Mrs Jingle
Well-Known Member
I really hope my question might result in some useful debate but not mayhem!
My horse had her shoes removed back in the autumn, within 6 weeks she had an abscess erupt at the coronet area on the back of her off front. She was hardly lame, and it cleared up very quickly. For various reasons she was not ridden for several months and just turned out with trims when needed, but walked out in hand about 3 times a week. But her diet has been optimum for barefoot for well over a year.
With hoof boots on she was brought back into work about 3 weeks ago, because I am very restricted on the conditions she lives in (think very wet boggy fields almost year round with little or no dry standing) she remained very sensitive on uneven hard ground. Although she had only gentle and short walks she just wasn't coping. Last week she started to brew an abscess on her back near side. This has also erupted at the coronet area on her heel. This horse has never abscessed in the 2 years I have owned her before pulling her shoes.
I have decided to have her re shod when she is completely recovered from this latest abscess. My question isn't about this decision, it is mine and it is what I feel suits my particular horse and my circumstances best.
However, what I am curious about, after doing a lot of googling, (as you do) it would seem that a lot of owners do expect that many horses transitioning to barefoot will almost certainly experience some degree of abscessing. I am also intrigued by the theory that this is because the shod hoof has been disguising some sort of underlying and rumbling infection for several years (yes years!!!) that has never made them lame, but on removal of shoes all this shocking interior hoof damage has more or less 'exploded' via an abscess as the hoof 'comes back to life'.
It has occurred to me that my own experience of abscesses over the years has only ever been in unshod horses. I have never personally experienced an abscess in a shod hoof, though I am sure it does happen.
I have a niggling feeling that somewhere we are missing some knowledge about the tendency for the abscessing to be more 'acceptable' in a barefoot horse. It doesn't sit easy with me that a horse in pain and regularly abscessing is a particularly good thing even if our intentions in trying barefoot are for the horse's long term benefit (in our eyes that is). Reading seems to tell me that it isnt something that just occurs whilst 'transitioning' with a lot of barefoot'ers it does seem to be an ongoing problem.
This is really not intended as a criticism of barefoot, I am only sorry that it didn't work for my horse, but it is something that I have been questioning a lot recently and just wonder what other's thoughts are?
My horse had her shoes removed back in the autumn, within 6 weeks she had an abscess erupt at the coronet area on the back of her off front. She was hardly lame, and it cleared up very quickly. For various reasons she was not ridden for several months and just turned out with trims when needed, but walked out in hand about 3 times a week. But her diet has been optimum for barefoot for well over a year.
With hoof boots on she was brought back into work about 3 weeks ago, because I am very restricted on the conditions she lives in (think very wet boggy fields almost year round with little or no dry standing) she remained very sensitive on uneven hard ground. Although she had only gentle and short walks she just wasn't coping. Last week she started to brew an abscess on her back near side. This has also erupted at the coronet area on her heel. This horse has never abscessed in the 2 years I have owned her before pulling her shoes.
I have decided to have her re shod when she is completely recovered from this latest abscess. My question isn't about this decision, it is mine and it is what I feel suits my particular horse and my circumstances best.
However, what I am curious about, after doing a lot of googling, (as you do) it would seem that a lot of owners do expect that many horses transitioning to barefoot will almost certainly experience some degree of abscessing. I am also intrigued by the theory that this is because the shod hoof has been disguising some sort of underlying and rumbling infection for several years (yes years!!!) that has never made them lame, but on removal of shoes all this shocking interior hoof damage has more or less 'exploded' via an abscess as the hoof 'comes back to life'.
It has occurred to me that my own experience of abscesses over the years has only ever been in unshod horses. I have never personally experienced an abscess in a shod hoof, though I am sure it does happen.
I have a niggling feeling that somewhere we are missing some knowledge about the tendency for the abscessing to be more 'acceptable' in a barefoot horse. It doesn't sit easy with me that a horse in pain and regularly abscessing is a particularly good thing even if our intentions in trying barefoot are for the horse's long term benefit (in our eyes that is). Reading seems to tell me that it isnt something that just occurs whilst 'transitioning' with a lot of barefoot'ers it does seem to be an ongoing problem.
This is really not intended as a criticism of barefoot, I am only sorry that it didn't work for my horse, but it is something that I have been questioning a lot recently and just wonder what other's thoughts are?