
If the hooves were morphed in some way, how could they not contribute or be a symptom of how the horse lived? After all, hooves change and adapt accordingly.
So?
I wouldn't blame all deaths on poor hoof form.
Were I religiously inclined, I would say, "Thank God for that!"
I can't speak for Strasser and I don't believe you can either.
Rather I speak to what she has written and what has been written about what she says.
Do you know the details behind why Strasser warns that horses can die? I'd be interested in reading what you have to say on the subject and how it compares to what I heard during her Seminars.
Chapter and verse? NO. But the song as I recall it goes something like this:
Applying the Strasser trim to a horse with a weakened metabolism and what she considers poor hoof form can cause changes in the circulatory system, and induce the rapid clensing of poisons(of whatever sort) from the body through the liver and kidneys and in so doing, stress those organs so much that they shut down and the horse dies. EEE AI EEE AI O.........
Strasser may have helped to bring attention once again to lameness and their causes in addition to hoof function that seemed lost to most.
Strasser is a two bit piano player playing an very out of tune piano on the stage at Lincoln Center. And she doesn't sing very well either.
Well, she is a humanbeing as far as I'm concerned.
For the purposes of this discussion, that counts for what?
I don't quite see the rigitity part other than what is best to maintain the overal health of the horse.
Unfotunately, she is ill qualified to pontificate on that subject.
Certainly there are so many variable within her methods to give those who practice her methods plenty to learn and apply.
If by now, you have not grasped the rigidity of her religious-like franchise, then you probably never will. And thats a pity.
When it's her name on the line, I should think she has the right to say how it will be used....Strasser Hoofcare Professional (SHP).
Rigidium ad examplem.
As far as it being a franchise, I'm not seeing enough evidence of it yet. How long did it take McD's to spread world wide?
Look in your phone book uder Optomitrist or Opthamologist. Pick out one and make an appointment to have your eyes checked.
World wide ? Not too very many years.
How would unweighted ground parallel coffin bone orientation change to that of having a palmar angle, when weighted?
You are aware of the purpose of, in this instance, the Distal interphalangeal joint, the Deep flexor tendon, the Main extensor tendon, the digital cushion, etc? And what precisely is an unweighted ground parallel p3 orientation and when and why does it occur? You also have a working knowledge of the stages of stride and the mechanics involved, don't you?
The boney structures of feral horses aren't different from healthy domestic horses any more than the unhealthy feral horses are all that different from unhealthy domestic horses. Lifestyle certainly has an affect on how well horses develope.
Ah! But you left out the role of genetics, environment, nutrition,disease, injury and job description. Or are you simply not aware of these factors
There never was any doubt that it depends. That's always the case
Not for a true adherant to the Strasser method..
And it's interesting to note how much the more widely accepted barefooting methods come closer to resembling Farrier methods of trimming and balancing feet.
:D Perhaps that's because all this time, farriery has gotten it right. And probably because all these Guru's come from a farrier background and all those things they were taught and learned formed the foundation for the houses they built and the turf they zealously defend.

Strasser on the other hand is a non-practicing veterinarian. Do you know if her veterinary major area of study was Equine? And since we know how notoriously little about the hoof is taught to veterinary students, well, you draw your own conclusions.
So I can see why how it would work out this way. Those who are reluctant to change would naturally gravitate to methods which don't deviate as much from what they're used to while the more adventuresome would not let this limit them.
If you think that the likes of Redden, Ovnicek, Bowker, Chapman,Duckett, Russell, O'Grady, Pollitt, DeNoix, Bennett etal. have not been adventurous and gone where others have not tread, then you really do need to get out more and expand your horizions.

[PaulBunyon]

Not all hooves having 30 degree hairlines will have 45 degree angled toes.
If they have a ground parallel coffin bone and no seperation of the white line at the toe they damn sure will. Perhaps you should revisit triginometric functions?
Fronts could range between 45 to 50 degrees (healthy coffin bones) while hinds can range between 50 to 60 degrees and either will have 30 degree hairlines.
Only if the coffin bone is caudally eleveated. Further, research has shown that in the modern light horse, the mean angle of the dorsal wall is 53 degrees. And befoe you ask, no, I don't have the cites infront of me but if I were so inclined, I could find them for you.
It just depends.
For a Strasserite, that is the demonstrably incorrect answer. Strasser's protocol demands a 30 degree hairline, ground parallel coffin bone, as necessary, artificially induced concaving of the sole to create hoof mechanism, ad naseum. There is no room for deviation from that except that by allowing for a range of coffin bone spatial orientation degrees, above a zero palmer angle, Strasser herself does not follow her own dictates.

But as I stated and you so correctly reiterated, "It Depends". I thnk that perhaps you are not as true a Strasser adherant as you loudly proclaim.
Which fact pleases not only me to no end,, but alsothe horses under your care.
Oh, I stand corrected. I should have said that your opinion has no affect on Strasser herself or her methods
Perhaps not. But every single person who reads my position and then takes pause for thought and/or decides not to inflict that madness on their horse(s), is one person and one or more horses that is saved from the dark side.
As far as uniformity, it is based on the equine physiology maintaining healthy bone form and function and where changes have taken place, according to those conditions.
What a load of crap. Nothing new or different here. Nothing special either.
Every other brand/flavor of either farriery or BUAism is working towards those same goals. We just try not to maim or kill the horse along the way. Nor do we make the statement that our trim(s) could kill the horse. Only one person I know of makes that claim. Care to tell us who that is?
The coffin bone relation to the ground surface dictates how the forces are distributed.
Way too much of an oversimplification. You/Strasser fail to account for the role of fluids, soft tissues, hard tissues, joint spaces the outer wall, and the myriad of structures above the level of the coronary band. But your oversimplification does show one thing. The further evidence of the Junk Science upon which Strasser is building her house of cards.
The HPA alignment can change. Hairlines are more directly affected by coffin bone orientation within the hoof capsule which goes along with hoof form and function.
Dear lady, HPA is directly affected by coffin bone orientation. How are hairlines more directly affected. And all these things and many more are involved with hoof form and function. Somehow, it seems that part of your knowledge base is in need of repair and upgrading.
I have yet to meet some that note more than what I'd stated.
just my opinion, but you really do need to get out more.
It's ma'am, btw.
So noted.
I think our views just reflect our experiences.
Perhaps yours, but mine reflect education, intellect, experience, common sense, good sense and horse sense.
What's considered to be "normal" is often based on what is found more often or what people are used to finding.
Perhaps that is just your experience?
This is why healthy hoof examples in many text books are frontally loaded contracted feet. It's the norm. Is it truly normal though? Normal from whose perspective?
As you learned in an earlier lesson, those books are dated and outdated. Those who continue to reference them alone are on a fool's errand.
Forrest Gump might opine that "normal is as normal does"
She reports them as she finds them.
From where I stand/sit, she reports them as best suits her contentions.
I've found that the causes go unnoticed while the symptoms gain all of the attention.
BULL! No self-respecting vet ignores trying to correctly diagnose causes. As for hoofcare professionals, and here we're talking about farriers because barefoot only trimmers are unable to provide the full range of hoofcare required in any given circumstance so while they may be trimming feet, they are not true hoofcare professionals, know better than to diagnose. That is the sole province of the veterinarian. If you, as a BUA trimmer are offering advise, or diagnosis as to causes of hoof pathologies, then unless you are concurrently a licensed equine veterinarian, you are way outside the boundaries and are practicing veterinary medicine without a license. Only fools venture into the realm of the veterinarian if they themselves are not veterinarians.
It is a pleasant surprise to find horse care professionals who hit the cause target.
When the cause has been correctly identified, farriers( the only true hoof care professionals) then and often in concert with the veterinarian, develop and implement a trimming or trimming and shoeing protocol to address both the cause and the symptoms.
A horse can't react to things it cannot feel such as hoof pathology and therapeutic shoeing techniques designed to keep the horse servicably sound.
Therapeutic trimming and shoeing is designed to address the cause and the symptoms. I do admit that it is also designed for pain palliation, which most consider a good thing.
And Dear Lady, all farrier instituted trimming and shoeing is designed to keep the horse sound. What? you think that its designed to make sound horses unsound and keep unsound horses unsound? ROTFLMAO!
As soon as it loses a shoe or they are pulled for resets, they are immediately aware again of their issues.
Some are, some are not. Regardless, that is because the orthotic is doing its job, to wit: addressing both the cause(s) and the symptom(s). Take away that orthotic and you remove the remediation. When you severly sprain your ankle and the doctor applies an ankle brace and within a short time you are both able to walk and remain pain free, and then you remove said brace and the pain comes flooding back and you are limping yet again, would you say that that happens because the brace is masking the cause and symptoms ? Or would you opine that perhaps the cause was still being remediated and the brace was infact aiding in both the cause remediation and the pain palliation and the soundness exhibited?

If you have carpal tunnel syndrome , diagnosed by the doctor, and the doctor prescribes a specific orthotic to address the cause and the symptoms, and the orthotic, while inplace, does just that, are you contending that the orthotic is merely a masking device? If when you remove the orthotic, the symptoms return, leading the doctor to conculde that the cause(s) have not been fully remediated, would you again argue that the orthotic removal was the reason the symptoms returned? If on the other hand, at some time in the future you removed the orthotic and there were no symptoms of CTS, would you then conclude that the orthotic had indeed done its job and correctly addressed the cause(s) and in so doing, ended the symptoms?
Owners will give more bute (if they are already doing so) just to help the horse be more comfortable to have its shoes done. That's just one example that comes to mind.
So? There are many avenues used to deal with the issues. When you have your teeth drilled for cavity removal, do you get novacaine? When you have surgery, do they use pain killers/numbing agents? When you get headaches, do you take anything for them? If you have severe arthritis somewhere in your body, what do you do for pain remediation and to address the causes of the arthritis? Have you ever used a cane, crutches, a walker or a wheelchair or suggested that someone you know should do so? Do you wear eyeglasses or contact lenses? A hearing aid? Have you ever, in any way, shape or form, altered your physical environment to accomodate any fraility, injury or degradement of your mind or body?
This is how I learned founder isn't permanent or necessarily chronic
Truely! Have the horses been informed of this yet? My own POV is that founder can be managed and kept in recession most of the time.
and navicular syndrome and disease are just kissing cousins.
First of all," Navicular Syndrome" is a broad term for a whole host of hoof issues including but not limited to, sprains of the impar ligament, inflammation of the soft tissues of the caudal region of the hoof, inflammation of the navicular bursa, undiagnosed corns and other bruised. Which is why so many people farriers or otherwise are able to claim success when treating Navicular Syndrome. I have yet to see any proof that a Strasserite has actually 'cured' a veterinarian diagnosed incident of true Navicular Disease which actually involves both soft tissue and bone insult.

And, IIRC, there is a farrier down in Texas who has make a standing offer and open challenge to any of the BUA to show that their method is more effective than a farrier's in remediating the causes and symptoms of Navicular Disease. To date, none of the brave souls and loud proclaimers of the BUA have taken him up on that matter. Perhaps you would like to be the first? Or perhaps you could entice Strasser or one of her SHP's to take up the challange?
Keep a horse imbalanced long enough with heel pain issues (syndrome) and it can lead to the navicular disease.
You just now figuring it out? Perhaps you should demand a refund from the Strasser camp for witholding this information for so long. Or perhaps, had you consulted with a hoofcare professional(aka: a farrier) and/or a well trained equine veterinarian, or both, you would have learned this lesson sooner and at a far lesser financial expense.
Improper hoof form is the culprit.
Not all by itsself it isn't. And if you believe that, then you haven't done your homework. What caused the incorrect hoof form? And don't lay it at the door of shoes or shoes alone. Nope, you've been hoodwinked and mind screwed.
The ideas of elevating the heels to treat heel pain and navicular just alter blood flow (Pollitt) and reduce blood to the painful regions thereby allowing the horse to appear sound.
Like your mentor, Strasser, you have cherry picked from Pollitt's work and have twisted and skewed the results to fit your demonstrably incorrect paradigm.
A one-shot trim to one hoof isn't much of an example to show her work.
So you concur! Her work and that which she preaches and demands is much different that that which she presented. Hmmmmm.
I'm not sure which outfit did this but I rather liked the insert used to show cadavers trimmed by various hoof professionals, including Strasser, as it allowed another comparison opportunity.
That would be the American Farriers Journal. If you want, I will try to find the year and issue number for you.
Then the other experiences happen when I meet an owner for a lameness/hoof consult being told that their previous trimmer or shoer couldn't find anything to explain why their horse was doing this or that.
Perhaps because said individual was not a trained diagnostician? And why should they be? Had that individual provided a diagnosis they would have committed a felony.
I was waiting at a large animal Vet's office for coggins/health certificates for a horse I was transporting and got to watch as the head Vet examined a horse with a "mystery" hind end lameness. He did all of the flexion tests and didn't touch upon the sheered heel contracted foot belonging to that same leg.[
Regardless of profession, some folks are educated beyond their level of intelligence. Or, perhaps said individual just wasn't educated or experienced enough and either didn't realize that or could not admit, even to himself, that possibility?
Once again proving the adage "Not all(fill in the blank) are created equal".
Did the sheered heel result from something higher up in the limb or was it the actual root of the limb issues?
That is a rhetorical question, right?
Leave a hoof issue long enough and it's hard to tell which happened first. No hoof, no horse.
Doesn't really matter so long as the problems are identified and correctly addressed. And, on that last point we do agree.:)
I have 15 head of live equines (ponies and horses). I have several freezers full of cadavers...mostly lower limbs of horses from slaughter houses or carcass removal people oh and one bovine lower leg from a client that slaughtered their steer for meat. I also will harvest limbs and heads from ones we've had to euth through the years. With the exception of one horse, renal failure, all were old (25+).
So? Proves nothing and adds nothing to the conversation.
If the hooves were morphed in some way, how could they not contribute or be a symptom of how the horse lived? After all, hooves change and adapt accordingly.
So?
I wouldn't blame all deaths on poor hoof form.
Were I religiously inclined, I would say, "Thank God for that!"
I can't speak for Strasser and I don't believe you can either.
Rather I speak to what she has written and what has been written about what she says.
Do you know the details behind why Strasser warns that horses can die? I'd be interested in reading what you have to say on the subject and how it compares to what I heard during her Seminars.
Chapter and verse? NO. But the song as I recall it goes something like this:
Applying the Strasser trim to a horse with a weakened metabolism and what she considers poor hoof form can cause changes in the circulatory system, and induce the rapid clensing of poisons(of whatever sort) from the body through the liver and kidneys and in so doing, stress those organs so much that they shut down and the horse dies. EEE AI EEE AI O.........
Strasser may have helped to bring attention once again to lameness and their causes in addition to hoof function that seemed lost to most.
Strasser is a two bit piano player playing an very out of tune piano. And she doesn't sing very well either.
Well, she is a humanbeing as far as I'm concerned.
For the purposes of this discussion, that counts for what?
I don't quite see the rigitity part other than what is best to maintain the overal health of the horse.
Unfotunately, she is ill qualified to pontificate on that subject.
Certainly there are so many variable within her methods to give those who practice her methods plenty to learn and apply.
If by now, you have not grasped the rigidity of her religious-like franchise, then you probably never will. And that's a pity.
When it's her name on the line, I should think she has the right to say how it will be used....Strasser Hoofcare Professional (SHP).
Rigidium ad examplem.
As far as it being a franchise, I'm not seeing enough evidence of it yet. How long did it take McD's to spread world wide?
Look in your phone book uder Optomitrist or Opthamologist. Pick out one and make an appointment to have your eyes checked.
World wide ? Not too very many years.
How would unweighted ground parallel coffin bone orientation change to that of having a palmar angle, when weighted?
You are aware of the purpose of, in this instance, the Distal interphalangeal joint, the Deep flexor tendon, the Main extensor tendon, the digital cushion, etc? And what precisely is an unweighted ground parallel p3 orientation and when and why does it occur? You also have a working knowledge of the stages of stride and the mechanics involved, don't you?
The boney structures of feral horses aren't different from healthy domestic horses any more than the unhealthy feral horses are all that different from unhealthy domestic horses. Lifestyle certainly has an affect on how well horses develope.
Ah! But you left out the role of genetics, environment, nutrition,disease, injury and job description. Or are you simply not aware of these factors
There never was any doubt that it depends. That's always the case
Not for a true adherant to the Strasser method..
And it's interesting to note how much the more widely accepted barefooting methods come closer to resembling Farrier methods of trimming and balancing feet.
:D Perhaps that's because all this time, farriery has gotten it right. And probably because all these Guru's come from a farrier background and all those things they were taught and learned formed the foundation for the houses they built and the turf they zealously defend.

Strasser on the other hand is a non-practicing veterinarian. Do you know if her veterinary major area of study was even Equine? And since we know how notoriously little about the hoof is taught to veterinary students, well, you draw your own conclusions.
So I can see why how it would work out this way. Those who are reluctant to change would naturally gravitate to methods which don't deviate as much from what they're used to while the more adventuresome would not let this limit them.
If you think that the likes of Redden, Ovnicek, Bowker, Chapman,Duckett, Russell, O'Grady, Pollitt, DeNoix, Bennett etal. have not been adventurous and gone where others have not tread, then you really do need to get out more and expand your horizions.

[hundredacres]

One could say the same thing about farriers ;)

Thats the truth. Bad farriers, badtrimmers, bad Strasser devotees...they all suck cause they're BAD!

You could have inserted any method into "Strasser" in this story...it wouldn't have mattered. Some people just don't know when to acknowledge that it's too hard on the animal to try and save it.

[Tree]

I still wish more detailed info had been provided in the OP about the UK pony's case. I doubt it was in stellar condition when Mrs. K took it on. However, the League tried to help it even after they seized it from Mrs. K so it makes me wonder just how bad off it was by then if THEY felt it worth trying their ideas for several months. However, the League wasn't tried in court for causing prolonged suffering of the pony but Mrs. K was charged with NOT euthing it when she had it.

I can't believe that a double standard doesn't exist when it comes to who does what and just how far some are allowed to go while others are not. Barbaro comes to mind now. Just how much is he going to have to endure before someone calls it quits? Will his caretakers and owners be prosecuted for making him suffer? I seriously doubt it since everything being done is being made public and deemed acceptable. The 'TEAM' involved in his case will probably be seen as heros. Oh that double standard at play again.

Tree

[Tree]

the person had nothing left to offer in a debate, so they went through my horse.

Oh. This happens to me too only it's not my horse who gets attacked, it's usually me. I do like debates and it's too bad when they turn into attacks.

And why would I repost them?

I didn't ask that you do. I said point out where I could find them and added that if you didn't want to, it was no problem.

1) If I did and it was a "friend" of yours (it is), why would I subject myself to hashing it out again but with a new member or the both of you?

I have a "friend" in here? I don't think so. You may be confusing friendship with someone else who happens to adhere to similar protocols of horse keeping. That would be my best guess. I also suspect that this "friend" and I would be out numbered.

You're going to defend the person regardless because of situational priorities. 2) After providing the information, then what? Are you going to slap them? What would be the point?

Nonsense! I don't know who I'd be defending although I could guess AND, I dislike seeing ppl on boards ganging up on others so why would I do so? That is usually the form "defending" someone takes....others jumping on someone or poking fun at them. This thread already has some examples of this childishness. I see no value in it.

As far as #2 goes, I felt I'd missed the "attack" or if I didn't, I certainly didn't read into it what you did. As far as doing anything to "them", as you asked, what would be the point? I'm not responsible for what others do. Why should that change?

No it wasn't, it was advice. Read your own post.

It was not intended.

Tree

[Tree]

I read on the news today that Richardson said if the laminitis shows up in another foot, they won't continue to try saving him. I have some strong mixed feelings on the Barbaro situation but I better not say them over the public airwaves.


I understand about keeping your feelings to yourself. Ditto for me.

You could probably be tried in a Military Tribunal for hate crimes if you mention Bobby should have been put down. :o

Oh yeah....if he'd been "my" horse......etc., etc. It still wouldn't change anything as far his life events.

Tree

[Tree]

I have been quite disturbed to read on that horseshoes site how many farriers absolutely blatantly despise barefooters. They have all sorts of nasty (and I mean NASTY) comments and names reserved for barefooters. On one thread I read something about homeschooled ignorant fools, etc. They say the people who are too stupid to learn to shoe turn to "barefooting". Too poor to go to college? Just be a barefooter. Some of them have absolutely NO respect for people who are interested in natural trimming.

Yes, you're quite right. I found much the same although there were some who were quite courteous and respectful. The baseless assumptions are endless. They're no less nasty to other farrier groups or individuals. Why is it so important to dump on people who don't think the same way?

But just remember that just because I have no interest in learning to shape metal and nail it on my horses foot, doesn't mean I can't do a damned good trim! It seems that farriers get offended that barefooters come in and do a trim on a horse, don't do any iron shaping, and leave with a check as big as the farrier. I've read several quotes on horseshoes in regard to the money issue. They get pissed that barefooters rake in all the dough and never have to shape a shoe to get it.

Ditto and I guess the animosity (sp?), comes from either having their ego dinted at being dropped for a trimmer or just their personal opinions of trimmers. However, unless some Farriers are still charging under $30 for a trim and don't add a mileage fee too, I don't earn as much as what most around here get for 2 shoes much less 4! Since I'm not Certified I don't command the big bucks. However, this doesn't reflect on my ability to trim either. Farriers shouldn't take issue with losing clients to trimmers only because it's the OWNERS how decide what is done to their horses!!!!

Hoenstly, I think it all depends on the class level of the farrier.

I agree.

But then you have other guys who get offended and pissed and turn to attacks and anger. It's so unfortunate and it makes me feel sorry for those angry people.

Most of the attacks I've encountered appear in forums vs face to face. I will sometimes cross paths with Farriers and some obviously know who I am and their expressions clearly show how they feel. Word gets around in the horsey circles. ;) However, I appreciate the Farriers and Trimmers who don't allow our differences to put a damper on chance meetings and indulging in some conversation. I think they are the type who are secure in what they do and aren't threatened by those who do things differently. Live and let live in other words. :D

Tree

[Appassionato]

I have been quite disturbed to read on that horseshoes site how many farriers absolutely blatantly despise barefooters...

I'm sorry, what does horseshoes.com have to do with COTH? Are they related?

[Appassionato]

I didn't ask that you do. I said point out where I could find them and added that if you didn't want to, it was no problem.

As far as #2 goes, I felt I'd missed the "attack" or if I didn't, I certainly didn't read into it what you did. As far as doing anything to "them", as you asked, what would be the point? I'm not responsible for what others do. Why should that change?

Ok, and after I turn over the said posts....what next? Why do you want them?

[Tree]

Ok, and after I turn over the said posts....what next? Why do you want them?

:rolleyes:

Tree

[Auventera Two]

Good post Tree, in regard to farriers. I do agree with you. And you're right that the farriers who are secure and happy in their job are probably less likely to attack trimmers.

[PaulBunyon]

The 'TEAM' involved in his case will probably be seen as heros. Oh that double standard at play again.
Though I shouldn't have to, I point out that the "Team" is not engaging in unecessary , unwarranted protocols and to compare what the 'Team' is doing to what Strasser and Associates needlessly inflicts on horses, is about as analogous to comparing Granny Smith Apples to road apples. While it is true that often the two start out green and then oxidize to brown, people will readily bite into the former, but will resist with all their might, biting into the latter.

[PaulBunyon]

I do agree with you. And you're right that the farriers who are secure and happy in their job are probably less likely to attack trimmers.
I take this to mean that trimmers who are secure and happy in their job are probably less likely to attack farriers? If so, that is a fact that has not been in evidence to date.

[Tree]

Though I shouldn't have to, I point out that the "Team" is not engaging in unecessary , unwarranted protocols and to compare what the 'Team' is doing to what Strasser and Associates needlessly inflicts on horses, is about as analogous to comparing Granny Smith Apples to road apples. While it is true that often the two start out green and then oxidize to brown, people will readily bite into the former, but will resist will all their might, biting into the latter.




You may keep all of your apples. ;)

It's obvious that the "Team" is doing all that they feel is necessary and what the owner's can afford to do. Will their efforts have been needless? That remains to be seen.

Tree

[PaulBunyon]

You may keep all of your apples. ;)

It's obvious that the "Team" is doing all that they feel is necessary and what the owner's can afford to do. Will their efforts have been needless? That remains to be seen.

Tree
Though this will probably cause an ensuing cyber-riot and at a minimum, hanging my cyber-effigy and loud cries of 'heratic", I'd have euthanized Barbaro right then and there at the track.

And, while their efforts may prove to have been in vain, I don't think I'd classify them as needless. Fruitless perhaps, but not needless.

Paul

[Tree]

Though this will probably cause an ensuing cyber-riot and at a minimum, hanging my cyber-effigy and loud cries of 'heratic", I'd have euthanized Barbaro right then and there at the track.

Paul

I think it was the comment of the attending Vets that they rarely get opportunities to treat injuries like Barbaro because the horses sustaining them were euthed at the tracks. So euthing them appears to be the norm and Barbaro is an exception.

Tree

[JB]

I've yet to see where someone has gotten nasty with a "barefooter" over their horse being barefoot, regardless of barefoot method.

Yep, you've missed it ;) There have been more than a couple of threads where a poster has embarked upon barefoot with their horse, and after 1 week :rolleyes: the horse is sore. In each of these threads, there has been more than one poster replying that they are being cruel and need to put shoes back on.

[PaulBunyon]

I have been quite disturbed to read on that horseshoes site how many farriers absolutely blatantly despise barefooters.
I think you will find that farriers have nothing against barefooters per se. Many of them are good clients. What farriers do despise and rightly ridicule, disrespect and denigrate, is the the sub- group of barefoot proponents that preaches the "always barefoot regardless of the circumstance or cost to the horse" nonsense. And who also make it a point to be otherwise derisive to farriers and horseowners who don't see it their way. Zealots, especially those with misplaced and wrong zeal, tend to be treated and offered the respect they have earned.

Farriers also tend to turn their considerable contempt on individuals or groups of individuals who promote and practice, trimming methods that are routinely injurious and damaging and are based on junk science and feed on those who are least able to fend them off.

Paul

[Appassionato]

Yep, you've missed it ;) There have been more than a couple of threads where a poster has embarked upon barefoot with their horse, and after 1 week :rolleyes: the horse is sore. In each of these threads, there has been more than one poster replying that they are being cruel and need to put shoes back on.

No question ignorance goes both ways. :no: Again, I said I've never seen it.

[goeslikestink]

mr pb are you a are you a--- afcl -- or fwcf

um ibet your the later -- granny smiths -- gave me a key of curiousity

[PaulBunyon]

mr pb are you a are you a--- afcl -- or fwcf

um ibet your the later -- granny smiths -- gave me a key of curiousity
Neither. I just like my apples the way I like my women--just a little tart.:)

[matryoshka]

The question is not whether you like them, but whether they like you. :lol:

[Dannie0303]

Ok so here is my opinion.

My horse is Strasser trimmed (let the flaming begin). He has gone from having HORRIBLE contracted feet (almost to the point of navicular) with 4 shoes and a constant battle with lameness to being sound. We were up to the point of jumping over 4'...when unfortunately he was kicked by another horse and fractured a splint bone.

Now NOWHERE was I "blindly" led into anything. My trimmer never pressured me to do anything. AND...before I sent him off to a Strasser certified rehab facility...my FARRIER told me that this was the right thing to do for my horse.

I have attached some photos

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/Dannie0303/Everything025.jpg
http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/Dannie0303/jumpingwithclaudia1.jpg
http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/Dannie0303/DSCN4092.jpg

[PaulBunyon]

Ok so here is my opinion.

My horse is Strasser trimmed (let the flaming begin). He has gone from having HORRIBLE contracted feet (almost to the point of navicular) with 4 shoes and a constant battle with lameness to being sound.
So apparently the farrier wasn't getting the job done correctly. And contracted heels don't necessarily mean navicular.
Now NOWHERE was I "blindly" led into anything. My trimmer never pressured me to do anything. AND...before I sent him off to a Strasser certified rehab facility...my FARRIER told me that this was the right thing to do for my horse.
So you really don't know if it was the trim or a change in overall horse management that really did the trick, right?

I have attached some photos
Photo 2: If he lands like this very often, he's either going to break a leg or bow a tendon or both, and you may well suffer a Christopher Reeves moment.
Photo3: Movement looks nice. It appears that his left hind has a negative plane coffin bone(convex dorsal wall is the tip off).

[grinanride]

Good for you Dani! Lovely horse
TE

[matryoshka]

I'm glad you've had success with your horse. He's beautiful, by the way. I think a point to note is that the horse went to a Strasser rehab facility where they could take proper care after applying their techniques. It wasn't somebody applying a severe trim to your horse in your own field where you are left with the aftercare. It seems that once the feet are in good condition (post rehab) then the Strasser trim becomes maintenance trimming, and not require special care.

Strasser probably doesn't offer the only trimming option to help contracted heels. It's just that it can take time and one must wait for new growth. I've decontracted heels that were about an inch across the buttresses and the frog was rotted out up beyond the level of the sole. Within a couple of weeks, the heels were maybe 1.5 inches, and by the next trim were about 2 inches. He had an almost normal looking foot in about 2 trim cycles. The problem for this boy, though, is that he had been lame with navicular pain for years at this point, and decontracting his heels and bringing back his breakover didn't make him sound. His hoof did not reshape the way some of them do when the breakover is brought back. They were long and narrow and stayed that way. His other foot was a club. I managed to get that heel to decontract a bit, but again, I couldn't make him sound. Perhaps Strasser could have, but unless she could repair damaged bone and soft tissue within the hoof, I doubt it.

IMHO, invasive work on feet should be left to vets and a prescription for aftercare must be followed vigorously. I'm not saying that all Strasser trimming is invasive, because I simply don't know. But if aftercare requires special facilities, then I'd be wanting a vet to perform the work. Then again, I don't even dig for abscesses, unless specifically told to by a vet. I recently held a foot for canker removal by a vet, and that was about as invasive as it gets. The aftercare is pretty intense as the frog, bars, and sole grow back.

[Thomas_1]

The Strasser method has been outlawed in Sweden, and I believe (but not sure) parts of the UK. Have you seen it in practice? .

Regrettably its not outlawed yet! But this is the 2nd successful prosecution in the UK and hopefully it won't be too much longer before these ill-trained amatures known as Strasser practicioners are banned!

And thanks to Paul Bunyon for taking considerable time and trouble to post in detail to give good explanations of functional anatomy.

[JB]

Photo 2: If he lands like this very often, he's either going to break a leg or bow a tendon or both, and you may well suffer a Christopher Reeves moment.


As far as I know, horses nearly always land like this. Are you expecting him to land with both front feet on the ground? They don't ;)

[Thomas_1]

For those who are genuinely interested in the facts of this case I thought I'd post to let you know I've just come off the phone from the ILPH and ascertained the following in relation to this horse.

It only came into the ILPH centre the day before the video was taken. It continued to be in the ownership of Kowalski thoughout its remaining life. It had been taken to the centre as it was the subject of a report of cruelty to the RSPCA.

It was alerted to the RSPCA by several members of the general public who lived near where the pony was kept.

It was taken to the ILPH with the consent of the owner who was ultimately prosecuted.

The pony was immediately seen on arrival by a farrier and vet and had its feet immediately padded and supported.

Within 10 days it had recovered sufficiently to trot - though trotting short : and that is the clip you can see in the video - only 10 days after entry to the ILPH.

However it had as part of management at the ILPH, periodic x-rays taken of its feet and they showed that progress was not going to be maintained and so the ILPH who by then were working with the owner persuaded her over time to take the decision to euthanase the pony.

[Auventera Two]

As far as I know, horses nearly always land like this. Are you expecting him to land with both front feet on the ground? They don't ;)

I can't view the photos in question, or PB's post because he's blocked. But I will respond to the portion you quoted since it is all I can view. If the photo is a jumping photo, yes, horses always land on one front leg. The jump is an extention of the canter/gallop stride. They don't leap up in the air and spring over like a mule might from a standstill jumping competition. This is why proper conditioning, strengthening, diet, and tendon support boots are vitally important for horses jumping large obstacles.

[Tree]

It seems that once the feet are in good condition (post rehab) then the Strasser trim becomes maintenance trimming, and not require special care.

Strasser's methods do allow for adjustments according to the hoof conditions. This is one reason I have come to accept Strasser's methods...there are a multiple of techniques which can be applied...and also why her methods aren't easily mastered too. There is just SOOOOO much to learn.

Strasser probably doesn't offer the only trimming option to help contracted heels. <deletia> Perhaps Strasser could have, but unless she could repair damaged bone and soft tissue within the hoof, I doubt it.

I guess it depends on the pool of Farriers and Trimmers one has available to them as to whether or not Strasser's is the only option to help contracted hooved equines. In my area, I pick up new clients whose horses do have contraction issues which have progressed on to chronic navicular syndrome/disease or laminitis/founder. Once the hooves have morphed into much narrower shapes it isn't a matter, for me, to regrow lost bone but to take the hooves, as is, and trim to allow them to function as best as they can. If bone gets added to the narrow portions of the coffin bones, much of it could go unnoticed as lateral xrays wouldn't show it. The A/P views could but early ones would have had to have been done to establish a baseline condition. Later views could be taken and compared to the early ones. The soft tissues are easier to heal/repair though. Basically trimming would put a halt, or in some cases slow ongoing damage being caused by improper hoof form. It just depends.

IMHO, invasive work on feet should be left to vets and a prescription for aftercare must be followed vigorously. I'm not saying that all Strasser trimming is invasive, because I simply don't know. But if aftercare requires special facilities, then I'd be wanting a vet to perform the work.

Yes, opinions do vary as to what qualifies as "invasive" or as to WHO should be performing the work. I'd trust a Farrier to know more about feet than I would Vets. Knowing what I do now, I trust my own judgement over the farriers around here when it comes to hooves. I am grateful for having the right to choose though.

Tree

[JsPt2003]

The story is a CAUTIONARY TALE about encouraging simpletons to use methods they do not fully understand.

AMEN :yes:

[matryoshka]

As for soft tissue damage, I was referring to the irreparable kind, or where scar tissue impairs circulation. I don't know the whole story on the navicular horse I trimmed. For all I know he was born with narrow feet. I was able to give him a functional trim that widened the heels and brought his breakover back. It *should* have made him sound since mechanically it was a good trim. However, the reality is that the horse didn't become sound, and I have to guess (have no x-rays or any tests performed on the hooves) that something else was going on inside the hoof. He was given time off from shoes to allow his heels to decontract, but he was walked and trotted more sound with shoes than without.

Heels aren't that hard to get to decontract. It just that some types of feet don't seem to become healthy even when it seems they should. Perhaps this is just my inexperience, or perhaps there are deeper issues inside the hoof that can't be repaired just through applying a good trim, no matter how long you give it to heal. Personally, I take the "less is more" approach and let time and growth help rebalance the hoof.

[Tree]

As for soft tissue damage, I was referring to the irreparable kind, or where scar tissue impairs circulation.

Where would the scar tissue be located? How was it determined that circulation was impaired? Not picking on you, just asking FMI.

I was able to give him a functional trim that widened the heels and brought his breakover back. It *should* have made him sound since mechanically it was a good trim. However, the reality is that the horse didn't become sound, and I have to guess (have no x-rays or any tests performed on the hooves) that something else was going on inside the hoof. He was given time off from shoes to allow his heels to decontract, but he was walked and trotted more sound with shoes than without.

Not speculating about the horse you're talking about but when I've had lingering pain issues involving contracted feet it tended to be the bars which were the culprits. I thought I'd been trimming them adequately enough but after watching someone else trim this same horse and all the bar material they removed, the horse went sound. So began another lesson for me about trimming. ;) That was 3 years ago and I'm having better results since.

Heels aren't that hard to get to decontract. It just that some types of feet don't seem to become healthy even when it seems they should. Perhaps this is just my inexperience, or perhaps there are deeper issues inside the hoof that can't be repaired just through applying a good trim, no matter how long you give it to heal. Personally, I take the "less is more" approach and let time and growth help rebalance the hoof.

I have come to realize that there is always a reason why hooves do what they do and it just the matter of finding out what is going on. Easier said than done with the more tricky cases!!! ;) For me, it WAS my inexperience. Shoot, when I was only doing pasture trims I barely had to touch the bars. Life was so much simpler then. :rolleyes: But it's true that there ARE cases where hooves are just beyond what a trim can do.

Ah, the LIM approach. My application of it might be different. I take more in the beginning, when needed, so that I can do less in the future. However, with my personal horses and ponies hooves, I see their feet less and may find more but not gross amounts of "more". :lol:

Tree

[matryoshka]

Nope, not the bars. When I took the farrier class, he was very specific about taking down the bars each and every trim, regardless of whether or not shoes were going to be applied. Even though I've seen some barefoot material that talks about leaving the bars to self trim, I always trimmed them. It didn't take long as a new trimmer for me to see numerous cases of overgrown bars. I trim them to the level of the sole--or as Ovenick would say-until they are straight.

I don't have any idea what tissue may have been compromised inside the hoof. My understanding at the time was that navicular syndrome horses often have impaired circulation in the heel area. After reading a number of success stories where barefooters had "cured navicular" horses, I had thought the horse would get more comfortable when I had his hoof capsule in better shape. The reality is that the horse stayed lame even after several months of having balanced bare feet. There had to be some reason this horse was sore. It wasn't in the leg or shoulder, it had to be the hoof.

This horse's hoof was sluggish to respond to the rebalancing, even though his heels decontracted nicely. When I bring the toes back on horses who have had them too far forward, I usually see a line where the old hoof flared and the new growth is closer to the coffin bone. Eventually the old flare grows out and the horse has a thicker, healthier hoof with a breakover that is closer to the tip of P3. At that point I'd already had a number of horses do that for me. This guy didn't. Since this horse, I've trimmed a couple of other horses with similar outer hoof conformation (i.e. long and narrow) that continued to grow in the same hoof form despite my continued efforts. These are management issues where I trim for a heel first landing but the hoof will not reshape for me.

This and a few other horses I've trimmed are the reasons I resist blanket statements about all horses being able to go barefoot. That has just not been my experience. I realize that one year isn't a whole lot of experience, but in that time I've seen quite a variety of hooves. At first I didn't restrict myself to any particular clientelle, breed, or horse care, and picked up extra trims whenever I could. Now I avoid big barns--prefer my backyarders, since I'm a backyarder myself. ;)

[matryoshka]

I didn't realize that "less is more" was a real, honest-to-goodness approach. :eek: I thought it was a way to help one decide whether or not to remove hoof material that has a quesionable function. For example, some of the horses that come in from sales have retained soles. I remove what can be easily removed and balance the hoof to that level, even if I think there is more retained sole under there. I don't go digging past a certain level of resistance in the hoof. Usually, it comes away easily in the very next trim.

So, when I'm holding a hoof that looks like it has extra sole that can be removed, I question whether it *should* be removed. Instead of scraping to the live sole all the way around, I will often leave it to the next trim, when it flakes off easily. It is easer to say "less [trimming] is more" rather than go through a lengthy explanation of a decision process where one tries not to take any material that is currently supporting the hoof, whether it looks like it should be there or not.

I have aggressively removed false sole when it was causing the horse to be lame. I didn't take it all the way down to where I suspected the true live sole was, though. I thinned it out until the horse was comfortable and had a heel-first landing.

Early trims are often more aggressive than maintenance trims once the hoof is in better shape. Still, I try to leave the horse walking and trotting comfortably and will only go as far as I feel will allow the horse to move well.

[Tree]

I trim them to the level of the sole--or as Ovenick would say-until they are straight.

Yeah but are the depth of the collateral grooves still quite deep even after you have the bars straight? I've been amazed at how deep I've had to take bars down before the horses indicated they were more comfortable. Of course, before I knew to do this I was having to watch others who were famililar with the technique while I continued to practice with the cadavers (during workshops).

I don't have any idea what tissue may have been compromised inside the hoof. My understanding at the time was that navicular syndrome horses often have impaired circulation in the heel area.

Oh, I thought maybe you did when you mentioned scar tissue specifically. However, it's true that navicular horses can have impaired circulation in the heels (blood taking the alternate branch of the digital artery which leads to the toe vs the one leading into the heels as it would do normally). This is what raising the heels does which is a common treatment for navicular horses...raising the heels/altering the balance of the hoof.

Since this horse, I've trimmed a couple of other horses with similar outer hoof conformation (i.e. long and narrow) that continued to grow in the same hoof form despite my continued efforts. These are management issues where I trim for a heel first landing but the hoof will not reshape for me.

Any xrays to show the coffin bone position within the hoof capsule with any of these horses? What sort of hoof balance do you end up with usually..ie., toe wall angles and/or hairline angles? This is all very interesting to me.

This and a few other horses I've trimmed are the reasons I resist blanket statements about all horses being able to go barefoot. That has just not been my experience. I realize that one year isn't a whole lot of experience, but in that time I've seen quite a variety of hooves. At first I didn't restrict myself to any particular clientelle, breed, or horse care, and picked up extra trims whenever I could. Now I avoid big barns--prefer my backyarders, since I'm a backyarder myself. ;)

Well, as I mentioned before, I've learned that things happen for a reason and finding those reasons has helped in making it possible, for me, to solve some of the frustrations I've run into in the past. And it's not to say I won't continue to run into something that I'll have to figure out either. ;) I wouldn't discount 1 year's worth of experiences. I think you'll find that as the years go by and you continue to see more and more hoof issues, you'll find it easier to unlock those tough ones that have been troublesome before. That's the way it's been for me. The learning process never stops.

Tree

[Tree]

I didn't realize that "less is more" was a real, honest-to-goodness approach. :eek: I thought it was a way to help one decide whether or not to remove hoof material that has a quesionable function.

LIM has been made popular by those whose trim methods involve doing less and allowing the hooves to "fix themselves". So it's not exactly a specific trimming method but more of a catch phrase used to describe doing less to gain more. In my own personal experiences if I were to take less I'd find more later and I dislike having to not only work so hard but don't like what this can mean to the hoof conditions. But I'm not commenting about your use of LIM by any means. Thanks for giving an example. It reminds me of the times when I go to trim hooves and the ppl didn't bother soak them during a drought and they're rock hard. Before I got some power tools, I used to practically cripple my hands while trying to get a knife through the rock hard outer layers. I finally just decided to heck with that and would give the horse the bare minimum of a trim and leave the rest to either fall out or flake out by my next visit...which it usually did. However, this was okay for horses not having any bad issues...they could get by with that approach fine. The more pathological ones often did poorly if the trim was incomplete.

So, when I'm holding a hoof that looks like it has extra sole that can be removed, I question whether it *should* be removed. Instead of scraping to the live sole all the way around, I will often leave it to the next trim, when it flakes off easily. It is easer to say "less [trimming] is more" rather than go through a lengthy explanation of a decision process where one tries not to take any material that is currently supporting the hoof, whether it looks like it should be there or not.

My decisions are based on how well the hoof function for the horse's needs.

I have aggressively removed false sole when it was causing the horse to be lame. I didn't take it all the way down to where I suspected the true live sole was, though. I thinned it out until the horse was comfortable and had a heel-first landing.

Early trims are often more aggressive than maintenance trims once the hoof is in better shape. Still, I try to leave the horse walking and trotting comfortably and will only go as far as I feel will allow the horse to move well.

Me too with the false sole if it interferes with a horse's comfort/hoof function. I've left excess sole where excess toe was found in a more recent navicular case and it proved useful as the excess portions were completely worn away 4 weeks later. Had I removed that stuff myself, I probably would have caused the horse to lose some much needed toe height.

Yes, with most of the ones I trim for the first time, there is a lot to have to trim in order to set the hooves up for better balance and function.

Tree

[matryoshka]

I'm pretty confident I got the bars down as far as possible each trim. In fact, I worried I took them down too far once or twice, but he always walked away comfortable. The collateral grooves aren't an easy way to figure it out when the frog is rotted up beyond the sole. That's kind of why I got a kick out of KC La Pierre's method of using the frog to determine how high to leave the heels. I feel much more comfortable using the live sole at the seat of the corn as a guide for heel height.

As much as the heels expanded in this guy, and it was dramatic, the front of the hoof capsule simply did not reshape. He did get some growth to his frogs, but it never got meaty and healthy looking--maybe it would have if given a full year. I trimmed back the toe and rockered the front to get a heel first landing on soft ground. Then out in the pasture within a few days, he was back to toe first and sore. I kept rolling the toes back to try to help him. It really seemed to be a pain issue rather than a mechanical toes-too-long issue. His feet were just narrow at the quarters, long toward the front, narrow and upright toward the heels. I can't remember if his buttresses curled in or not.

Other horses with this hoof condformation have gone sound for me. They hadn't had histories of unsoundness, and I want to keep it that way. In their cases, it is a matter of trimming to get the heel first landing--or at least flat--and continuing to keep the heels short and the toes back. The hooves just never reformed the way some other types of feet do. It's a mystery to me without the benefit of radiographs. I'm wondering if their coffin bones are narrower than average horses, or if there is something whacky about the lateral cartileges. It's hard to get a client to radiograph sound feet. ;)

[grinanride]

You are on to something there - under developed bone, contracted to or beyond the veriticle, joint adaptation is a possibilty and damage you cannot know about inside the hoof - these cases may take a couple of years of correct frequent trimming and lots of movement - they also may never come around to sound on terrain other than soft - so, do what you can to whatever point you can
or will
TE


As much as the heels expanded in this guy, and it was dramatic, the front of the hoof capsule simply did not reshape. He did get some growth to his frogs, but it never got meaty and healthy looking--maybe it would have if given a full year. His feet were just narrow at the quarters, long toward the front, narrow and upright toward the heels. I can't remember if his buttresses curled in or not.

I'm wondering if their coffin bones are narrower than average horses, or if there is something whacky about the lateral cartileges. It's hard to get a client to radiograph sound feet. ;)

[Tree]

The collateral grooves aren't an easy way to figure it out when the frog is rotted up beyond the sole. That's kind of why I got a kick out of KC La Pierre's method of using the frog to determine how high to leave the heels.

Yes, collateral groove depth can be tricky to use if the frog has become "welded" to the bars in those areas. And frog conditions can vary so much that it's not a consistent guide to heel height. If people were to try to trim heels down to the level of very recessed puny frogs, they'd hit blood if the horse even let them trim down that far.

As much as the heels expanded in this guy, and it was dramatic, the front of the hoof capsule simply did not reshape.

You were probably dealing with remodeled bones. My oldest QH (28), has this and so his toe angles on both hinds are lower than 50 degrees...more like 45's and the fronts are less than 45 degrees also. Six years of being trim/shod by a farrier who purposely shaped his feet like this to extend his stride set his feet up to morph to lower than his natural born angles. This horse was my mare's 1st colt so I know he wasn't born with angles/hoof shapes like those.

He did get some growth to his frogs, but it never got meaty and healthy looking--maybe it would have if given a full year.

It still sounds much like bar issues to me when you mention the frogs never becoming healthy looking. It doesn't take a year to get the frogs better, in my experiences. Did you ever soak his feet regularly or was there a damp area available where he was kept?

His feet were just narrow at the quarters, long toward the front, narrow and upright toward the heels.

Again, this sounds like morphed bones. When I pull coffin bones from narrow hoof capsules they're always narrow too. Bones change according to conditions.

Other horses with this hoof condformation have gone sound for me. They hadn't had histories of unsoundness, and I want to keep it that way. In their cases, it is a matter of trimming to get the heel first landing--or at least flat--and continuing to keep the heels short and the toes back. The hooves just never reformed the way some other types of feet do. It's a mystery to me without the benefit of radiographs. I'm wondering if their coffin bones are narrower than average horses, or if there is something whacky about the lateral cartileges. It's hard to get a client to radiograph sound feet. ;)

When you get a chance to collect some hooves to study, you'll see how bones can morph according to the outer hoof capsule shapes.

Tree

[Thomas_1]

and tendon support boots are vitally important for horses jumping large obstacles.

Tendon support boots are not esential at all and indeed there is a body of evidential opinion that concurs that if a horse is fit and properly managed and exercised to keep it in condition for competition that support of tendon boots can actually be detrimental.


Horses should always land on one foot and his pasterns must be strong to stand the impact of his whole weight travelling fast. The forelegs should be used one at a time to absorb the impact. The hindlegs come down later in the rythm of a canter stride. The hindleg doesn't touch down until its diagonal foreleg has almost completed its support phase.

Neither my eventers nor hunters wear tendon boots.

[Auventera Two]

I'm not talking about Hunters who pop over cute 3 footers. Hunters often do not wear leg protection because the jumps simply are not demanding enough to require it. I am talking about Jumpers who commonly clear fences in excess 5 feet. I have personally never seen a Show Jumper do a round without tendon boots on the front. Maybe some people do, but I certainly never would, and I don't remember ever seeing it.

I cannot speak to Eventers because the types of obstacles are very different. Water, and mud are involved as well. I am not aquainted with the Eventer world do not know what types of leg protection they do or do not advocate. Although a quick search on Eventers showed almost not one going without some type of tendon support.

There's a big difference in this:
http://www.horseworld.ca/images/ponyhunterrider_hunter_of.jpg
http://horsesdaily.com/photos/2003/Attache'-NHS03-168.jpg
http://wellington-wef.com/aspen_star/canter.jpg

And this:
http://dulcinae.com/v-web/gallery/albums/album33/IMG_1565.jpg
http://www.albertaequine.com/graphics/images/news2004/candelemarcotaere.jpg
http://www.albertaequine.com/graphics/images/news2004/vincekafka.jpg

[Tree]

Actually, I'm of the opinion now that the idea of tendon support is a joke. Why? Well, examine the DDFT's sometime and then consider the "support" capabilities of something that is made with weaker materials and come to your own conclusions. ;)

If any horse breaks down in its tendons there is something structurally wrong and it is nothing that "support" is going to prevent from happening. With all the issues imbalances/improper hoof form can set horses up for and how horse management practices can affect how well a horse's structures will develope...boots are just another one of those band-aids, IMO. Seeing them on the horse's legs probably do more to support a false sense of security for the humans vs giving the horses any real support. I'd be more concerned over how tight wraps are affecting the circulation in the limbs.

Those DDFT's are really strong and that is what supports the limb functions.

Tree

[JB]

I have personally never seen a Show Jumper do a round without tendon boots on the front.

These are protective boots, not support boots, big difference. They are there to protect the tendons in front from being smacked by a hind foot. They are open in the front to allow the horse to still feel it if he rubs/bangs a rail.

You won't ever see them on a Hunter, even the Regular Working Hunter (4') because they are not allowed. You WILL see them on Equitation horses, who do courses more similar to jumper courses than hunter courses, as a means of protection, not support.

[MBPearls]

Anything that may kill a horse is not for me.

Guess I won't tell about my friend's two-year-old filly that died after being vaccinated, while her other horse and my horse got pretty ill.

Anything, any time can kill a horse. Horses are silly and fragile.

[Tree]

Guess I won't tell about my friend's two-year-old filly that died after being vaccinated, while her other horse and my horse got pretty ill.

Anything, any time can kill a horse. Horses are silly and fragile.

Gosh, Poopoo is not the sharpest tool in the shed. I totally missed that comment.

What horses can die from could fill another thread.

Tree

[Equibrit]

"I'm not talking about Hunters who pop over cute 3 footers."


Neither is he! You probably have NO experience of the kind of HUNTER he is talking about.

[cosmos mom]

"I'm not talking about Hunters who pop over cute 3 footers."


Neither is he! You probably have NO experience of the kind of HUNTER he is talking about.


American hunters don't even exist where Thomas is from, right? In my experience, boots on jumers protect from hits, and are not to offer support. Maybe some one else has better insight on this, though, as I do not ride Grand Prix jumpers.:)

[goeslikestink]

i font wear tendons boots on my coblett and she jumps big as in big

[Lookout]

I am talking about Jumpers who commonly clear fences in excess 5 feet. I have personally never seen a Show Jumper do a round without tendon boots on the front. Maybe some people do, but I certainly never would, and I don't remember ever seeing it.


There's a farrier doing slow motion video of horses in motion and one of this videos shows a horse landing from a big jump. It shows the tendon "vibrating" back and forth, meaning rather than being 'stretched' it is slack. How could you support that? Also disputes the idea that there is "all that tension" on the dft.
I know longer have the link but grinandride may still have it.

[Lookout]

It only came into the ILPH centre the day before the video was taken. It continued to be in the ownership of Kowalski thoughout its remaining life. It had been taken to the centre as it was the subject of a report of cruelty to the RSPCA.

How very strange. The ILPH can seize the horse and take over its care but can still be in the "ownership of Kowalski".

[goeslikestink]

not strange look out -- in order to prosecute they have to take the owner to court a horse can and is taken and seize but any horse welfare group and vetinary care is given -- like spca in your country the resuce centers seize with police thats

1 the civil rights cover by plod
2 animal rights covered by welfare groups and associaton niether nor can enter or seize with out the other--

so horse is own by owner until proven in a court of law that they have been creul to it -- if not it goes back if yes then horse welfare then have it signed over to them by a judge

and until the time of the court hearing the animal welfare gruops look after and feed and support animal if that animal need to be put to sleep then a vet of in dependance comes to access and verified that in the best interest of that said horse it has to be put sleep -- then vet is also asked and summoned to give his statement of fact to the court of law

[Thomas_1]

"I'm not talking about Hunters who pop over cute 3 footers."


Neither is he! You probably have NO experience of the kind of HUNTER he is talking about.

I was going to post to suggest she gets out more and learns and understands what happens elsewhere ;) . I was going to draw attention to the fact that I was talking about PROPER English hunters who hunt on challenging high Hill land jumping solid dry stone walls and fences for between 6 to 9 hours during the season and with points of up to 2 miles.

Equibrit, Goeslikestink and I well know that she was talking from a position of total ignorance .

But..........

I couldn't be bothered to try to explain or inform - I've now decided its more amusing watching someone dig a hole. I personally can't begin to understand the mentality of anyone seeking to post and profer support to someone who has been prosecuted for cruelty to a horse. Its even more absurd that they should seek to condemn the very organisation that managed to get a horse out of ownership of someone who wasn't fit to own it and who managed to secure a criminal prosecution for cruelty.

[matryoshka]

I believe the problem with jumping heights arose over two different interpretations of the term "hunters." TwoSimple was referring to show hunters, while Thomas1 is describing fox hunters. Not the same thing at all. I don't fox hunt, but the sport itself differs in the US compared to England. I'd like to fox hunt, but I'd have to do it in a side saddle. Don't know if I'm brave enough to try it in a side saddle first time out. I don't think it would be much fun to try to jump in my endurance saddle.

And for every tragedy, there are going to be people who try to see the other side, especially if one side seems overly emotional or biased. It doesn't make them evil or ignorant--they are trying to be fair. There is writing study that talks about the inadvisabililty of using terms like "the best in the world" or "the worst I've seen" because people automatically start thinking of things they've seen that are better or worse that what is being described. That has certainly happened here (or is it the other thread where the foundered pony was walking on concrete--people automatically commented about having seen worse pain in horses). In any case, I thought the vet had a good approach and was informative rather than purposely inflamatory. She was cautioning horse owners not to take serious lameness cases into their own hands. Get help from people with years of experience. Good advice, wouldn't you say?

The farrier who said the feet were mutilated and that it was the worst case he'd ever seen was unintentionally setting himself up to be disagreed with. I put this down to simple human failure to find the best words to make his case. I interpreted it as his being appalled by what he saw and how the pony would have been best served by immediate veterinary attention working with a farrier who is skilled in helping horses with founder. It could just as easily been any other trimming style under attack. The horse was suffering, and the owner failed to get veterinary care. Therefore, it is cruelty, even though the owner didn't mean to be cruel.

The humane society (or whatever it is called) did what they could and followed their procedures that have been tested over time and in the courts. They were unable to save the pony. Had the owner been working all along with a vet and still failed to save the pony, there would have been no cause to claim cruelty. It could have had the same outcome either way, only the pony would hopefully have been on pain killers if it were being treated by a vet.

Sorry if I am mixing up threads here. I'm too tired to go back and figure out which is which.