Trimming Back the Sole Callous to Illiminate Bruising?

[ytr45]

Hi Guys,

I have a question about something my farrier said and did today.

I have been taking some lessons on learning to do a barefoot trim with my horse. Basically what the barefoot trimmer does is:
1) take the heals down to the level of the sole with the rasp
2) trim the bars with the hoof knife
3) rasp the hoofwall down to a little above the level of the sole
4) roll/beval the hoof wall

Today my regular "shoeing" farrier was here to put shoes on my shod horse and I asked him to look at the barefoot-trimmed horse to make sure he thought everything was going ok with the barefoot trimming.

He said he thought the trim looked great - except one thing, and here's where I'm confused:

He pointed out that the sole callous area (the areas of the sole closest to the edges of the hoof) was *too high* and was hitting the ground first, instead of the hoof wall hitting the ground the first.

So he took his hoof-knife and pared away a a few slivers of sole area, and underneath the area he took off was bright red bruising. He said that the sole *itself* was causing bruising from being too high and putting pressure on the foot.

So basically after he pared down the sole callous the hoofwall looked more like a lip around the edge of the hoof.

I am confused because I thought you were never supposed to trim away live sole, only the chalky stuff. I also thought you wanted a big thickened sole callous to protect the foot. I never heard of the sole itself causing bruising. Whats up with that? Doesn't removing the thickened callous undo what you are trying to achieve in a barefoot hoof?

Thanks, I'm confused....

[pawsplus]

The horse is supposed to come down heel-first and then go to the toe. The sole IS supposed to be weight-bearing, and only VERY slightly (1/8") lower than the wall. DO NOT LET ANYONE TRIM OFF THE SOLE CALLUS!!

Go here:

http://www.gossiping.net/phpBB2/index.php?mforum=equinextionforu

THE place on the web for really great BF info. Post some pix! :)

[Auventera Two]

I'm confused by this also. I just recently read that sole in front of the point of breakover is fair game, but sole behind it - DON'T TOUCH. I guess that makes more sense to me, but it's still confusing.

[Tree]

Hi Guys,

I have a question about something my farrier said and did today.

I have been taking some lessons on learning to do a barefoot trim with my horse. Basically what the barefoot trimmer does is:
1) take the heels down to the level of the sole with the rasp

What sort of front to back balance do you end up with by using the sole to determine heel height? I'm asking only because I have not been able to use the sole as a guide for it. So, have you ever checked toe angle and hairline angle after a trim to see how they read?

2) trim the bars with the hoof knife
3) rasp the hoofwall down to a little above the level of the sole
4) roll/beval the hoof wall

It makes sense that you'd have to either use the hoof knifes to trim bars since rasps would not be able to get down to their level past the heels or some other tool, like a dremel or roto-zip with suitable burs to do the same (power or cordless).

Again, I'd want to know what the final hoof balance is like (toe angles and hairlines) when only taking wall down to just above the sole plane. I love it when toe walls build up to provide a "natural shoe" when most horses overload their toes and wear the toe walls excessively instead. :(

And rolling or beveling the hoof walls sounds like the "mustang roll". Is it?

Today my regular "shoeing" farrier was here to put shoes on my shod horse and I asked him to look at the barefoot-trimmed horse to make sure he thought everything was going ok with the barefoot trimming.

He said he thought the trim looked great - except one thing, and here's where I'm confused:

He pointed out that the sole callous area (the areas of the sole closest to the edges of the hoof) was *too high* and was hitting the ground first, instead of the hoof wall hitting the ground the first.

So he took his hoof-knife and pared away a a few slivers of sole area, and underneath the area he took off was bright red bruising. He said that the sole *itself* was causing bruising from being too high and putting pressure on the foot.

So basically after he pared down the sole callous the hoofwall looked more like a lip around the edge of the hoof.

Since this was the only thing he seemed to think needed touching up (sole edges), I would suspect the overal hoof balance was one that he's used to seeing. Did the portions of sole he pared away appear to be flakey or dead? I know calouses tend to be quite firm and flake-free but I'm asking, just in case. I've never found calused sole when the hoof walls were growing out above the sole plane before. Calouses tended to be found in hooves where those portions of sole was actively weightbearing. With the bruising, it sounds as though the sole he trimmed away was excessive vs an actual calluse.

I am confused because I thought you were never supposed to trim away live sole, only the chalky stuff. I also thought you wanted a big thickened sole callous to protect the foot. I never heard of the sole itself causing bruising. Whats up with that? Doesn't removing the thickened callous undo what you are trying to achieve in a barefoot hoof?

Thanks, I'm confused....

I guess it just depends on what you've been told/taught.

I leave calloused sole where there is no wall to take over the active supporting role. Since I find toe sole callouses in the hooves of horses lacking in toe height, I see it as the hoof's way to compensate until enough toe wall can grow and take over. Therefore, I don't want sole callouses at all but when the hooves lack toe height, I wouldn't remove any toe sole calluse because it is serving a purpose. If your horse's feet lack toe height then you're probably finding more wall above the sole plane in the quarters on back to the heels vs in the toes. The bruising can also be caused by overloading the toes if that is where you're finding the bruises...in the toe sole. If it's in the shape mimicking the coffin bone, that's not good either. It means the sole corium is being pinched between the sole and coffin bone tip area.

What I want to achieve isn't sole callouses but rather a natural shoe formed by there being enough outer wall growth taking it above the sole plane. It's not something that's easy to achieve though and so it's exciting to see it happening with properly balanced/functional hooves.

Tree

[Tree]

The sole IS supposed to be weight-bearing, and only VERY slightly (1/8") lower than the wall. DO NOT LET ANYONE TRIM OFF THE SOLE CALLUS!!

At what point during the weighted phase should sole be actively weightbearing? If the outer wall is 1/8" higher than sole, the sole would be passive with that wall active, depending upon the amount of force which is being placed on the hoof.

Tree

[Tree]

I'm confused by this also. I just recently read that sole in front of the point of breakover is fair game, but sole behind it - DON'T TOUCH. I guess that makes more sense to me, but it's still confusing.

I think the confusion eminates from the various ideas one can find when it comes to how to trim hooves. I believe the idea of rasping sole in relation to breakover comes from Gene Ovnicek. Is this where you've found the info?

Tree

[CookiePony]

Tree, will you post a picture of the "natural shoe" with the hoof wall present at the toe? I'm having trouble picturing it. I.e. do you not trim the hoof wall to just above the level of the sole? Or are you looking for thickness, not height, in the toe wall?

[Lookout]

He pointed out that the sole callous area (the areas of the sole closest to the edges of the hoof) was *too high* and was hitting the ground first, instead of the hoof wall hitting the ground the first.

So he took his hoof-knife and pared away a a few slivers of sole area, and underneath the area he took off was bright red bruising. He said that the sole *itself* was causing bruising from being too high and putting pressure on the foot.

So basically after he pared down the sole callous the hoofwall looked more like a lip around the edge of the hoof.

I am confused because I thought you were never supposed to trim away live sole, only the chalky stuff.
Why?
You never actually said he trimmed away 'live' sole, just that it was part of the callous. That could be chalky, or non-chalky.

I also thought you wanted a big thickened sole callous to protect the foot. I never heard of the sole itself causing bruising. Whats up with that? [QUOTE]
Well, it does sound like it did cause bruising from your description, doesn't it?
[QUOTE]
Doesn't removing the thickened callous undo what you are trying to achieve in a barefoot hoof?

Which is what? How do you determine if the angles are correct and if the foot is balanced? How do you affect this balance if necessary? Or are you saying your only possible correction could be by lowering the back of the foot?

[Tree]

Tree, will you post a picture of the "natural shoe" with the hoof wall present at the toe? I'm having trouble picturing it. I.e. do you not trim the hoof wall to just above the level of the sole? Or are you looking for thickness, not height, in the toe wall?

I will gladly email you one showing this. But for now, mentally picture how a metal shoe is fixed to the hoof. It raises the sole off of the ground. The areas touching the shoe surface next to the foot are the walls only, not the sole. Walls grow faster than sole horn too. If a horse's laminar connections are strong, as the outer wall grows out it will be higher than the outer edges of sole, providing the overal sole shape is concave vs flat and bars follow along with that shape. The walls form the natural shoe in the sense that they are active leaving the soles passive on firm footing. This can be tested by walking a barefoot horse, with such a trim, on asphalt and then lifting the hooves to see which portions are covered in black from having made contact with the road surface.

If I see adequate toe wall higher than the toe sole and the hoof balance is good, no, I would not lower the toe wall to a certain height. The example given was 1/8". An eigth isn't much so I'd rather the horse had more than that. Shoes tend to be thicker than 1/8". I don't know how someone arrived at that particular figure. I'd like height and thickness in the toe wall but don't sacrifice proper hoof balance to get it.

Tree

[mbetteridge]

The horse is supposed to come down heel-first and then go to the toe. The sole IS supposed to be weight-bearing, and only VERY slightly (1/8") lower than the wall. DO NOT LET ANYONE TRIM OFF THE SOLE CALLUS!!



From Dr. Doug Butlers Principles of Horseshoeing III:
Chapter 41, Page 603:
"The Sole is not designed to bear weight. It protects the coffin bone, and it's cupped shape helps with traction in soft ground. The sole grows down at the same rate as the wall but normally becomes disorganized and flakes away, or exfoliate, when it reaches a thickness of about one-fourth inch."

[Tree]

From Dr. Doug Butlers Principles of Horseshoeing III:
Chapter 41, Page 603:
"The Sole is not designed to bear weight. It protects the coffin bone, and it's cupped shape helps with traction in soft ground. The sole grows down at the same rate as the wall but normally becomes disorganized and flakes away, or exfoliate, when it reaches a thickness of about one-fourth inch."

Damn! It's time to upgrade my Farrier text library. I only have his II edition. Sounds like he's added more to III seeing as how II only had 567 pages.

Thanks for providing the quote.

Tree

[luvmytbs]

I have a picture of a "natural" shoe, please ignore the frog - thanks to weeks of wet spring, the frog kinda went all to he!!.

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d193/luvmytbs/Picture008.jpg

[Tree]

Yes, that's what I'm talking about. Thanks.

Tree

[Beethoven]

This is interesting to think about. When I first got my horse, I noticed the sole callus, but now she no longer has that and I think her natural shoe is forming. When I walk her after I hose her off down the matted aisle, you would think a shod horse walked down the aisle as you only see the outside part of the hoof ie like a shoe. I take it this is a good thing and my regular farrier is doing a good job with her feet. I am keeping this one without shoes as long as she holds up and can do her job! And luckily my farrier agrees!:winkgrin:

[Happy_Hooves]

Your natural shoe is simply excess heel and toe. Only about a 1/16th of an inch is needed at the time of trimming. A foot with distortion should be rockered at the toe (Ovinicek, Ramey, Bowker et al) a foot without distortion at the toe needs only a roll.


FMI www.NBhoofcare.com

[CookiePony]

Thanks for the pic, luvmytbs! I understand now.

OK-- so the "natural shoe" vs. toe callus w/ rolled toe (NB theory) are somewhat at odds. I was wondering if we were talking about two different philosophies here.

[Tree]

Thanks for the pic, luvmytbs! I understand now.

OK-- so the "natural shoe" vs. toe callus w/ rolled toe (NB theory) are somewhat at odds. I was wondering if we were talking about two different philosophies here.

In my opinion I think you're right...two different philosophies are being talked about.

Tree

[MissCapitalSplash]

I was JUST going to start a similar thread.
My farrier stopped showing up so I found someone new and had good recomendations so decided to try him.
The first time he came out, he put shoes on my equitation horse, idiot proof, easy shoe job.
He then did my TB gelding that has had some soundness related to pedal oestitis, thin walls, etc. He cannot be shod or goes lame, and cant keep glue ons on. He has been sound since making him barefoot a year ago.
New farrier comes out and starts hacking away at sole, saying that sometimes he hits blood on a new horse until he gets to know them. Huge red flag and I told him that this horse has thin soles to begin with. He said to trust him and that my horse would look better and move better. He finishes his trim and horse walks off ok, a little sore but he usually is after a trim. It has now been a month and horse is CRIPPLED. takes itty bitty steps, head bobs, and doesnt want to walk on anything hard. He sole is soft to the touch and forget hoof testers, with your fingers her freaks out.
Then, 1 day after her shoe job, my mare, who has never been lame a day in her life, is very sore and walking on egg shells.
Im thinking I need to ditch this guy and find someone else, but he insists it is good to hack away their sole, which I had never heard of!

[Tree]

I'd ditch this person. I mean, hooves are what they are as soon as you first see them. If this person can't find their way around the hoof without unnecessary trimming/thinning, I'd question their ability to read hooves at all.

Up to now you have trusted him but the red flags are multiplying. Your horses are both lame. Is this the result of a "good thing"?

Good luck in finding a replacement who can deal with the current issues your horses are having.

Tree

[ytr45]

Hi Tree,

Some further questions from your analysis.

"With the bruising, it sounds as though the sole he trimmed away was excessive vs an actual calluse. "

Maybe you are right about this. How would I know the difference between excessive vs an actual calluse? It wasn't chalky/flaky.

"If your horse's feet lack toe height then you're probably finding more wall above the sole plane in the quarters on back to the heels vs in the toes. The bruising can also be caused by overloading the toes if that is where you're finding the bruises...in the toe sole. If it's in the shape mimicking the coffin bone, that's not good either. It means the sole corium is being pinched between the sole and coffin bone tip area."

Yes, you are right, I see wall height above the sole plane on the quarters and heels only. I never see wall height above the sole plane in the toe area. And I think you are saying that this is bad because it means the toe is taking too much pressure? (I am a beginner at all of this...)

When the farrier pared down the sole callous/excessive sole I did see the bruising all the way around the inside of the hoofwall/whiteline - which I guess is what you mean mimicking the coffin bone. (the bruise was in a horse shoe shape). Can you explain more about what this means - the corium being pinched, etc. What do you recommend? So in that case was it good that the farrier trimmed the sole?

thankyou Tree! and everyone!

[ytr45]

So can excessive sole cause bruising?

[Huntertwo]

My Barefoot trimmer never takes away any sole, although my pony has been barefoot all along and is forming a nice concave shape. I do rasp in between trimmings.

As someone pointed out, if I bathe her and walk down the aisle, I see only the outline of the hoof wall and a tiny bit of heel.

[Need4speed]

Loved the picture of that hoof. That is what I aspire to for my horses. My favourite barefoot website is www.barefoothorse.com (http://www.barefoothorse.com) . I never trim the sole. I only take off the chalky part. I've seen someone trim sole until the foot bled. "Not a big deal, it's a long way from her heart, hahaha...":rolleyes: :( This from someone who is supposed to care about horses.

I also trim my own horses. I have asked a farrier recently what he thought about my trims. He said they looked balanced, but he'd trim a bit of the sole off near the hoof wall, to create a "natural horseshoe" like the picture posted. I have to say though, I'm still pretty nervous about cutting away any sole.

[luvmytbs]

He said they looked balanced, but he'd trim a bit of the sole off near the hoof wall, to create a "natural horseshoe" like the picture posted. I have to say though, I'm still pretty nervous about cutting away any sole.

That horse's soles have never been touched with a knife. The concavity (thus a "natural shoe" evolving) is created by a balanced trim, and yes, it does take some time, especially on TB's from the track, which he is.

[Shilo]

Luvmytbs
I like the horeseshoe shape of your hooves, but it looks like the heels are too long. Looking at the heel buttress it is distorted, meaning where the heel comes from the heel bulbs to the buttress is bent. The frog looks unhealthy and possibly thrushy. Does your horse land heel first?

[Lookout]

So can excessive sole cause bruising?

Yes.

[luvmytbs]

Luvmytbs
I like the horeseshoe shape of your hooves, but it looks like the heels are too long. Looking at the heel buttress it is distorted, meaning where the heel comes from the heel bulbs to the buttress is bent. The frog looks unhealthy and possibly thrushy. Does your horse land heel first?

Shilo,

yes the heels look long in that picture, I looked at his feet right after taking the picture, and found that the heels are not as long as they look. He is still a little underrun, so perhaps that is why it looks that way, and he needs his bulbs to decontract more. And yes, he does land close to heels down first from what I can tell, definitely not toe first.

Just to satisfy myself, I will look at his feet later on today. That picture was taken in April I believe.

None of my horses had thrush thank God, they were all "loosing" their frogs this spring due to major wet conditions. And now again, I have about an inch of water sitting in the pasture, since we have been getting hammered here in KY the last two days. 3 inches in some parts last night.

[cuatx]

Pardon my jumping in here, but I thought you weren't ever to take any sole from the tip of the frog to the toe. Is this not correct?

[Tree]

Pardon my jumping in here, but I thought you weren't ever to take any sole from the tip of the frog to the toe. Is this not correct?

It depends on whose method you're following and the hoof condition.

As this relates to what I do, when dealing with a horse supsected of having toe laminar connection issues, no sole is trimmed away from the tip of the frog on forward. This is in case the coffin bone orientation and/or prior hoof balance (as in high heels forcing more than the natural amount of weight onto the toes), has begun to or has already been compromsing blood flow to the toe sole. If that has been or is the case, sole growth would be impaired and sole thickness beneath the coffin bone tip could be quite thin. And certainly in cases where rotation has been chronic causing the sole, nearest the frog tip or slightly beyond, to become convexed (bulged outwards), one would be wise to avoid trimming the bulging portion of sole. Many, like this, would already have blown abscesses out where the coffin bone tip has been resting, long-term (ie., sole penetration cases).

Tree

[Auventera Two]

I think the confusion eminates from the various ideas one can find when it comes to how to trim hooves. I believe the idea of rasping sole in relation to breakover comes from Gene Ovnicek. Is this where you've found the info?

Tree

Boy, that's a good question. I am trying to remember where I read it. Let me think on it and I'll post the link. It might have been on the horseshoes site too. I'll try to find it!

[Auventera Two]

I have a picture of a "natural" shoe, please ignore the frog - thanks to weeks of wet spring, the frog kinda went all to he!!.

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d193/luvmytbs/Picture008.jpg

This confuses me too because in Ramey's book he says the walls should be trimmed down far enough that you can "just" catch a fingernail on them if you scrape your nail across the sole. They should never be standing up 1/8 or 1/4 inch above the sole, like is evidenced with the natural shoe. Can somebody explain this more?

Doesn't this natural shoe cause torque that stretches/tears the white line? I read a comment about being able to "roll a marble" around the inside of the wall and how bad that is for the white line. If you can roll a marble, it is tearing the white line. It makes sense to me but am I missing something??

My farrier told me to go ahead and trim the sole as long as it is exfoliating material. He said that the problem comes in when people can't tell what is live and what is exfoliating.

[Auventera Two]

Ok - found it: It came from this link:

http://www.horseshoes.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3005&highlight=front+breakover

Toes do not necessarily have to be shortened from the bottom. They can be mechanically "shortened" by moving the point of breakover back under the foot to the nautural place it wears just ahead of the tip of the coffin bone, without touching live sole.
It appears that one of the feet in the picture shows that worn in rocker already, quite some distance behind the front of the hoof...(the horse's left foot in the side view) You can see the space under the wall in the toe in the picture. That's his rocker toe. You can just draw a line across the sole at place that natural rocker begins (It will be about 1" ahead of the frog tip) and rasp it to a little bit more angle.Then round the daylights out of the hoowall edge. You'll be surprized how much shorter that makes the toe without having touched any sole behind the breakover line.
Sole ahead of the line is dead anyway, stretched forward, so you won't hurt anythingas long as you stay ahead of the line.

[Tree]

This confuses me too because in Ramey's book he says the walls should be trimmed down far enough that you can "just" catch a fingernail on them if you scrape your nail across the sole. They should never be standing up 1/8 or 1/4 inch above the sole, like is evidenced with the natural shoe. Can somebody explain this more?

Check Ramey's site (hoofrehab.com) and see if he continues to use that approach. I don't keep up with him but do have his book. I don't know where he got the 1/8 or 1/4 meaurements from. Hopefully someone else in here knows more about PR's ways.

Doesn't this natural shoe cause torque that stretches/tears the white line? I read a comment about being able to "roll a marble" around the inside of the wall and how bad that is for the white line. If you can roll a marble, it is tearing the white line. It makes sense to me but am I missing something??

Not in properly balanced hooves. The torque happens when imbalances are present. Like I said before though, it what you'll find will depend on the principles the methods are based upon. Not all are the same. ;) I don't think you're really missing a thing other than how to judge the info you find.

My farrier told me to go ahead and trim the sole as long as it is exfoliating material. He said that the problem comes in when people can't tell what is live and what is exfoliating.

Yes, determining live sole from exfoliating can be difficult under some conditions. Like around here, drought conditions will cause exfoliating sole to be hard and reluctant to flake off until the hooves get plenty of moisture. I don't consider live sole plane an accurate way to determine what needs trimming....particularly when it comes to balancing feet. Live sole just isn't fool proof.

Tree

[PaulBunyon]

I don't consider live sole plane an accurate way to determine what needs trimming....particularly when it comes to balancing feet. Live sole just isn't fool proof.
Cites?
How about Savoldi's UST theory and research? How about Ovineck and Bowker's research? Those all seem to offer evidence that fully contradicts your assertions.

[Tree]

Cites?
How about Savoldi's UST theory and research? How about Ovineck and Bowker's research? Those all seem to offer evidence that fully contradicts your assertions.


My farrier told me to go ahead and trim the sole as long as it is exfoliating material. He said that the problem comes in when people can't tell what is live and what is exfoliating.

Now I know why "dense" would enter your mind. Do you read for content? My response was to this quote from Two Simple. Do you wish to take her farrier to task over his comments or is a double standard at play here?

Tree

[Auventera Two]

Cites?
How about Savoldi's UST theory and research? How about Ovineck and Bowker's research? Those all seem to offer evidence that fully contradicts your assertions.

I could get into big trouble for trying to explain what I think Tree meant, but I'll try. lol. :lol: I don't believe she meant the "ACTUAL LIVE SOLE" can't be depended upon, but rather the person's perception of what they think is live sole. Finding the live sole can be difficult, even to the trained eye. So if you have a sole that needs much exfoliating but yet you trim only to the level of that hard packed exfoliating stuff, thinking it is live sole, you won't be getting the heels, bars and walls down to the proper height. Finding the actual live sole is the correct way to trim - but you have to be able to find it first.

So Tree if that's not what you meant, then I apologize, and you'll have to clean up my mess! :winkgrin:

[Tree]

I could get into big trouble for trying to explain what I think Tree meant, but I'll try. lol. :lol: I don't believe she meant the "ACTUAL LIVE SOLE" can't be depended upon, but rather the person's perception of what they think is live sole.

So Tree if that's not what you meant, then I apologize, and you'll have to clean up my mess! :winkgrin:

:D :D :D :D :D

Tree

[PaulBunyon]

Now I know why "dense" would enter your mind. Do you read for content?
Absolutely and all the time. You somehow doubt this to be true?
My response was to this quote from Two Simple.
I don't give a rat's ass who you were responding to. You made a statement and I called you on it. As of yet you have managed to less than adroitly avoid answering on topic.
Do you wish to take her farrier to task over his comments or is a double standard at play here?
No double standard here. You made a comment, I'm calling you on it. Step up or step away. Makes no difference to me.

Paul 'n Babe

[Tree]

I don't give a rat's ass who you were responding to. Paul 'n Babe

This portion of your post rather suits you, RB.

Tree

[PaulBunyon]

Damn! It's time to upgrade my Farrier text library. I only have his II edition. Sounds like he's added more to III seeing as how II only had 567 pages.
POHII, pp.119, 1st paragraph on the top left side of the page;
POHII, pp.130, 3rd paragraph down from the top on the left.

another POV from an essaywritten and provided by Dr. James R. Rooney, DVM, Equine anatomist and Pathologist:

"Sole Pressure and Weight Bearing

It is generally recognized, and my observation, that the initial impact of the bare foot with the surface and the major weight-bearing is on the bearing edge of the hoof wall, including the bars. The imprint of frog and sole on the surface (given that there is sufficient loose material on the surface to permit such an imprint) occurs after impact as the vertical force on the foot approaches maximum at midsupport

No doubt the frog and sole can share the weight-bearing once the bearing edge of the hoof wall is fully loaded, particularly in marshy, sandy, or sandy loam conditions. Loose material on the surface tends to pile up under the hoof as the bearing edge plows down through it. There certainly can and will be frictional wearing of the sole and frog, under these conditions with compensatory thickening of the cornified epidermis (callus) as a result. Such thickening, however, does not imply that the sole and frog are primary or major weight-bearing structures as sometimes claimed."

[PaulBunyon]

This portion of your post rather suits you, RB.

Tree
Like some others, you mistake me for somone else. I have used my given name from the beginning. Ok, my last name is actually spelled 'Bunion' which I'm told was the 'Americanization' of my great grandfather's last name as he passed through Ellis Island around the turn of the last century. Because of the obvious foot connotations and because as a child I always liked the stories of the other Bunyan, I chose to use that variation of my last name. So sue me.

[PaulBunyon]

To refresh your memory, you said:
I don't consider live sole plane an accurate way to determine what needs trimming....particularly when it comes to balancing feet. Live sole just isn't fool proof.
I then said:
Cites?
How about Savoldi's UST theory and research? How about Ovineck and Bowker's research? Those all seem to offer evidence that fully contradicts your assertions.
To which you made some inane non-responsive reply.

Care to try again?

[Tree]

Like some others, you mistake me for somone else.

Interesting. Well, at any rate, you and RB could be identical twins, considering the similarities.

Tree

[Tree]

To refresh your memory, you said:

I then said:

To which you made some inane non-responsive reply.

Care to try again?

Refer back to responses #'s 36 and 37. If you can read for content, you should find what you're seeking there.

Tree

[PaulBunyon]

Interesting. Well, at any rate, you and RB could be identical twins, considering the similarities
Thank you. I will consider that a compliment.

Paul

[LarkspurCO]

Tree, it sounds like you're retracting what you said earlier. You didn't say that "because of the difficulty in idenfying live sole... I don't consider it an accurate way to determine what needs trimming."

If that's what you meant, it wasn't clear to me, so I can understand Paul's challenge.

Perhaps more relevant would be your opinion on whether the actual live sole is a reliable guideline for trimming. Yes or no?


Holly


P.S. If Paul Bunyon were RB, I'm sure he would have spelled the overgrown lumberjack's last name correctly - Bunyan. :)

[caballus]

Since live sole is about 1/2 - 3/4" thick and a uniform mirror of the bottom of the P3 (Salvoldi et al), why is the live sole NOT a viable means of mapping the hoof? Live sole, with the reading of the collateral grooves at the apex of the frog and at the heels, gives a pretty good idea of just where in the hoof capsule the P3 lies. Using the sole with other "map points" tells a true story and gives a good indication of how the lparticular hoof *should* be trimmed.

[ytr45]

Can excessive sole cause bruising?

[mbetteridge]

Can excessive sole cause bruising?



Another quote from P3

Chapter 42, Page 626

"The function of the sole is to protect the sensitive parts above it. The sole is not designed to support weight, as is the wall. Therefore, the sole should not bear constant pressure from a shoe or from the ground. "

Yes, excessive sole coming in contact with ground and causing sole pressure can cause bruising.

Hope this helps

[Tree]

Tree, it sounds like you're retracting what you said earlier. You didn't say that "because of the difficulty in idenfying live sole... I don't consider it an accurate way to determine what needs trimming."

If that's what you meant, it wasn't clear to me, so I can understand Paul's challenge.


When you put what Two Simple's farrier said about , "...the problem comes in when people can't tell what is live and what is exfoliating", and my response, particularly the last sentence, "Live sole just isn't fool proof", I guess I don't see the problem probably because I knew what I'd meant. So I'm not retracting anything but it's apparent I was misunderstood. Difficulty in identifying live sole was implied both by me and TS's farrier's comment.

My point was, and still is, that there is room for error.

Perhaps more relevant would be your opinion on whether the actual live sole is a reliable guideline for trimming. Yes or no?


Holly

If my opinion still isn't apparent, no, it isn't a reliable guideline alone. It would just be one PART of a list of things used to determine hoof balance and even then, according to what each individual uses for methods, coffin bone position, relative to the ground, would vary.

P.S. If Paul Bunyon were RB, I'm sure he would have spelled the overgrown lumberjack's last name correctly - Bunyan. :)

Then you know who I was referring to, right? ;) Yes, unless in his haste to 'respond' he didn't check thoroughly for typos, that mistake wouldn't have been made. :lol:

But do you now understand where I was coming from about my comments on live sole?

Tree

[Tree]

Since live sole is about 1/2 - 3/4" thick and a uniform mirror of the bottom of the P3 (Salvoldi et al), why is the live sole NOT a viable means of mapping the hoof?

Savoldi (checked the spelling), did an in depth study to discover the UST. Using the UST theory only works if people know what live sole is.

Live sole, with the reading of the collateral grooves at the apex of the frog and at the heels, gives a pretty good idea of just where in the hoof capsule the P3 lies. Using the sole with other "map points" tells a true story and gives a good indication of how the lparticular hoof *should* be trimmed.

I agree because more than one aspect of the entire hoof is being considered, but even with everything considered, there is still room for error. It just depends on a person's abilities to recognize conditions.

Tree

[rcloisonne]

None of my horses had thrush thank God, they were all "loosing" their frogs this spring due to major wet conditions.

I beg to differ. That split in the central sulcus is caused by thrush. The most common reason for thrush is contracted heels which are also evident in this photo. Move the breakover back, get the heels down and increase movement on firm surfaces.

[caballus]

Two different insults can thrive in the central sulcus ... thrush which produces a black, tarry, very odiforous gunk and yeast infection which causes a white, cheesy looking substance. If one treats merely for thrush and there is also yeast present the yeast will thrive and be absolutely proliferate on the dead thrush. Thrush is a bacteria; yeast is a fungus similar to candida albicans. One needs to treat for BOTH at the same time. A good natural product for this is Australian Tea Tree Oil then follow up with a Calendula/H20 spray. Both are anti-fungal, anti-bacterial, anti-septic, antibiotics. The Calendula will aid in rapid new tissue growth. However, as is mentioned, contracted heels are part of the reason for the infections and that must be addressed. Trying to rid the hoof of thrush and yeast without addressing the overall hoof form does no good. Yeast, also, is a systemic bug and the feed & nutritional base must be re-evaluated.

[Tree]

I beg to differ. That split in the central sulcus is caused by thrush. The most common reason for thrush is contracted heels which are also evident in this photo. Move the breakover back, get the heels down and increase movement on firm surfaces.

Actually, the cracks forms because of contraction vs thrush. Infections of the sulcus tend to be a symptom of contraction.

And I'll just add to this by saying that if lowering the heels doesn't allow the bulbs to expand when the hoof is weightbearing then check out the bars too.

When bar issues are missed, lowering the heels gets blamed for the resulting pain so then people are reluctant to lower the heels when they probably lowered them to the correct height.

Tree

[caballus]

And I'll just add to this by saying that if lowering the heels doesn't allow the bulbs to expand when the hoof is weightbearing then check out the bars too.

Also check the "arch" in the qtrs. If the arch in the qtrs is non-existant then the hoof still cannot expand as much as it's supposed to and that will contribute to contraction.

[luvmytbs]

O.K.

Let me add a picture taken of the same hoof on the same day before the trim.

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d193/luvmytbs/Picture004.jpg

His heels are still way underrun. I believe the split you see is caused by the heels decontracting. Correct me if I am wrong. Please remember these are TB's coming off the track with feet that are pathetic. BTW, I checked last night, his frog is back. :) Unfortunately movement on hard surfaces is out, we are wet, wet, wet. My pasture has up to one inch standing in it. My guys are out 24/7 on several acres.

I am also adding a picture taken the same day of another TB, off the track, who displays the same crack (as I am thinking rapid decontraction) , however he was spending most of the time in a stall (unfortunately due to his owner's request) so he didn't "loose" his frog because he was rarely exposed to the wet conditions. Now in his case, he actually came in with a convex sole. Really bad pancake feet and shoes tacked on to hardly a foot. :(

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d193/luvmytbs/Stormy.jpg

P.S. no suggestions necessarry on the second picture, horse is back in racetraining, with shoes of course. At least he starting out with somewhat of a good foot this time. ;)

[PaulBunyon]

Two different insults can thrive in the central sulcus ... thrush which produces a black, tarry, very odiforous gunk and yeast infection which causes a white, cheesy looking substance..
Shucks, and here I thought the insults were
1. You're ugly
and
2. Wow, you smell like rotting garbage on a hot summer day.

:) :D

On the serious side, nice post caballus.

Raul

[luvmytbs]

And to answer the OP's question, from my experience with the horse in the second picture, yes.
When we pulled the racing plates, he was walking on his convex soles, and very very ouchy. The sole did show bruising after a few days; he had to walk across gravel and hard concrete to go in and out.

My trimmer never touched the soles though, just worked on getting concavity. I used hoof boots to move this horse until he was comfortable (gaining a little concavity).

[PaulBunyon]

P.S. If Paul Bunyon were RB, I'm sure he would have spelled the overgrown lumberjack's last name correctly - Bunyan. :)
I was only willing to take just so much liberty with altering my last name for these boards.:)

Paul

[rcloisonne]

Two different insults can thrive in the central sulcus ... thrush which produces a black, tarry, very odiforous gunk and yeast infection which causes a white, cheesy looking substance.
I'll bet if the owner took a hoof pick, attached a moistened piece of gauze and ran it through that crack, the resulting crud would be black. Not to say it's impossible, but I've yet to see any white cheesy stuff come out of one of those CS splits.

I think we can all agree with Tree; that the contraction itself is the root cause of the problem, rather than vice versa. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

[PaulBunyon]

Refer back to responses #'s 36 and 37. If you can read for content, you should find what you're seeking there.
Both/either were non-rssponsive and indicated a clear lack of understanding of live sole and its use in establishing correct M/L hoof balance.

In and of itself, it is of little to no value in determining A/P balance, nor does it indicate the spatial orientation of p3 within the hoof capsule or the thickness of the live sole. None of which is relevant to the discussion at hand.

Savoldi (checked the spelling), did an in depth study to discover the UST. Using the UST theory only works if people know what live sole is.
Anyone, regardless of creedo, who is trimming horses, professionally or otherwise, who does not know what live sole is, should immediately cease and desist and seek remedial help.

When you put what Two Simple's farrier said about , "...the problem comes in when people can't tell what is live and what is exfoliating", and my response, particularly the last sentence, "Live sole just isn't fool proof",
Apples and road apples. The farrier identified the problem and stated why. You made a comment that had no bearing on the farrier's observation, but clearly staked out your position regarding the live sole. You still have not substantiated your assertion. By the way, smmiley faces, whether one or several, are not sufficient to defend your position.

And your response, contrary to your subsequent protestations, did not in any way shape or form imply difficulty with identifying live sole. And that is read or reading in the context you provided

My point was, and still is, that there is room for error.
Just because errors are made, does not mean that there is room for error.
If you(the collective) are making this error, then you have to ask yourself "Why?", and then do something to correct the problem.

Paul

[Tree]

O.K.

Let me add a picture taken of the same hoof on the same day before the trim.

His heels are still way underrun. I believe the split you see is caused by the heels decontracting. Correct me if I am wrong. Please remember these are TB's coming off the track with feet that are pathetic. BTW, I checked last night, his frog is back. :) Unfortunately movement on hard surfaces is out, we are wet, wet, wet. My pasture has up to one inch standing in it. My guys are out 24/7 on several acres.

The split doesn't appear to involve the skin directly above the frog sulcus so that's good. From this angle, the crack doesn't appear to be much more than a crease, to me. I think getting the hoof trimmed so that function improves will be all it takes to treat it.

I am also adding a picture taken the same day of another TB, off the track, who displays the same crack (as I am thinking rapid decontraction) , however he was spending most of the time in a stall (unfortunately due to his owner's request) so he didn't "loose" his frog because he was rarely exposed to the wet conditions. Now in his case, he actually came in with a convex sole. Really bad pancake feet and shoes tacked on to hardly a foot. :(

Well, I cannot see the sulcus due to that darn shadow. Don't you just hate that when it happens!!! ;) Atleast the foot doesn't appear to be a pancake any more and there was likely better quality horn to put the horse shoe nails in to.

Tree

[Auventera Two]

Interesting. Well, at any rate, you and RB could be identical twins, considering the similarities.

Tree

I thought the same thing right away. It would seem that Rick doesn't have enough to do on horseshoes so he wants to turn Coth into a snake pit too. Sorry Rick, but people on Coth are friendly and desire to HELP each other. NOT nitpick posts line for line and word for word. I think you'll find out pretty quickly too that Mods won't let you get away with everything you get away with on horseshoes (considering you 'are' a mod over there and play by your own bully rules.) :sleepy: I say you need to trim more horses and write less posts.

[Rick Burten]

TS and company

I just received an e-mail from a member of this august web site that there are those who think I have been participating in several discussions here under a what shall I call it, hmmmm, nom de plume'. Said nom de plume being that of one Paul Bunyon.

This is absolutely incorrect, though I find it flattering that some of you would think highly enough of another's writing style as to confuse it with mine.

Those of you who are better acquainted with me, know I take upfront responsibility for what I write.

Unfortunately, when I long ago registered to be a member (inactive until now) of this web site, I mistakenly used a screen name instead of my real name. I suppose that back then I felt the screen name I chose more accurately described what I do. Now that I have become , depending on how you look at it, famous or infamous, I just use my given name.

So for the record, on these boards, when and only when you see the screen name "hoofrx1", you will know that it belongs tome, Rick Burten and none other.

I hope that puts to rest the brewing tempest in a teapot and enables those who have gotten all twisted up over "who is me and me is who" to relax and untwist themselves.

I see some familiar names here so perhaps I'll join in more often, though my responsibilities elsewhere generally require my full attention. Time will tell.

Have fun y'all.

[Auventera Two]

This is absolutely incorrect, though I find it flattering that some of you would think highly enough of another's writing style as to confuse it with mine.

*Snort* Don't flatter yourself so much Rick Burten. "Highly" wasn't exactly what I was thinking of the writing style. :rolleyes:

[Lookout]

Can excessive sole cause bruising?

Before you start waving your arms and sending up flares, reread the thread, in particular post #26

[Rick Burten]

*Snort* Don't flatter yourself so much Rick Burten. "Highly" wasn't exactly what I was thinking of the writing style. :rolleyes:
I am sooooo hurt. I am soooo crushed! I so desperately sought your approval. Woe is me!

Do you have a hankie you could lend me so I might dry the tears from my eyes?

How 'bout some kleenex then?

Careful TS you're about to forego that COTH friendliness you advertised earlier.

What might the Mods think? What might the Mods do? Only the Shadow knows............

[Lookout]

Since live sole is about 1/2 - 3/4" thick and a uniform mirror of the bottom of the P3 (Salvoldi et al), why is the live sole NOT a viable means of mapping the hoof? Live sole, with the reading of the collateral grooves at the apex of the frog and at the heels, gives a pretty good idea of just where in the hoof capsule the P3 lies. Using the sole with other "map points" tells a true story and gives a good indication of how the lparticular hoof *should* be trimmed.

So you think all live sole = uniform thickness? Only in a healthy foot. By definition, a pathological foot does not have uniform sole thickness. So, use it on all the already healthy feet you work on.

[Lookout]

Thanks mbetteridge for the Butler quotes.

Would anyone care to elaborate given the sole is not weightbearing why it's so awful and verboten to trim it (asked of the non-sole trimmers of course).

[PaulBunyon]

So you think all live sole = uniform thickness? Only in a healthy foot. By definition, a pathological foot does not have uniform sole thickness. So, use it on all the already healthy feet you work on.
I think you may find that regardless of pathology, the sole at anygiven point under p3, will be uniformly thick. This does not mean that from front to back or side to side the sole is necessarily the same thickness and by dissection, that can be easily shown. What it does mean is that once the sole is esfoliated down to the level of the bottom of the live sole, and its relatively easy/simple to determine when that happens, the sole will, medial-laterally be uniform in thickness. this may, for a variety of reasons mean that p3 is not parallel to the horizon(medial-laterally) but the live sole thickness will be even.

This is important because that allows us to get the foot in correct M/L balance.
As noted elsewhere, the live sole plane does not help establish A/P balance nor does it necessarily indicate how thick the live sole actually is.
To achieve overall balance in all planes and dimensions requires the trimmer to have at his/her disposal, sufficient knowledge and skill to recognize what the numerous factors are and how to use them to achieve static and kinetic balance. And the two may and often do require slightly different balancing techniques.

I am interested in learning why, by definition, a hoof with pathology does not have uniform sole thickness as I described above. Or perhaps our definitions and understanding is not in accord.

[PaulBunyon]

Would anyone care to elaborate given the sole is not weightbearing why it's so awful and verboten to trim it (asked of the non-sole trimmers of course).
Trimming into live sole, especially anterior to the true apex of the frog, has been proven to cause the coffin bone to drop within the hoof capsule.
Even though the sole is not a primary weight bearing structure, it will secondarily , in many terrains, bear weight. Further, the weight of the horse is descending through the bony column towards the sole corium. Left intact, the sole does an admirable job of protecting and supporting the bony column.

There is even a time to let sole that is not yet ready to exfoliate on its own, stay in place, again, particularly in front of the true apex of the frog. Each hoof must be evaluated based on numerous factors and observations before one goes and removes any sole except that which is already trying to fall out of the bottom.

While I cannot envision ever removing any sole from a hoof with a live sole depth of say 6-10 mm, I can easily envision removing some dead sole from a foot with a live sole depth greater than 16 mm. the question is, how do we know , absent radiographs, how much live sole there is under p3? Absent radiographs, we depend on our observational skills, experience, knowledge and power of deductive reasoning .

Paul

[Kaydence]

Many posters welcome both Rick and Paul to the boards. :)

I thought the same thing right away. It would seem that Rick doesn't have enough to do on horseshoes so he wants to turn Coth into a snake pit too. Sorry Rick, but people on Coth are friendly and desire to HELP each other. NOT nitpick posts line for line and word for word. I think you'll find out pretty quickly too that Mods won't let you get away with everything you get away with on horseshoes (considering you 'are' a mod over there and play by your own bully rules.) :sleepy: I say you need to trim more horses and write less posts.

[Lookout]

Many posters welcome both Rick and Paul to the boards. :)

Speak for yourself.

[Tree]

Many posters welcome both Rick and Paul to the boards. :)

Different strokes for different folks. As a poster, I am not one of those "many" you refer to.

Tree

[PaulBunyon]

Different strokes for different folks. As a poster, I am not one of those "many" you refer to.
A poster? shucks, all this time I thought you were a tree.

[PaulBunyon]

Speak for yourself.
All twisted up already eh? Why's that?

IIRC, You've been getting some fairly neutral toned, forthright replies to your questions.

I do notice though that for some reason you have not replied in kind. Why is that?

Though I've not been on the receiving end yet, you'd be amazed(or, perhaps not) at the e-mails I've gotten in the short time I've been on this forum warning me of your rather petulant and peckish nature and waspish tongue. Not that it matters to me.

Well, perhaps we'll get a look at your sunny side or maybe you'll just take your Motrin and behave in a civilized manner.

Perhaps like a mother hen you feel some obligatory agonistic behaviorial response is either necessary or warranted on your part? Works for me.

By the way, are you familiar with Shakespeare's play "The Taming of the Shrew"?

May the force be with you.

Beam me up Mr. Scott

Mr. Sulu, I need warp speed, now.

Engage!


Paul

[Auventera Two]

Many posters welcome both Rick and Paul to the boards. :)

Perhaps I might be one of those many if they would show a genuine care for owners and their horses and shed the holier than thou, self righteous tone. What's that oldie but goodie say - People don't care how much you know unless they know how much you care. ;)

[caballus]

By definition, a pathological foot does not have uniform sole thickness. So, use it on all the already healthy feet you work on.


Would you expound on that, Tree? What pathology(ies) and why?

Thx.

[Kaydence]

I spoke for myself and the others who have also commented to me on how nice it is to see them here. :) I certainly didn't think I'd be speaking for you.

Speak for yourself.

[goeslikestink]

well i for one have found this thread to be interesting how much one has found out by a debate-- of lets say two people --

opnions and views

for me there is no way that reading this thread that i owuld let the op go anywhere near a horse-- even if i was a proffessional idont think so--

the horse foot is one of themost completcated things on the body
has so many parts to that foot -- theres no way that i would play god
with ahorses foot -- without being a proffessional - ie vet or farrier--

in most superfisual injuies yes i have had about one picked sole and 2cuts from a flint on two different horses and 2 bruise soles from flints outsides and thats it - i pay good money for a farrier to make a good job and look after my horses feet well and not to be lame -- and in all my years of horses said farriers have done what i paid them to do -- and i can honestly say that not once has my horses been lame from bad shoeing or trimming of the feet from a qualified farier-- and i have had more horses than hot dinners--
and a horse or pony with lamintus can be managed as i have had one old ted was lamy shettie - but with
good husbandary -- good diet-- and a good farrier couple with a good vet-
can live a good life ---
what ever you give your horse to eat will show up inits feet--
not all horses can go barefoot --

and will say to that a mustang trim -- tell me how does one get that if the mustangs are wild --

the difference between - barefoot to the mustang which to me cannot be ever the same - as those horses are wild --ours are used
wether they be companiion horses or working ones or babies - our horses are domesticated and are used-- so the foot is not going to ever be the same as a wild horse---
becuase we use them---
natural is wild --- out in the wild to be wild -- ours are used --wear and tear on that foot becuase we use the horses/ponies in all disaplines--

to me its even stevens -- but also to me i prefer a good qualified farrier to a barefoot trimmer--- as afarrier has been tuaght by that proffesion to do both
and if a horse needs extra care then couple with another professional the vet
that horse will have the best attention-- that what i pay for -- the best one can give --is the care of that horse--by yourselves the vet and farrier--

[goeslikestink]

remeber to that mustangs have preditors-- like th cougar the wolf-- you have animals that pray on wild animals ie mustangs so a lame or sick horse/pony/foal
might not be seen -- they wild --so wild is natural aand not used---

the foot of the horse is in the care of us the people becuase we use them

[Tree]

Would you expound on that, Tree? What pathology(ies) and why?

Thx.

Thanks for asking.

For me, I can think of instances where rotations have pinched off the blood supply at the coffin bone tip so that the sole beneath it stops growing, becomes thinner and eventually allows for sole penetration.

Then there is high heel situations which would overload the toe causing undo wear to the toe walls. Once the walls are worn down level with the toe sole then it too is subject to excessive wear so this would be a case of sole becoming thinned due to excess wear from the outside.

Another thing with high heels is that the sole nearest the heels becomes thicker. So with the excessive wear going on in the toe sole and excess in the caudal areas, the sole thickness becomes uneven.

Then there are the cases where overgrown bar horn has restricted blood supply to the sole. This depends on how much excess thickness forms and what sort of footing the horse lives on. If the ground is soft enough, the laid over bar horn will not interfere with blood flow as much as it would should the footing be harder and unyeilding. With the thick areas of sole/bar unable to flex the corium in those areas will be pinched. When the sole loses its blood supply, growth is slowed and leads to thinning.

Another form of pathology would be those platter-like flat hooves which just drop soles on the ground so more areas of sole corium are pinched. People are always mentioning horses, mainly TB's, having thin soles and flat feet, looking for ways to help them stay sound.

Tree

[Tree]

and will say to that a mustang trim -- tell me how does one get that if the mustangs are wild --

They might get the domestic horses hooves to LOOK like wild horses but if you were to dissect and compare the wild horse hooves (abrasive terrain) to a wild TRIMMED domestic horses hooves, there would be some BIG DIFFERENCES beneath the exterior.

the difference between - barefoot to the mustang which to me cannot be ever the same - as those horses are wild --ours are used wether they be companiion horses or working ones or babies - our horses are domesticated and are used-- so the foot is not going to ever be the same as a wild horse---becuase we use them---

That's not quite true when it comes down to acual 'use'. If a domestic horse's living arrangements include more time in a stall and limited turnout and then daily riding, the amount of miles a wild horses hooves would have would be considerably more unless it were captured and penned in a limited area of space.

Movement is a very important thing to a horse's metabolism due to blood circulation. The hooves aid in moving the blood. An idle horse's heart has to work harder to move blood without the aid of the hooves. The idle horse, stalled, then asked to perform under saddle goes from one extreme to the other. Hopefully the feet are able to function well enough to make a difference or blood circulation is still a concern.

Domestics carry a rider's weight. Wild mares will be carrying foals but of course the domestic horses will be coping with more extreme changes while the wild horse's will be gradual (wgt gain) up until they give birth (dramatic wgt loss).

natural is wild --- out in the wild to be wild -- ours are used --wear and tear on that foot becuase we use the horses/ponies in all disaplines--

With domestics, lifestyle factors in to how well their hooves hold up in addition to what sorts of footing they spend their time on. Soft footing creates soft hooves. Hard footing hardens feet. More time out aids in blood circulation which helps the metabolism. Good metabolism supports good health and the immune system. It goes on and on.

In the wild, these horses don't have their meals delivered at certain intervals everyday. They have to move from place to place to find enough to eat. Depending on what sort of footing their habitats provide will determine how much wear their feet receive. Since they have bare hooves they have direct contact with the ground. Shod domestics would not. The shoes would wear as their growth goes untouched until their hooves are tended to. Barefooted domestics would have direct ground contact but again, how well they do would depend on the horse's living arrangements.

So the basic exception between wild and domestics would be carrying a rider's weight. However what a wild horse's feet are subject to would probably exceed that of a domestics feet. The wild hooves would likely have more mileage on them. If their hooves get daily wear their hoof form would not become excessive. Excess horn inhibits function. Abrasive terrain wild horse hooves are often times to model used in barefoot trimming. However, they would be the BETTER model when compared to soft terrain wild horse hooves. Soft terrain hooves aren't as "pretty" and "neat" but ragged, flared, chipping...sort of like certain domestic horse hooves that don't get enough attention but still manage to self-trim.

to me its even stevens -- but also to me i prefer a good qualified farrier to a barefoot trimmer--- as afarrier has been tuaght by that proffesion to do both
and if a horse needs extra care then couple with another professional the vet
that horse will have the best attention-- that what i pay for -- the best one can give --is the care of that horse--by yourselves the vet and farrier--

The way I look at this is, Farriers are doing only what they've been taught. I don't happen to agree with maintaining coffin bones at a tilt given the physical aspects of what that does to alter the distribution of forces coming to bear on the coffin bone/hoof capsule. It also concerns me when unnatural hoof formations are accepted as being perfectly normal. It also bothers me how little the hooves are studied in Veterinary training and in some Farrier courses. Again, I think this is a difference between the USA and what the UK requires.

I no longer believe more money buys the best of medical services or farriery services. "You get what you pay for" leaves something out. It implies that if you buy cheap, you will get less than the ideal. For consumer products, maybe! For services? It depends, IMO.

Tree

[caballus]

For anyone interested in reading Michael Savoldi's article on Uniform Sole Thickness, you can find it here:
http://www.naturalhorsetrim.com/Michael_Savoldi_uniform_sole_thickness.pdf
Excellent, informative article w/great illustrations.

(That laminae is in some pretty rough shape!)

[goeslikestink]

i just knew you couldnt resist tree--- wild horses dont have weight on there backs do they--- and they are used not by the weight on there back alone but by the weight they pull-- doh

as for my money i dont spend cheap money on a farrier -- i expect a job job for the money i pay our farrier as registered proffessionals of up to six years training the same as a vet -- i said
that you can not pass the final exam as you havent done the course--

sorry but no -- my farriers are fully trianed -- and have letters after there name to prove it and are the fellowship of farriers asscociation-- they are not its sisbybitzy people--- they are fully trained people--- i am not sop donty play god to my horses feet --- i have had over 5000 horses past thorugh my hands and not one was a bad farrier job-- afrrier is a license person who can do both barefoot and shoe --period

[Tree]

remeber to that mustangs have preditors-- like th cougar the wolf-- you have animals that pray on wild animals ie mustangs so a lame or sick horse/pony/foal
might not be seen -- they wild --so wild is natural aand not used---

Yes, this is quite true. However, domestic horses have their "predators" as well. They may not be in the same as the wild horses...wild creatures...but more along the lines of the negative affects of captivity such as confinement hazards (fencing materials, trappy situations), metabolic disturbances (atomospheric conditions in barns/air quality, limited movement, over feeding, bad feed stuffs, limted access to water), daily exposure to chemicals (wormers, fly sprays, barn spray systems, etc.) and other forms of stress. I also think of the situations where horses are killed with kindness. There can be some rather distorted ideas surrounding horsekeeping.

In the wilds, the smartest and fittest survive. Wild horses learn quickly that there is safety in numbers and to be alone can mean death.

All horses are exposed to the "Acts of God" too like lightning, high winds causing trees to fall, fire, flood...that sort of stuff. And there are the accidental deaths also due to catastrophic events...falls, freak accidents, etc.
With the wild horses, if they can't keep up with the herd, they probably won't survive. With domestics, depending on how much the owners are willing to support, they can be saved even if not brought back to 100%. Barbaro is still on my mind. He has a steep hill to climb right now.

the foot of the horse is in the care of us the people becuase we use them

I say that whatever the living conditions I have don't provide towards the natural needs of my horse's hooves (because they're all kept barefoot), I have to see to. If I used them more, their feet would be closer to self-maintaining with the added wear.

Tree

[Tree]

i just knew you couldnt resist tree--- wild horses dont have weight on there backs do they--- and they are used not by the weight on there back alone but by the weight they pull-- doh

Excuse me if I happen to LOVE talking about horses, GLS! If we were sitting face to face, enjoying tea or what have you, the mood would be so much more pleasant.

Tree

[goeslikestink]

hahaha tree-- you so righteous sometimes just becuase i use a farrier that does both--- hahaha

[goeslikestink]

i love a good debate with you - tree haha

[PaulBunyon]

Perhaps I might be one of those many if they would show a genuine care for owners and their horses and shed the holier than thou, self righteous tone. What's that oldie but goodie say - People don't care how much you know unless they know how much you care. ;)
The oldies but goodies that I prefer are "You can't always get what you want";
"Hot Rod Lincoln"("they arrested me and put me in jail so I called my pappy to throw my bail......");a cult favorite "Get your tongue out of my mouth I'm kissing you goodbye" ; 2 From CWmusic, " Thank God and Greyhound you're gone" and "(I've got friends in)Low Places"; "YMCA"(the national anthem of the Gay Nation), and last but not least, "I Will Survive!"

Paul

[Tree]

i love a good debate with you - tree haha

The sorts of debates I enjoy don't get personal but stick to the subject.

Tree

[Auventera Two]

i just knew you couldnt resist tree--- wild horses dont have weight on there backs do they--- and they are used not by the weight on there back alone but by the weight they pull-- doh

This isn't totally true. Every year, most wild mares carry a foal which adds a considerable amount of weight to her overall structure. This weight can be in excess of 250 pounds, of which the average rider is not that heavy. Even while carrying this weight, the mare manages to keep traveling her 20 or 30 miles a day in search of food and water.

And yes, I do agree that some of the sports humans demand of horses may require that they wear shoes. This is to get the desired result that humans are seeking. i.e., a longer slide on a reiner, a higher jump on a jumper, etc. (And my personal slant on this is that if my sport of choice demands shoes, I would probably rethink my sport of choice. But that is my personal choice and not one that I necessarily think would be right for other people.)

But simply adding weight to the horse's back and normal, everyday pleasure riding does not mandate that the horse need shoes. If the horse is maintained and conditioned properly, with a properly balanced trim, he would be able to be pleasure ridden barefoot. And heck, I've even read 50 or more testimonials of barefoot endurance horse owners.

sorry but no -- my farriers are fully trianed -- and have letters after there name to prove it and are the fellowship of farriers asscociation-- they are not its sisbybitzy people--- they are fully trained people--- i am not sop donty play god to my horses feet ---

I've told it 100 times here but some of the WORST hack jobs I've ever seen were suffered at the hands of certified farriers with letters behind their names ;) Certainly not all farriers are hacks. But you can't get all your security in the designations behind the name. I had a mare whose feet were absolutely scalped by a certified farrier who did corrective shoeing and was in very high demand with all the show people and vets. My mare was laid up for an entire year, she suffered absesses and took to lying down in her stall many hours each day because her feet hurt so badly. The vet said he'd never seen a horse's feet cut that short before in his whole career. So what the heck happened??? We'll never know. There is good and bad in every career. There are good trimmers and bad trimmers, and good farriers and bad farriers.

Contrarily, when I lived in the south, the guy that shod my horse was basically a nobody who learned the trade from his dad, and never attended farrier school. He charged me $20 for 4 shoes, and that is absolutely no lie. The horse was sound and had great looking feet and the shoes stayed on for a whole 6 weeks. In 6 years of owning that horse, he was shod probably half of that time and he never missed a day of work due to being sore, and only one time did he lose a shoe and that was due to an accident of a hoof sliding under a steel gate.


i have had over 5000 horses past thorugh my hands and not one was a bad farrier job-- afrrier is a license person who can do both barefoot and shoe --period

Do you work in the horse industry to have that much exposure to that many horses?

[Need4speed]

-- but also to me i prefer a good qualified farrier to a barefoot trimmer--- as afarrier has been tuaght by that proffesion to do both that horse will have the best attention-- that what i pay for -- the best one can give --is the care of that horse--by yourselves the vet and farrier--

I have to respectfully disagree with you gls. I trim my horse's feet myself. Would I rather pay someone to do it? Absolutely. It's d@mn hard work! I've done alot of research about barefoot horse trims. I agree with pretty much all of Trees posts.

I don't have the luxury of having a barefoot horse practitioner trim my horses' feet however. Why? Because unless I wanted to fly one here from another province, I'm stuck with the farriers in my area. When I asked my vet about a recommendation, he told me he couldn't recommend anyone, because none of the farriers were that good.

Every farrier here wants to trim sole (and not just the dead sole). I'm not going to risk my horses' hoof health to audition farriers. Many so called barefoot trims by farriers here is a trim to shoe, then the edges rounded off.

So, when it comes down to it, you do what you have to. Here's another quote, added to a thread that is full of more than it's fair share of quotes "If you want it done right, do it yourself." I went out and learned what I had to to do it myself.

[PaulBunyon]

There can be some rather distorted ideas surrounding horsekeeping.
Not to mention, hoofcare.
In the wilds, the smartest and fittest survive.
Which in a way, goes towards explaining why the feral hoof model is not necessarily either accurate or correct when dealing with the modern, domestic Human whim designer-created equine.
All horses are exposed to the "Acts of God" too like lightning, high winds causing trees to fall, fire, flood...that sort of stuff. And there are the accidental deaths also due to catastrophic events...falls, freak accidents, etc.
With the wild horses, if they can't keep up with the herd, they probably won't survive. With domestics, depending on how much the owners are willing to support, they can be saved even if not brought back to 100%. Barbaro is still on my mind. He has a steep hill to climb right now.
So its not all about hoofcare? Who knew?
I say that whatever the living conditions I have don't provide towards the natural needs of my horse's hooves (because they're all kept barefoot), I have to see to.
So if the living conditions you provide don't have cougars, wolves, coyotes, chuck holes, scarce water, random breeding(the genetic component) routine scarcity and quality of food stuffs, you provide it? And, each of the aforementioned things can be shown to directly affect the natural needs of your horse's hooves.
If I used them more, their feet would be closer to self-maintaining with the added wear.
Or would be so worn that they couldn't keep up with the herd and would be at greater risk to whatever nature might offer, right?
They might get the domestic horses hooves to LOOK like wild horses but if you were to dissect and compare the wild horse hooves (abrasive terrain) to a wild TRIMMED domestic horses hooves, there would be some BIG DIFFERENCES beneath the exterior.
So why are you using the feral horse hoof as your paradigm? And how about those ferals of the Eastern Seaboard? Does the same hold true for them?
Which environment would you say most compares to the environment in which the majority of domestic horses in the US is found? The arid high plains or the softer and wetter grass prairies found East of the Mississippi river?
Movement is a very important thing to a horse's metabolism due to blood circulation. The hooves aid in moving the blood. An idle horse's heart has to work harder to move blood without the aid of the hooves. The idle horse, stalled, then asked to perform under saddle goes from one extreme to the other. Hopefully the feet are able to function well enough to make a difference or blood circulation is still a concern.
Does this not generally apply to most living organisms?
With domestics, lifestyle factors in to how well their hooves hold up in addition to what sorts of footing they spend their time on. Soft footing creates soft hooves. Hard footing hardens feet.
If this is so, then why do horses living in the soft footing of desert sand have hard feet, as do many horses of the Chincoteague area? Not to mention the horses of many European countries who are living in neither arid nor hard surface terrains yet routinely have hard, solid feet? Also, how does this account for the domestics who spend much of their time stall bound and have hard feet? Perhaps there are other factors at play which you have failed to account for? Could tissue dessication be a factor or is that only related to brittleness rather than hardness?
So the basic exception between wild and domestics would be carrying a rider's weight.
Actually that is incorrect. There are many differences between the designer selected domestic horse and the more or less naturally selected feral horse. You have touched, unwittingly or not, on those many differences in this and other replies you have made.
The way I look at this is, Farriers are doing only what they've been taught.
To the contrary. While what a farrier is taught helps form the foundation for his/her knowledge, it is just that, a foundation. From that point on, how a farrier builds and maintains his/her house of knowledge, skill and ability, is a function of the individual. Some are content with a grade school level of knowledge. Others continue on to a post-doctoral level.
And the same is true of those of the barefoot-only trimming persuasion. Sadly, it is apparent that most of these individuals are content with a 1st grade education, intellectual and physical.
I don't happen to agree with maintaining coffin bones at a tilt given the physical aspects of what that does to alter the distribution of forces coming to bear on the coffin bone/hoof capsule.
You need to take up your disagreement with either Mother Nature or God(if you are a believer) because the fact remains that while coffin bones with a zero palmer angle are found in nature, they are the exception. The caudally eleved spatial orientation of the coffin bone is the norm, regardless of whether the animal is feral or domestic. And, given that you are in disaccord with physical laws which last time I checked are not subject to personal likes or dislikes, your contentions regarding how the forces coming to bear on the hoof, both from above and below, are distributed, are erroneous.
It also bothers me how little the hooves are studied in Veterinary training and in some Farrier courses.
It bothers most people when the truth be known. And lets not leave "many Barefoot trim courses" out of your sentence. Especially when much of what is being taught in those courses could well be considered quite suspect.
I no longer believe more money buys the best of medical services or farriery services. "You get what you pay for" leaves something out. It implies that if you buy cheap, you will get less than the ideal. For consumer products, maybe! For services? It depends, IMO.
One should never confuse "belief" with fact.
The reality is that nine times out of ten, one does "get exactly what one pays for." And actually, what it implies is that there is a difference between "Cheap" and 'Inexpensive". And when one buys "cheap", one gets cheap(as in, inferior).
If one is able to buy quality at an inexpensive price, then one has gotten a bargain. For example sometimes, the advise given and received here is cheap(inferior)and you got what you paid (nothing)for. Other times, the advise given here is great(above average-superior quality). You got it inexpensively(for free) therefore it is a bargain. No one ever tells anyone they got a bargain when the product whether it be intellectual or physical, is cheap because in reality, that product is or will turn out to be quite expensive. But everyone finds out about the quality product that was obtained inexpensively. Right?

The adage "The bitter taste of poor quality lingers long after the sweet flavor of low price has dissolved" applies here.

[Ghazzu]

Perhaps I might be one of those many if they would show a genuine care for owners and their horses and shed the holier than thou, self righteous tone. What's that oldie but goodie say - People don't care how much you know unless they know how much you care. ;)

"Nice" as a priority isn't at the top of my list for many services.
If I had to choose between a pleasant but average surgeon and the best damned knife in the East with the bedside manner of a dragon for my horse, I'd go for the SOB.
Likewise for a farier.
I'll take an ornery cuss who is *good* over a nice average.

Sure, it's wonderful to have both in the same package (and I do have a farrier of that sort presently), but technical skill trumps social grace every time for certain things. And my horses' feet are one of those.

[PaulBunyon]

So, when it comes down to it, you do what you have to. Here's another quote, added to a thread that is full of more than it's fair share of quotes "If you want it done right, do it yourself." I went out and learned what I had to to do it myself.
Would you say that that applies to anesthesia; heart surgery; dentistry; invitrio fertilization; skilled carpentry, plumbing, electronics, auto repair, desiel engine repair; ad naseum?


Paul

[PaulBunyon]

But simply adding weight to the horse's back and normal, everyday pleasure riding does not mandate that the horse need shoes.
Nor does it mandate that s/he doesn't.
If the horse is maintained and conditioned properly, with a properly balanced trim, he would be able to be pleasure ridden barefoot.
You say this as though it is an absolute, which it isn't. The only thing absolute here is that "It Depends"
And heck, I've even read 50 or more testimonials of barefoot endurance horse owners.
Did you read the part where they talk about using boots?
Did you read the part where one of the pre-eminent endurance riders who is a strong propenent of barefoot, has said , on numerous occasions, that she shoes horses for certain endurance rides?
Besides, testimonials are like anecdotes. Neither is the plural of, data.

Human nature being what it is, which are you going to believe, the testimonials about something with which you already agree or are in favor of, or testimonials that run counter to that?
I had a mare whose feet were absolutely scalped by a certified farrier who did corrective shoeing and was in very high demand with all the show people and vets. My mare was laid up for an entire year, she suffered absesses and took to lying down in her stall many hours each day because her feet hurt so badly.
A full year? Yikes! What was the after care like? I too have seen some pretty severe trims that lead to lameness et al, but absent other pathology, all were successfully resolved in very short order.
The vet said he'd never seen a horse's feet cut that short before in his whole career.
Were the feet copiously bleeding after the trims? Even if all the sole had been excised, correct veterinary intervention and veterinary/farrier follow up, should have been able to deal with the situation. Lets explore some of the whys.
First, veterinary intervention should have included appropriate bandaging and pain remediation. Just what might occur in the case of a "Street nail procedure". Next, a remedial protocol by the farrier should have been undertaken. said protocol might have included the artificial lengthening of the walls through the use of methyl-methacrylates or slected Urethane products, and the the addition of some form of support, with the goal of load sharing between the reconstructed walls and the frog, depending of course on what the actual determination of what needed to be done.
Third, the hoof wall grows at a rate of approximately 1/4-3/8 inch/month. that being the case, within a few months, enough hoof wall should have grown down to again begin to do its job(s) properly. While the sole does grow more slowly, it too should have been able to regenerate sufficiently to allow for a return of health.

What was the cause of the abscesses and did they occur in all affected feet?

Why were the services of a farrier who specialized in 'corrective' farriery employed in the first place? Had this farrier ever provided services to you before? If so, what were the results? If not, why not? As a percentage of the whole, how many others had the same experience as you?
So what the heck happened??? We'll never know. There is good and bad in every career. There are good trimmers and bad trimmers, and good farriers and bad farriers.
And even the good ones occasionally have a bad day.
Contrarily, when I lived in the south, the guy that shod my horse was basically a nobody who learned the trade from his dad, and never attended farrier school. He charged me $20 for 4 shoes, and that is absolutely no lie. The horse was sound and had great looking feet and the shoes stayed on for a whole 6 weeks. In 6 years of owning that horse, he was shod probably half of that time and he never missed a day of work due to being sore, and only one time did he lose a shoe and that was due to an accident of a hoof sliding under a steel gate.
Apples to road apples.

We'll never know how the horse in question would have fared with this other farrier, nor is it either fair or appropriate to compare the two farriers. Unless of course they both worked on the same horse and had the same problems or lack there of, to contend with.

Me thinks the lady doth protest too much.

Paul

[Need4speed]

Would you say that that applies to anesthesia; heart surgery; dentistry; invitrio fertilization; skilled carpentry, plumbing, electronics, auto repair, desiel engine repair; ad naseum?


Paul

Some of your statements are so absurd, that to dignify them with an answer would simply be a waste of my time.

[Auventera Two]

Did you read the part where they talk about using boots?
Did you read the part where one of the pre-eminent endurance riders who is a strong propenent of barefoot, has said , on numerous occasions, that she shoes horses for certain endurance rides?
Yes, absolutely. But I guarantee you that I would MUCH prefer my horse to wear a pair of hoof boots which can be removed at the end of the day than a set of steel shoes which cannot. No use debating ad nauseum. I have my reasons, and they are vast and varied. I use hoof boots when an if necessary, and absolutely adore them.

I ride my mare several times a week on varied terrain, including gravel, barefoot. However, when I entered a 5 mile horse race I used Old Mac boots because we covered most of the race on large, sharp rocks at a fast trot or canter, which had the potential to be damaging. As it was, two horses finished dead lame and bleeding. One of those horses was shod, one was totally barefoot.

Now, why would it make sense for me to nail 4 shoes and pads to my horse's feet for this race which lasted 30 minutes? At the end of the race I simply pulled the boots, and she went right back to the benefits of being barefoot. She suffered no bruising from being barefoot traveling at a fast rate of speed over sharp rocks larger than my hand. She got the benefits of a strong, rubber traction sole. Other horses were sliding on the rocks and the asphalt. My mare just went right over them with never a slip one. After the race there are no nail holes through the white line and hoof wall, no weaking of the hoof capsule due to nailing on shoes, etc. Just pull the boots off and there you go! ;)

People get into trouble when they think it has to be all or nothing. Barefoot doesn't mean NOT using protection if the footing warrants it. Horse owners are not always capable of providing a 100% "natural" environment for their horses. Instead they might stand in a muddy paddock which softens the soles, or they might eat too much alfalfa because that's the only thing available to the horse owner, etc.

But the answer to these less than perfect conditions is NOT necessarily - nail on shoes. The answer can be to leave the horse barefoot and use hoof boots if and when necessary. This way the horse gets the benefit of a barefoot lifestyle, and also the benefit of protection in less than steller riding situations.

I talked to my farrier about the Old Macs and he said he thought they were great. He nodded his head and said something like, yep, use them if you need to. I don't see any reason to put shoes on a horse if you don't absolutely have to.

A full year? Yikes! What was the after care like? I too have seen some pretty severe trims that lead to lameness et al, but absent other pathology, all were successfully resolved in very short order.

Were the feet copiously bleeding after the trims? Even if all the sole had been excised, correct veterinary intervention and veterinary/farrier follow up, should have been able to deal with the situation. Lets explore some of the whys.
First, veterinary intervention should have included appropriate bandaging and pain remediation. Just what might occur in the case of a "Street nail procedure". Next, a remedial protocol by the farrier should have been undertaken. said protocol might have included the artificial lengthening of the walls through the use of methyl-methacrylates or slected Urethane products, and the the addition of some form of support, with the goal of load sharing between the reconstructed walls and the frog, depending of course on what the actual determination of what needed to be done.
Third, the hoof wall grows at a rate of approximately 1/4-3/8 inch/month. that being the case, within a few months, enough hoof wall should have grown down to again begin to do its job(s) properly. While the sole does grow more slowly, it too should have been able to regenerate sufficiently to allow for a return of health.

What was the cause of the abscesses and did they occur in all affected feet?

Why were the services of a farrier who specialized in 'corrective' farriery employed in the first place? Had this farrier ever provided services to you before? If so, what were the results? If not, why not? As a percentage of the whole, how many others had the same experience as you?



Veterinary care DID include bandaging. You have no idea how much money was spent on bandaging, pain medication, and follow up vet visits. No, the feet were not bleeding. And nor do they have to be for extreme discomfort to be present. (you should know this??) Anyway, there wasn't enough foot to nail a shoe to. This was before the popular age of horse boots. At that time there was pretty much the old fashioned EasyBoot available and the vet said he didn't particularly care for them because that aligator clamp in the front digs into the hoof wall and damages it. Instead we kept her wrapped in baby diapers, foam pads, vetwrap, etc.

As you well know, MOVEMENT is necessary for circulation, which is necessary for growth. For a long time, the mare could barely hobble a few feet at a time. Putting her outside did no good because she stood in the middle of her paddock with a hay pile and never moved. She wouldn't even go for water. We kept in a deeply bedded stall with water buckets hanging on all sides so she only had to go 2 or 3 steps to the water.

It was many months before this mare grew much foot, and our new farrier commented on the extreme thinness of the sole. As soon as he was capable, he put 4 shoes plus pads on, but she was lame for months even after this. Her feet contracted, the frogs shrunk. It was just a mess all the way around, and I really can't tell you "exactly" what was going on, but she was 100% fine before that bad trim. It was a full year before the mare could go back into training.

This farrier was our "regular" farrier for about 5 years or more prior to this incident. He always did an okay job but the horses were often tender footed after trims. We used a corrective farrier because this same mare bowed 2 tendons back to back an the vet at the time thought it was hoof balance related. This was several years prior to the scalping incident.

After the incident the farrier was unwilling to return calls, unwilling to talk about the situation, and subsequently never returned to our farm that I can remember.

Absessing was caused by bruisining from a very thin sole, and 100% of the weight of the horse being on that thin sole. No, I don't think the absesses occured in all 4 feet, though I can't remember if it was only 2 or possibly 3 feet. I know it was more than one.

I don't know how many others had an incident like this because I don't commonly call people up asking if they are happy with their farrier. He came highly recommended to us and though the horses were always sore after a trim, we thought this was "normal." Shortly after this incident, this farrier kind of dropped off the radar and dumped a lot of his clients. We heard that he moved pretty far away and only came back to shoe a few particularly difficult cases, but I really have no idea.

Having said all this - I don't believe all farriers are bad! Not at all! But like I was only pointing out - more money doesn't always yield better results, and letters behind a person's name doesn't mean they can't royally screw up. And yes, ditto for people with no letters behind their name too. But I think its incorrect to say that ONLY certified farriers with letters behind their name can correctly trim horses. I just don't believe that at all.

[barney4liz]

i have had over 5000 horses past thorugh my hands and not one was a bad farrier job-- afrrier is a license person who can do both barefoot and shoe --period

:rolleyes:

Perhaps you just didn't know a bad job from a good one?

[barney4liz]

'pologies for being snarky, but that just struck me as silly. Even good farriers screw up sometimes, and the good ones will admit it.

[PaulBunyon]

Having said all this - I don't believe all farriers are bad! Not at all! But like I was only pointing out - more money doesn't always yield better results, and letters behind a person's name doesn't mean they can't royally screw up. And yes, ditto for people with no letters behind their name too. But I think its incorrect to say that ONLY certified farriers with letters behind their name can correctly trim horses. I just don't believe that at all.
Interestingly enough, I am in complete agreement.

And, thank you for the very detailed reply.

Rarely if ever have I been in a situatlon where I could not fnd a way to ammend an orthotic to a hoof. But that's just me. I don't know if you have heard of or seen "The Styrofoam Protocol", so if you haven't, you can find it, along with lots of other interesting and good information, at www.hopeforsoundness.com. Its in either the 'downloads' section or the 'tech support section'. Its one of those true bargins I was talking about---quality information, downloadable for free.:)

[goeslikestink]

it becuase they are over here they cant work with out a license and proof that they are what they say they are--like vets doc etc

me i would rather have a shoe on than a boot anyday i havent seen any one in uk ride with boots on there horses feet ever ---

chocie my choice my farrier is reasonable priced un like some --

[Auventera Two]

me i would rather have a shoe on than a boot anyday i havent seen any one in uk ride with boots on there horses feet ever ---

Your choice is definitely your own, and I respect it as such. I'm just curious if you don't try boots BECAUSE no one else does, or if there are other reasons. I too admit that at the race, several people looked at me crazy and a couple even asked - "What is on her feet?" because they'd never seen them. But I didn't much care. I knew it was the best thing for my horse. Otherwise I ride alone or with a couple of good friends so I don't have much exposure to other people. I'm not sure how many people out there are using boots.

I suppose I don't mind being the odd one out so it doesn't bother me if people stare or question. I used it as an opportunity to tell those few people about the boots and their benefits. But I do understand and respect the fact that many people might prefer steel shoes for various reasons.

[luvmytbs]

me i would rather have a shoe on than a boot anyday i havent seen any one in uk ride with boots on there horses feet ever ---



So how can you judge something you have never tried?

Me, now a barefooter, had my horses shod for years. So we tried shoes. When the option (new fad, LOL) of barefoot came about, we tried barefoot (six years) ago. My hoses don't need shoes and now have much healthier feet. And I have used different brands of boots, when a horse needed temp support for the hoof. Works great.

So please note, if you condemn something you have never tried, your opinion isn't relevant to folks who have actually tried and made decisions based on their experiences.

[goeslikestink]

no need to try as horses and ponies are sound why undo something thats right and works -- as for not knowing a bad foot form another yes i do hence why i am well respect wth vets and farriers not just in my area--i have seen bad feet -- thanks--

it still comes down to choice -- i have barefooters and shod horses-- i just dont have a trimmer-- why pay for one to one job when one can do two--
its like my trianer he does all with what i want to do why pay fro three wehn i can pay for one-- choice -- it not righteous - it chioce

how we do things with our horses is our own choice but sometimes that choice
we have to complyment it by another profession ie vets- etc
to give the best care for that said horse in question--

everybody beilives in what they know or believe in ---
and from this debate much more has been learnt as you extending the minds of information-- given what could be or not--

theres always going to be a fore and against on this subject

and people have a right to choose there opnions or views to be heard
but one cannot say one is better than the other either can they-- as barefoot is good sometimes and so is shoeing-- and yes a good farrier will tell you if they have done a cock up--

[Auventera Two]

no need to try as horses and ponies are sound why undo something thats right and works -- as for not knowing a bad foot form another yes i do hence why i am well respect wth vets and farriers not just in my area--i have seen bad feet -- thanks--

You're right, it is your choice, and I respect that. I do however, certainly hope that you never speak negatively or criticize boots until you have tried them and given them a fair shot. I have had various horses in shoes all throughout my life, and know that after trying boots, I will never go back to horseshoes if there is anyway I can avoid it. But at least I did try. You've spoken several times about being well respected by vets and farriers, gls. I'm just curious if you work in the horse community in some capacity. No real reason, just curious.

[goeslikestink]

i did -- do abit now and again but not like i did

[Tree]

I got a pair of Boa boots for my 28yo QH gelding in lew of front shoes when he would go off to work at a local summer camp for 10 weeks. His past was as a shod horse getting his first set at age 4. Atleast his hooves were of a good size by that age. But shortly thereafter we sold him and he became a show horse for 6 years and had his feet cared for by a farrier who was notorious for allowing toes to become long and low which caused the heels to become weak and underrun. From birth to age 4 his feet were not like that having front toe angles of close to 50 degrees and hinds at around 55.

At any rate, his hooves changed and at age 10 we had the opportunity to get him back. This was before I started doing hoof work so my farrier did his best to get his heels at better angles and bring his toes back where they belonged using heel wedges for a couple of shoeings before pulling the shoes and leaving him with a pasture trim. Oh yeah, the previous farrier would get feet into this condition as a way to lengthen his stride. With the front hooves breaking over so late he would strike the bulbs with the hind toes and purposely shorten up to avoid doing it again.

At any rate, during the time his toes were so long his WL's stretched and his coffin bones morphed in all 4 hooves. So now it's a constant effort to keep his breakovers back and heels where they belong to support the boney column. He lacks concavity because of the coffin bone changes so his soles come closer to the ground. He's good on grass and loose dirt that isn't really deep but ouchy on gravel and firm uneven footing. So since he only needs temporary protection on surfaces they would ride him on I finally opted for boots vs tolerating shoes and more hoof changes for 10 weeks. Even with the shoes being reset at 5 weeks, his growth just slid forward again and he'd be tripping at the beginning of the 4th week. With the booting arrangement, I do his hoof work and he's been fine with 6 week intervals. His feet can wear some when not booted.

Tree

[pawsplus]

From Dr. Doug Butlers Principles of Horseshoeing III:
Chapter 41, Page 603:
"The Sole is not designed to bear weight. It protects the coffin bone, and it's cupped shape helps with traction in soft ground. The sole grows down at the same rate as the wall but normally becomes disorganized and flakes away, or exfoliate, when it reaches a thickness of about one-fourth inch."

Well, yes, this is what conventional farriers do say (in order to justify the use of shoes!). But in fact, the sole is weight-bearing at the sides of the hoof (quarters), just a cm or so in. When the hoof bears weight, the hoof flexes (or SHOULD, if it's allowed to do so!), allowing the part of the sole adjacent to the wall (which is just a teeny bit higher than the sole) to come into contact w/ the ground. And the toe callus is very MUCH weight-bearing.

Much research done on this by Ovnichek, Jackson, etc.

[Lookout]

Well, yes, this is what conventional farriers do say (in order to justify the use of shoes!).
No they don't. They don't need to make up anatomy to make up reasons for shoeing.

But in fact, the sole is weight-bearing at the sides of the hoof (quarters), just a cm or so in.
Please provide the references where they've rewritten the anatomy books.


When the hoof bears weight, the hoof flexes (or SHOULD, if it's allowed to do so!), allowing the part of the sole adjacent to the wall (which is just a teeny bit higher than the sole) to come into contact w/ the ground.
Flexing is immaterial to whether it's weightbearing, and "contact" does not equate with weightbearing.

[cyberbay]

Sad that this thread took a turn for the worse. All the posters were being civilized and taking the time to understand everyone else's comments. I think it was the poster 'PaulBunyon' who took on a pointlessly confrontational tone with Tree and that made the thread unpleasant to read from that point on.

As a rider who has a horse going barefoot to help him with navicular, I've seen a lot of good that barefoot can do. But, there is a lot of confusion out there over how the hoof should appear, how it should be trimmed, when shoes are called for, etc. When threads like this turn into unnecessary boxing matches, no one is being served. I was learning a lot about b'foot in what was, for at least a little while, a very coherent discussion.

If anyone civilized, like Tree, would like to answer, the farrier who trims my barefoot horse often takes a 'notch' out of the quarters of his front hooves. Does this serve a purpose? I've also noticed that when the ground is hard and dry (but not bone-splitting hard and dry) this horse's hooves wear quite nicely -- I've asked the b. manager more than once, "What do I owe you for the trim?" thinking that my horse was just trimmed by the farrier. She declines any $, b/c the horse has NOT been recently trimmed. It must be the ground doing the trimming... Not really asking anything here, just making an observation.

[Tree]

Well, yes, this is what conventional farriers do say (in order to justify the use of shoes!).

Maybe the farriers I know are unconventional because they tend to rasp the wall down level with the sole and then some (rasp more than just the outer edges of sole flat) before shoeing a hoof. Or, they didn't have Butler's book as a guide in their classes. And when these types do a pasture trim it's as though they're preparing the hoof for a shoe but just leave it bare. There is just too much sole making ground contact, in other words. Then when the horse limps or is ouchy, that's when they say shoes are needed. Dr. Butler is correct about the walls being active and soles passive on firm surfaces and there being some sole contact according to how uneven or soft/deep the footing is too. The soles do protect the structures they cover and their shape should mimick those structures too.

But in fact, the sole is weight-bearing at the sides of the hoof (quarters), just a cm or so in. When the hoof bears weight, the hoof flexes (or SHOULD, if it's allowed to do so!), allowing the part of the sole adjacent to the wall (which is just a teeny bit higher than the sole) to come into contact w/ the ground. And the toe callus is very MUCH weight-bearing.

Much research done on this by Ovnichek, Jackson, etc.

You seem to be describing the abrasive hard terrain hoof form. However, soft terrain hoof form would be different. Their walls can be much higher than the sole plane because added traction is needed. Their soles would retain dead sole until something harder came against them and knocked it out.

In Jaime Jackson's books I saw more wild hoof examples which were taken from horses living on abrasive hard terrain. If I'm not mistaken, Gene Ovnicek's research involved the same living conditions so the hooves would be similar in form to Jackson's. But how would these compare to what Butler was describing? It looks as though he was referring to hooves on SOFT ground.

Tree

[Thomas_1]

I beg to differ. That split in the central sulcus is caused by thrush. The most common reason for thrush is contracted heels which are also evident in this photo. Move the breakover back, get the heels down and increase movement on firm surfaces.

I beg to differ. The most common prime cause for thrush is poor hygiene, failure to clean the feet regularly and leaving the horse standing in dirty, moist conditions. A horse with deep clefts will be particularly susceptible. Horses with long toes and contracted heels will tend to develop deep frog clefts.

The condition is easy prevented by good hygiene and management - daily thorough cleaning of the feet and a clean dry bed. Foot shape is important, the toes should be kept short and feet properly trimmed by a good farrier.

[mbetteridge]

Well, yes, this is what conventional farriers do say (in order to justify the use of shoes!). But in fact, the sole is weight-bearing at the sides of the hoof (quarters), just a cm or so in. When the hoof bears weight, the hoof flexes (or SHOULD, if it's allowed to do so!), allowing the part of the sole adjacent to the wall (which is just a teeny bit higher than the sole) to come into contact w/ the ground. And the toe callus is very MUCH weight-bearing.

Much research done on this by Ovnichek, Jackson, etc.


It's funny that all the barefooters think that farriers believe all horses should have shoes and that we have to invent reasons to justify putting shoes on every horse. My personal belief is that if a horse has good, strong, healthy feet and can do the job he's being asked to do barefoot, then leave him barefoot. If he is having problems that shoes can help, then shoe him. I don't push my clients and demand that they shoe their horses, in fact, most of the horses I do are only trims. I only have a few that either require shoes or the owners just plain want them in shoes. My own horses at the present time are barefoot. I had them shod when I was riding all the time, but that is just my own personal preference. Now they're standing out in the pasture not being used as much, so I pulled the shoes at their last trimming. By the way, I trim all the dead, exfolliating sole off all the horses I trim and I have not had one walk off lame or become lame yet.

[Tree]

I beg to differ. The most common prime cause for thrush is poor hygiene,...

Really?


...failure to clean the feet regularly and leaving the horse standing in dirty, moist conditions.

:lol: :lol: :lol: Sorry, I had to quit laughing in order to respond.

Ok, let's examine the cleaning of the feet. My horses live outside 24/7 and the footing is comprised of dirt, sod, manure, pee, weeds...basically non-sterile in general. If I were to clean their hooves once a day and compare that to how exposed to dirt they are from there on out during a day, the dirt exposure would overwhelm the time those feet were clean. And to add to this, although I clean out the manure from their loafing sheds once daily, this still doesn't prevent them from standing in manure. Oh and add to this that when I am feeding round bales of hay the areas immediately surround them become quite contaminated with hay, pee, manure, mud and whatever else. In other words, a very dirty situation which they'll spend hours standing in because they're eating.

Do my horses have thrush or deep cracks in their frogs? No! Why is that????

A horse with deep clefts will be particularly susceptible. Horses with long toes and contracted heels will tend to develop deep frog clefts.

Now this I can agree with. Yes, horses having deep clefts will have perfect areas for bacteria to thrive. However, once the contraction issues are addressed, the frogs are no longer being pinched in to form the deep cleft and the thrush has no home to set up housekeeping in. Thrush is a symptom of contraction.

Foot shape is important, the toes should be kept short and feet properly trimmed....

Yes so how on earth did you come up with poor hygiene part? If hygiene were the cause my horses and ponies would all have deep clefts but because they have proper hoof form, their hooves are self-cleaning and not as prone to getting junk trapped in them long enough to set up thrush.

Tree

[Tree]

It's funny that all the barefooters think that farriers believe all horses should have shoes and that we have to invent reasons to justify putting shoes on every horse.

And it's funny (queer not funny ha ha), how SOME farriers will take what one person says and assume that they speak for ALL.

Tree

[mbetteridge]

And it's funny (queer not funny ha ha), how SOME farriers will take what one person says and assume that they speak for ALL.

Tree


My apologies. You are absolutley right. I know that some do not speak for all, I should not have phrased it that way. :)

[Tree]

I know that some do not speak for all, I should not have phrased it that way. :)

Say, while we're on the subject, did you read the thread entitled "Farriers vs Barefooters"?

Tree