Another barefoot thread sorry......Farrier vs barefoot trimmer

[Spiritedly]

Sorry if this has been asked before but I've just seen a post saying that if your horses are barefoot you should have a trimmer not a farrier do their feet. So what does a trimmer do that a farrier doesn't? All of mine are unshod and seem to cope fine with being trimmed by the farrier so I don't understand why people say you have to have a barefoot trimmer do them?

 

[pansymouse]

Mine is barefoot and done by a farrier - a registered regulated professional trained and examined to a high standard; I wouldn't gamble my horse with anything less.

 

[cptrayes]

You should have anyone do your horse who has a track record in trimming working barefoot horses. That can be a farrier or a trimmer. There are good and bad in both camps, you need to find one that consistently has sound barefoot horses on their books.

There are farriers who trim well but don't be fooled by the 'they have the training' argument. Their syllabus does not include trimming hardworking barefoot horses and unless the master they train with has some on his books, they will end their apprenticeship with little knowledge about them. A qualified trimmer will, in that case, have more training than a farrier.

To confuse things even further, there are unqualified trimmers who know what they are doing too,.

Try to get a recommendation from people in your area.





ps don't be fooled by the 'regulated' either. Mark Wellfair ripped the hoof wall off two horses of a client who had upset him, intending them not to be able to be shod for as long as possible. He was banned for 3 months and is probably shoeing again now.

Nor the 'highly examined'. The farrier training comprehensively failed its last Ofsted inspection.


There are a lot of good farriers, but sometimes it's in spite of their training, not because of it!

 

[Meowy Catkin]

There are registered and trained trimmers to.

I use a Farrier because I now have a really good one (after having to sack a terrible one) and there isn't a good trimmer in my area. My farrier is pro BF and doesn't hack at the frog (unless it's raggy) and doesn't pare the sole. This seems to be the main point. If the farrier insists on paring the sole and regularly trims the frog, even if you ask them not to, it will make keeping the horse BF much, much harder. So in that case a good BF trimmer would be a better option. If you have good farriers and good BF trimmers in your area, then you're really lucky and can choose the one you like best.

 

[MrsNorris]

If you do enough roadwork, you probably wont need either. Mine sees a farrier maybe once a year, he never has to do anything other than round off any chips ( I do that myself the rest of the time), but I like him to see horse occasionally just to make sure nothing is going awry.
I have found that self-trimming works the best for us and my (occasional) farrier agrees.

 

[competitiondiva]

Mine is barefoot and done by a farrier - a registered regulated professional trained and examined to a high standard; I wouldn't gamble my horse with anything less.

^^ This, whether you choose to go barefoot or shod IMO it should only be done by someone qualified and insured and registered to a central body who can take action if something goes wrong, like the farrier council. Mine are a combination of barefoot or shod infront, my farrier is happy to do either....

 

[Meowy Catkin]

Being registered with the FRC does not guarantee a decent job will be done as I sadly know. Heelfirst (a farrier) said many things on this subject that I agree wholeheartedly with eg the minimum standard expected etc...

 

[cptrayes]

^^ This, whether you choose to go barefoot or shod IMO it should only be done by someone qualified and insured and registered to a central body who can take action if something goes wrong, like the farrier council. Mine are a combination of barefoot or shod infront, my farrier is happy to do either....

Did you see my post? Failed Ofsted inspection; farrier who leaves a horse with bleeding feet after deliberately maiming it free to carry on shoeing; no barefoot training in the syllabus??? Fully qualified farriers coming out of college now STILL saying that if horses are going to do a lot of roadwork then they need shoes on?


Your trust in the FRC is misplaced, I think, though there are many good farriers in spite of this.


I wish the FRC would sort themselves out, because people do need to be able to trust them.

 

[competitiondiva]

Did you see my post? Failed Ofsted inspection; farrier who leaves a horse with bleeding feet after deliberately maiming it free to carry on shoeing; no barefoot training in the syllabus???


Your trust in the FRC is misplaced, though there are many good farriers in spite of this.

I wasn't specific that it should be a farrier, (though personally I think they should). My points were that the person be qualified, insured and registered to a central answerable body.....

 

[Meowy Catkin]

Did you see my post? Failed Ofsted inspection; farrier who leaves a horse with bleeding feet after deliberately maiming it free to carry on shoeing; no barefoot training in the syllabus???


Your trust in the FRC is misplaced, though there are many good farriers in spite of this.

Quite right CPT. It's a terrible situation - they nave no minimum standard. It's appalling really and I agree with you RE Mr Wellfair's 'punishment'. Awful.

Here's one of HF's posts for those who are interested.

No, No, No. I could not disagree more, we must not expect the owner to have the knowledge, we must as a profession be competent, that is my point.
If we are to rely on owners to assess our work, why not let them shoe/trim their own horses and take the whole responsibility.
If farriers are to be held to account then let them have a minimum standard to which they MUST keep, as in every other professional body from vets to plumbers.
At present the ‘U bend’ in your loo is more protected than your horses feet, as only the fitting of one
( the loo) is protected, in other words if it was found that the plumber fitted it wrong you would have a case.
Farriers are only protected by law in the fact that no one else can do their job, and it is this that makes them (us ) arrogant and unaware of our consequences

I personally think that with the current situation, it is essential that owners can tell a good trim/shoeing job from a bad one.

 

[cptrayes]

At least they are answerable to someone...............

What is the point in being answerable to anyone if the penalty for deliberately seriously maiming two horses is a twelve week ban?

And have you ever heard of one struck off for terrible shoeing? No, they just carry on crippling horses.

It is this lack of accountability which lets down all the good farriers out there.

 

[competitiondiva]

What is the point in being answerable to anyone if the penalty for deliberately seriously maiming two horses is a twelve week ban?

And have you ever heard of one struck off for terrible shoeing? No, they just carry on crippling horses.

It is this lack of accountability which lets down all the good farriers out there.

I did not follow this case, did a vet support the the horse was caused un-necessary suffering??? If so why were charges under the Animal Welfare Act not brought against the farrier?

 

[pennyturner]

If you do enough roadwork, you probably wont need either. Mine sees a farrier maybe once a year, he never has to do anything other than round off any chips ( I do that myself the rest of the time), but I like him to see horse occasionally just to make sure nothing is going awry.
I have found that self-trimming works the best for us and my (occasional) farrier agrees.

This is quite right. I realised some years ago that I didn't really need the farrier at all. Even the self-trimming is minimal, as we do fairly regular road work. Sometimes I'll look at one of the ponies and spot a little flare, or a long toe, and by the time I remember to look again its worn back to a better shape.

Several of my ponies have NEVER seen a farrier. Like the rest they have lovely healthy feet.

Whoever you use, make sure they're working with the horse's natural wearing process, not hacking back the sole and rasping the upper surface, as though they were putting a shoe on.

 

[BayLady]

Use someone who is good, who you can see examples of work from and have a good track history of keeping unshod horses sound and working.

I took myself off and trained to do it myself as couldn't find anyone local to me to do it. I used a couple of very good EPs but they moved out of my area and as my horse was a difficult case I needed to be able to make minor adjustments myself (the only way to keep her sound in shoes at the end was to xray every single time she was shod to make sure she was balanced to her bones, not by sight). This training also gave me the knowledge to be able to recognise a good from bad farrier, which benefitted my mare when she was shod.

Using a farrier gives you zero protection or comeback whatsoever. The FRC have no teeth and seem to always work to protect their own, which has done nothing for the standard of farriery in the UK.

 

[Meowy Catkin]

http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/news/two-horses-deliberately-lamed-by-farrier/
^There you go CD.

Also

For those who may be interested:
There is no minimum standard in farriery, all farriers qualify, register, preferably both and then set out to make a living.
CPD courses are attended with points given for attendance.
But when it comes to having a minimum standard within the profession there is non.
The disciplinary committee of the FRC will sit to discuss a case that is brought before them but that will be due to a law possibly having been broken or damage has been inflicted to an animal.
As to how a farrier shoes a horse it is up to the farrier’s training and ability.
FACT: the main thing that has improved the standard of farrier in the last 30 years is the quality of the readymade shoe:
My problem always was and is: if shoeing has such a wide scope of tolerance due to difference of opinion amongst professionals, how can the veterinary profession sit by and condone what they should know to be bad shoeing knowing it to be harmful to the horse.( H. oath ‘the wellbeing of the animal is paramount&#8216
The answer is that you will very rarely find a vet. Who is willing to speak-out against a farrier, due to them needing to work with them on a regular basis.
In 38 years of shoeing I have been asked only 3 Times in my career to give my judgement on a fellow farrier, and each time I recommended that the farrier concerned should be held responsible for their actions due to their incompetence.
If any owner has a horse with foot problems, then it is no different than having a horse with a laceration of the skin: it is a problem that professionals should be able and qualified to solve or refer to someone who can.
We must stop thinking that the feet are in a different category than the rest of the horse
We must start to expect MORE from the professionals who are charging to maintain them.

^another of HF's posts

 

[cptrayes]

I did not follow this case, did a vet support the the horse was caused un-necessary suffering??? If so why were charges under the Animal Welfare Act not brought against the farrier?

He was prosecuted for criminal damage. He went into the field and maimed two competition horses, intending the owner not to be able to shoe them and compete for the longest possible time.

His ban imposed by the FRC was twelve weeks. He is probably shoeing again now.

 

[competitiondiva]

He was prosecuted for criminal damage. He went into the field and maimed two competition horses, intending the owner not to be able to shoe them and compete for the longest possible time.

His ban imposed by the FRC was twelve weeks. He is probably shoeing again now.

ludicrous that AWA charges weren't brought....

 

[cptrayes]

ludicrous that AWA charges weren't brought....

It's called plea bargaining. They say we don't do it in this country but we do. He pleaded guilty to CD charges, where he might have fought AW charges and cost the taxpayer a lot of money for a lengthy trial with expert witnesses.

But that's a different thread.

The fact is, it's as rare as hens teeth for the FRC to discipline anyone for the run of the mill long toe/flat heel/unbalanced shoeing that you can see everywhere once you look for it.

I think I'm right in saying that this is an organisation which asked Heelfirst not to take any more apprentices because he criticizes the lack of standards.

An organisation which supports time-limited shoeing competitions where the same horse has different feet shod by different farriers, there by definition (since the competition has a winner who is judged to have done best) creating an unbalanced horse. And then has the gall to tell the Farrier that points out that it's wrong, to keep quiet.

OK, I need to burn my soapbox to keep warm now

 

[TBID]

I think I'll take my chances with my DAEP, there may not be an official organisation like the FRC has for farriers but the justice system for welfare issues seem to be more realistic for trimmers. If a trimmer messes up its plastered everywhere & it involves the UK actual LAW not an in house law/act. If a farriers messes up, An in house 3 month ban or case's are postponed for 12 months allowing the farrier continue to work, this doesn't seem right or fair. The farrier who did the damage to the competition horses did not get what he deserved.
I know my trimmer is qualified through the institute of applied equine Podiatry, he has studied the structures & the function of the hoof & how to maintain a barefoot,He needs to attend a cpd every year to continue in his work, he's insured with SEIB & he's approachable. if he messes up, it'll be treated as a regular welfare case...involving the UK law. Not in house punishment.