Are boots a good alternative to shoes?

L

Laura1812

Well-Known Member
Joined
22 March 2010
Messages
420
Visit site
What are all your thoughts?

I actually hate boots - they are clumpy, get dirty, are a pain to get off and on, and can rub but also from the horses point of view they must change the proprioception and balance significantly too.

If you look at things such as old macs they bring the breakover point for the limb a lot further forward than a bare or shod hoof, cavallo's do this too. The whole bearing surface is a lot larger than that of the hoof - sometimes the heels come out a lot further behind. All this makes big changes to the horses natural footfall and gait.

The best boots I have come across and the only one I would now use are the easyboot gloves as they are flexible and close fitting.

However, I would never consider using them all the time - I would rather have a well shod hoof.

Discuss!!
 
Disagree (almost) entirely, but I've become one of the loony brigade who don't believe in shoes. A well shod hoof might be that for the first few days after applying the shoe, but after six to eight weeks it can't possibly be. Then the farrier comes, trims the foot, and the horse suddenly has to adjust to a new balance. I know this could happen with a bare hoof too if the horse is on ground that provides no wear, but most get at least some from their general movement.
The bit I do agree on is that boots change proprioreception and gait, which is why horse should be slowly introduced to boots - suddenly going on a long, fast hack with something new on the hoof is asking for trouble.
However, with a horse that is used to boots I think they are great and have used Old Mac's, Boa's and now Gloves with no problems. Although they are relatively rigid structures, they still have give and allow the horses foot to expand and contract the way it's supposed to. They don't condition the feet to the riding terrain, but they do allow you to keep a horse fit while working on the conditioning so they are a perfect half-way house between shod and bare. You can add pads to them to increase comfort and also to increase circulation (see Bowker's stuff).
So my conclusion is that yes, boots are definitely a good alternative to shoes.
 
I too am not that fond of boots.

I am one of those that believes in shoes however my farrier comes every 5 weeks not the 6 to 8 stated in the post above.
I fail to see what is so bad about shoes why they are so cruel as can be stated by some posters I hasten to add not you soloequeestrian, your post is very sensible the same as I fail to see what is bad about bare foot as long as you can get away with it, and you still have your horses feet trimmed regularaly by a proper proffesional, or boots although I am not sure I would want to use boots daily.
Seems like an awful lot of bother getting on and off.

So I personally would not consider them a good alternative to shoes unless I only worked my horses once or twice a week.

Additionally I event so really boots are not an option
 
I have just started using boots (old macs) on my mares back feet as she kicks one of the other horses and it is not possible to separate or move them, however as the ground here is very stony she needed something to hack in, we go out 6 days a week up to an hour, apart from grit getting in the boots (i use vetwrap around her pastern) i think they have been great. Think the arguement between boots, barefoot or shoes is personal choice and i have adapted a never say never attitude!!
 
I don't like hoof boots but I like shoes (and the damage they do to feet) even less. Luckily (or so I tell myself) I can't get hoof boots to fit my horses (very wide short feet) so that solves that problem for me ;) Mine all work hard without boots OR shoes.

I don't like the trainer type boots and I wouldn't use them for everyday riding but they are very useful in certain cases (had some for a lami pony). However there are other boot types that have little effect on the horse other than protection - the easyboot styles and the renegade come to mind. They are easy to use with a bit of practise.

And unless there's some problem (usuall diet) then boots should only be a temporary measure.
 
I think shoes are a better alternative to shoes, but i dont think they are suitable for everything.
Shoes damage the feet by restricting its expansion, which restricts blood flow. I think you really have to understand all the ins and outs of how the hoof works, and why its important. The hooves are like hearts, helping to pump blood around the body. This keeps the feet, legs and body healthy. You wouldnt put the heart in something that restricts its fuction? Feet are meant to work a certain way to manitain themselves and do their job, i just dont believe, from what i have learnt over the years, that shoes allow this to happen.
As with boots, there is so many on the market these days for every horse owner and discipline. But i dont believe that hoof boots should ever take over from a well functioning foot. I beleive that if you have a good healthy, strong hoof, then boots are not needed, except in extremes like really rocky or unpredictable footing.
I think that if you want to compete a horse shoeless, the feet have to be good enough to do this without the protection. Except if you need studded boots for grass.

Boots are also useful for remedial cases, such as laminitis and navicular. But when the feet are healed, you should be able to work the horse without the boots.

I think most people just shoe because its handy. If you just want to be able to take your horse out of the field and ride him down the road without conditioning the foot, then shoeing is better. I think that a lot of people just prefer to have their horses hooves the responsibility of the farrier, not of themselves.

I also think that its pretty lazy of people to not want to spend the time putting boots on them. We spend ages brushing, tacking up, cleaning eyes, noses and muzzles, and putting boots on their legs.
As for them getting dirty, big deal. All you have to do is hose them off and let them dry.
I dont think boots are suitable for hunting and deep mud, but i like to think that my horses will be good enough for when i take him hunting or competing.

Im not anti shoeing, but it does bug me when people cannot be bothered to use hoof boots because they are to lazy. But i guess that if you dont believe shoes are harmful, then you wont think that there is anything wrong with shoeing horses.
 
I have seen thermographs of shod horses legs versus unshod horses legs, which shows the legs of a shod horse as blue ie cold, and unshod leg as red, ie warm.
You may be able to find stuff if you google, but a lot of what i have learnt is probably not even published.
But if you know of any research to the contrary, please enlighten us.

Ps, maybe check out bob bowker, he has done a lot of research on the biomechanics of how hooves work.
 
Jennyharvey said:
I have seen thermographs of shod horses legs versus unshod horses legs, which shows the legs of a shod horse as blue ie cold, and unshod leg as red, ie warm.
You may be able to find stuff if you google, but a lot of what i have learnt is probably not even published.
But if you know of any research to the contrary, please enlighten us.

Ps, maybe check out bob bowker, he has done a lot of research on the biomechanics of how hooves work.
Click to expand...

I've seen the thermograph as well, but couldnt find any details of how the clinical trial was conducted, ie how many horses took part, were the thermographs taken pre or post exercise etc. I have seen one thermograph of one cool blue leg (shod) and three hot yellow legs (unshod), but it didnt state whether the horse was barefoot and then shod on one foot, or shod, and three shoes lost/removed, or whether it was taken pre/post exercise.

It would be interesting to read evidence that either proves or disproves the claim that shoes restrict blood flow, otherwise the claim cant really hold up against scrutiny.

It would also be interesting to know at what percentage of flow rate do tissues within the foot start to suffer.

I have read claims on that the circulation is reduced by 75 % in shod feet, but cant find any quantative evidence to support it. I would of thought that having 25% of normal blood flow would rapidly cause ischaemic necrosis, yet the overwhelming majority of shod horses seem to be healthy.
 
Are boots a good alternative? Fantastic for road work, my horse loved them. He had a terrible tripping problem, but never tripped in boots. I nervously had a gallop on grass and had no problems. The only time I didn't like them were in slippy mud, clay, which we have a lot of round here when he wouldtend to lose his back feet a bit.

I think you can get different "tyre tread" now to take into account different terrain.

I have also done a small cross country course in boots (a trec where you are suppoed to use the same tack both days so I didn't want to go barefoot and accidently elminate partner and self from competition, but he could have gone round without as I had done a cross country practice barefoot, over artifical landings, through water, banks, etc

A pad inside really helps to condition the sole as it provides the correct level of presssure and support.

They can be a fiddle to put on at first, it is a bit of a knack really and doesn't take any longer than putting on other sorts of boots, then they might need a wash afterwards, but just drop them into a bucket of water or give them a brush.

I think one of the problems with the way horses are kept now is that they very rarely have their shoes removed completely to rest the feet, as used to happen before the advent of year round competitions and horses ridden all year in arenas, etc. A metal shoe was fitted to a horse that was about to do a lot of work - hunting, show jumping, polo. The horses fitted with shoes all year round like vanners and driving horses were the ones that had more hoof problems, but they had a hard life anyway so weren't expected to live that long anyway.
 
Matt a horse who has his shoes taken off grows foot at roughly twice the rate that it does with a shoe on. You will almost certainly have noticed that when a horse has its first set of shoes they normally come loose very quickly, then the growth slows and subsequent sets stay put longer. I've seen this with every single 3 year old I have had shoes put on. I can't account for the changes in speed of growth except by increased/reduced blood flow. That's why cornucresine works too, it irritates the coronet band and brings more blood to it.

In general, it is clear just from using your hand on a cold day that an unshod horse's feet are generally warmer than a shod one's. I'm sure that can be measured with an optical pyrometer and I have one so I must do that one day!

Bob Bowker has done some doppler ultrasound and this supports the theory that blood flow is stronger in the lower leg of an unshod horse, but he hasn't published it, just presented it at a conference I went to (a barefoot one of course, so fairly biased, yes). I think he has published his dissection work, where he has found that the lateral cartilages of an unshod horse have a network of spiral capilliaries carrying blood into it, where shod horses do not, so unshod horses certainly have a blood flow that is not present in shod horses (though not necessarily more blood, of course).

As a downside, my personal belief (not supported by at least one trimming organisation) is that barefoot horses get laminitic sole sensitivity earlier than shod ones - precisely because of the increased blood flow. If bugs are jumping the gut into the bloodstream in increasing numbers, and it takes ten bugs an hour to create inflammation and there is more blood per hour in an unshod horse, then an unshod horse would get the ten bugs an hour earlier. Other people insist that it is simply that shod horses have their soles suspended off the floor, and/or shoes numb the feet partially, but from personal experience of a very fit laminitic, I don't think this is the full answer myself.

To answer the original question I would, if I had to, rather use boots only when the horse is ridden than have the foot shod 24/7. Though of course it would not be "legal" to compete affiliated dressage (except for a 6 month exemption) or eventing, nor practical to hunt at all, in boots.
 
Allover said:
As the frog is known to act as a "pump" would you not expect the blood flow to be greater in an unshod horse?
Click to expand...

I'm not a professional but I don't think the frog is considered to be a pump anymore. I think it's the hoof mechanism ie. expansion and contraction of the hoof as the horse moves that acts as a pump. As weight is loaded onto hoof it expands drawing blood into it, as weight is lifted hoof contracts again forcing blood out. This mechanism is severely restricted by a metal shoe and any rigid support. Pete Ramey describes grooves in shoes caused by the hoof wall expanding and contracting as much as it is able.

Mta... Just for interest of those who haven't seen boots fitted. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6b3xLCUAgk&feature=channel
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, I agree that an unshod hoof is warmer than a shod one. In fact, it is a bit of worry until you realise that it is normal.

And no, I would not like to do a lot of galloping/jumping in hoof boots, although I have heard of someone BSJA jumping in hoof boots and people do endurance in hoof boots.

I think you CAN use a hoofboot for Riding Club dressage but don't know about other rules such as Pony Club, British Dressage.
 
British Dressage will give you dispensation to compete for 6 months in hoof boots while the horse gets used to working without shoes. No boots are allowed for affiliated eventing. Most Riding Clubs follow affiliated rules, you'd need to check with your own. I haven't a clue about BSJA, anyone know?
 
cptrayes said:
Matt a horse who has his shoes taken off grows foot at roughly twice the rate that it does with a shoe on. You will almost certainly have noticed that when a horse has its first set of shoes they normally come loose very quickly, then the growth slows and subsequent sets stay put longer. I've seen this with every single 3 year old I have had shoes put on.
.
Click to expand...

I certainly did not find this, when my then 3yo was first shod (front only ) he went eight weeks between shoeing which was lucky as he had to be sedated, now he barely lasts 5 weeks although this may be due to the fact that now several years on he does a lot more work.
 
Last edited:
MattFranks said:
I've seen the thermograph as well, but couldnt find any details of how the clinical trial was conducted, ie how many horses took part, were the thermographs taken pre or post exercise etc. I have seen one thermograph of one cool blue leg (shod) and three hot yellow legs (unshod), but it didnt state whether the horse was barefoot and then shod on one foot, or shod, and three shoes lost/removed, or whether it was taken pre/post exercise.

It would be interesting to read evidence that either proves or disproves the claim that shoes restrict blood flow, otherwise the claim cant really hold up against scrutiny.

It would also be interesting to know at what percentage of flow rate do tissues within the foot start to suffer.

I have read claims on that the circulation is reduced by 75 % in shod feet, but cant find any quantative evidence to support it. I would of thought that having 25% of normal blood flow would rapidly cause ischaemic necrosis, yet the overwhelming majority of shod horses seem to be healthy.[/QUOTE]

I dont agree with that. All of the horses that i have removed shoes from have had very bad WLD, and/or thrush. Why?
How come that the longer the horse wears shoes, or the earlier they are shod, the more tender they are once the shoes are removed. Some feet deteriorate quicker than others, so end up with navicular at 6, whereas some take a lot longer to get this bad. Obviously their are a lot of varibles regarding this, like farrier competency, diet and lifestyle, age horse was shod.

If the shoes do not damage the feet or effect blood flow, why then is there this infection of the white line, or why are some horses crippled by shoes?
If the philosophy of horse shoeing is so adament that shoeing doesnt effect the hooves negatively, then why cant you shoe a horse its full life, take of the shoes and continue to ride at the same level as before? Why do they need to transition? Why?, if shoes do not cause harm or restriction.
Click to expand...
 
Lanerch what breed is he? I have seen the same with upright feet with nearly parallel sides, the kind that get longer but not much wider as they grow. All my newly shod horses have been sport horses with sloping walled feet that get bigger the longer they are untrimmed, and all of them have had loose front shoes after three weeks when the first set went on but went at least five after the first set.


Jenny I think you are generalising a bit too much. I friend of mine unshod a 25 year old mare who she had been having shod without a break since she was 4 years old. The mare never took an unsound step. I have taken the aluminium race plates off a four year old TB shod at 18 months and he never took an unsound step either. Not all horses are noticeably damaged by shoes by a long chalk.
 
Last edited:
cptrayes said:
Lanerch what breed is he? I have seen the same with upright feet with nearly parallel sides, the kind that get longer but not much wider as they grow. All my newly shod horses have been sport horses with sloping walled feet that get bigger the longer they are untrimmed, and all of them have had loose front shoes after three weeks when the first set went on but went at least five after the first set.


Jenny I think you are generalising a bit too much. I friend of mine unshod a 25 year old mare who she had been having shod without a break since she was 4 years old. The mare never took an unsound step. I have taken the aluminium race plates off a four year old TB shod at 18 months and he never took an unsound step either. Not all horses are noticeably damaged by shoes by a long chalk.
Click to expand...

I suppose i was. I was ranting and got a bit carried away.
But its just strange that something that has the ability to cause harm, even if it were in the minority of cases, to still be thought of as 'ideal', for most working horses, regardless.

Similar in a way to smoking. Not everyone who smokes dies because of it, but a lot of countries are doing their best to discourage it. Why? Because it has the capacity to make the person ill or kill them. But not in all cases. Sorry if i offend any one with this analogy, but its just the way i look at it.

As i have said before, im not anti shoeing in any way. Im just not much of a believer in it.
 
Well I LOVE Ben's hoofboots; he has the G2's they are fab :)

I hack out about 4 times a week for up to 3 hours, never had a problem with the way he goes. They are cheaper than being shod too.

They are no bother to put on and off ( unless you're lazy and "can't be bothered")takes all of 5 minutes if that. If they get muddy then hose them down when you get back. And for the rest of the time he's not wearing them, he's barefoot, and has good feet.
 
Some interesting replies - I probably haven't been very clear but I was thinking of boots versus shoes more from a biomechanics point of view. A lot of boots are large and clumpy around the hoof and must significantly alter your horses normal stride with breakover points, weighting of the limb etc- what effect does this have on the horses movement and is this causing long term soft tissue damage?

My mare doesn't wear boots much but I put some old macs on her hinds the other day and trotting up a hill she looked like she had strinhalt. She has worn boots before and had already been wearing them an hour so it wasn't a reaction like when you first put travel boots on. This concerned me greatly and if the horse is altering its natural gait to compensate for boots then this isnt necessarily a good thing and is where I would rather shoe than exercise her in nothing but boots. Thankfully this isnt necessary as she has lovely strong feet, but it just got me wondering.
 
I think you really have to understand the benefits of boots. They are very useful for transitioning hooves, for remedial purposes like lami, navic and other hoof problems that cuase the horse pain or discomfort. I dont think that boots should be worn all the time. They shouldnt take over from a well functioning hoof.
If someone uses boots all the time, instead of conditioning the feet, then the boots can rub, and the heavier ones may alter the horse's pace.
There are new boots coming out all the time, including the easy boot gloves. These are very light boots for riding, and i think that these would be best if you needed boots long term for riding.

Its not just boots that effect gait. Horses are not designed to have anything permenantly attached to their hooves. Horse shoes are actually quite heavy for a horse. Even light racing plates can alter a horses proprioception and movement because the horse is so sensitive to anything on his feet. Plus, with boots you can take them off when the horse is not working, shoes are kept on all the time so the horse always has weight of them on his legs.
Because the horse is so sensitive to weight on his feet, its easy to alter his gait, like a pacing horse. Or you can correct to some degree abnormal movement with using special shoes.

So for me, i dont think boots can cause the problems that shoeing does. Id rather have boots on my horse for riding than a metal shoe permenently nailed to his hoof.

I think that the only time boots can ever have a negative effect is if the horse wears them constantly, like a shoe, and the hoof doesnt get the abrasive and unlevel footing the horse needs to develope a good foot.

As for the horse to move strange with the boots on, a lot of horses do this. If the horse always does it, maybe it means the boots are uncomfortable or too heavy.

Also, just because the horse doesnt show any abnormality in gait with shoes on, even slight things that we dont notice can be going on. PLus all that concusion from roadwork cannot be good for the horses legs or joints.
 
Last edited:
Laura1812 said:
Some interesting replies - I probably haven't been very clear but I was thinking of boots versus shoes more from a biomechanics point of view. A lot of boots are large and clumpy around the hoof and must significantly alter your horses normal stride with breakover points, weighting of the limb etc- what effect does this have on the horses movement and is this causing long term soft tissue damage?

My mare doesn't wear boots much but I put some old macs on her hinds the other day and trotting up a hill she looked like she had strinhalt. She has worn boots before and had already been wearing them an hour so it wasn't a reaction like when you first put travel boots on. This concerned me greatly and if the horse is altering its natural gait to compensate for boots then this isnt necessarily a good thing and is where I would rather shoe than exercise her in nothing but boots. Thankfully this isnt necessary as she has lovely strong feet, but it just got me wondering.
Click to expand...

I love Ellies Renegades as they are light and flexible. They do not touch the coronet and her bulbs are contained in the basket. The whole set up is made up of several independant parts and held together by just one wire, and even if the wire snaps(never happened to me) the boots will not fall off as they fit to the hoof and have to be prised off, which is I think an amazing feat of engineering. These boots don't just cover the hoof, they work with it and Ellie has stepped out beautifully in them since the day I first put them on. I call them her reeboks. She bounces like a kid in new shoes and :D We even gallop in them!!


boots004.jpg
[/IMG]
 
cptrayes said:
Lanerch what breed is he? I have seen the same with upright feet with nearly parallel sides, the kind that get longer but not much wider as they grow. All my newly shod horses have been sport horses with sloping walled feet that get bigger the longer they are untrimmed, and all of them have had loose front shoes after three weeks when the first set went on but went at least five after the first set.
Click to expand...


He is a 17.2 3/4 tb 1/4 hannovarian with huge feet wider than they are long, don't know if that makes a difference. As I said was lucky at the time because of the sedation, he lasted 8 weeks all summer but the next year unfortunatly went to 4 now stabalised at 5. Did look at boots before he started eventing as he used to pull off his front shoes with his back, but none were big enough. Now he events and he is better balanced that is no longer an option or necessary.
 
Last edited:
Laura1812 said:
Some interesting replies - I probably haven't been very clear but I was thinking of boots versus shoes more from a biomechanics point of view. A lot of boots are large and clumpy around the hoof and must significantly alter your horses normal stride with breakover points, weighting of the limb etc- what effect does this have on the horses movement and is this causing long term soft tissue damage?

My mare doesn't wear boots much but I put some old macs on her hinds the other day and trotting up a hill she looked like she had strinhalt. She has worn boots before and had already been wearing them an hour so it wasn't a reaction like when you first put travel boots on. This concerned me greatly and if the horse is altering its natural gait to compensate for boots then this isnt necessarily a good thing and is where I would rather shoe than exercise her in nothing but boots. Thankfully this isnt necessary as she has lovely strong feet, but it just got me wondering.
Click to expand...


Laura you are comparing chalk and cheese. It's impossible to compare the overall effect on a horse's wellbeing of shoes on 24/7 with boots put on only for a ride on a difficult surface.

Also I think you maybe had the wrong boots on for your particular horse. I have ridden in four different kinds of boots on eight different kinds of horses and never had a gait much different from a shod one, though the noise is quite peculiar!

llannerch yikes - I wouldn't like to try and get shoes on a horse that big who doesn't want them :) !! As you say, thank goodness they didn't loosen early.

Jenny you aern't alone in getting carried away. I share your enthusiasm for barefoot and I do agree with you that most of the shoes I have taken off have hidden a horror of white line disease. In my current hunter's case it is now impossible to refix his shoes to his feet because the nail holes in them are outside the size his feet reached after 3 months without them. You couldn't refix my rehab's either, because his heels are now over half and inch wider than the heels on the shoes he came in. And you and I will agree wholeheartedly that this kind of rapid change, where the shoe looks fine but is simply wrong for the foot the horse would really like to have, is very, very common.
 
cptrayes said:
Laura you are comparing chalk and cheese. It's impossible to compare the overall effect on a horse's wellbeing of shoes on 24/7 with boots put on only for a ride on a difficult surface.
Click to expand...

Am I though? if a horse is ridden for 8 hours a week in boots with totally different breakover points to normal, and a different weight on the limbs and also carrying a rider I think this could have quite an effect on the soft tissues over a period of time. I'm not talking abouts being put on just for a difficult ride - i'm talking about riding in them regularly as in daily or doing the majority of ridden work in them which an increasing number of people seem to be doing these days.

A shoe is very close fitting to the foot and is on all the time so the soft tissue will adapt to compensate re limb flight. Obviously im not talking about concussion.

I do agree with you all that barefoot is still preferable to shod, im just no fan of boots. The only boots I would now use are the easyboot gloves although I have no experience of renegades and have not seen them in the flesh, but I have seen the other makes.

I just dont believe boots are for the good of the horse for long term consistent use im afraid. At least not ones such as old macs, marquis, cavallos, boas etc.
 
Last edited:
Laura1812 said:
Am I though? if a horse is ridden for 8 hours a week in boots with totally different breakover points to normal, and a different weight on the limbs and also carrying a rider I think this could have quite an effect on the soft tissues over a period of time. I'm not talking abouts being put on just for a difficult ride - i'm talking about riding in them regularly as in daily or doing the majority of ridden work in them which an increasing number of people seem to be doing these days.

A shoe is very close fitting to the foot and is on all the time so the soft tissue will adapt to compensate re limb flight. Obviously im not talking about concussion.

I do agree with you all that barefoot is still preferable to shod, im just no fan of boots. The only boots I would now use are the easyboot gloves although I have no experience of renegades and have not seen them in the flesh, but I have seen the other makes.

I just dont believe boots are for the good of the horse for long term consistent use im afraid. At least not ones such as old macs, marquis, cavallos, boas etc.
Click to expand...

I guess someone should do a study of the long term effects of hoof boots on hooves. Sure it would be an interesting read.

As for the shoes being tight fitting, maybe on the day the shoes or put on. But after a few weeks of wearing them, the toes will grow forward, the heels run forward, the soft tissue atrophy because of reduced blood flow and reduced stimulus. So ideally a horse should be shod every week, or less, to make sure that this doesnt happen. Or else you are constantly trying to bring the foot back to normal. Thats why trimming should be regular too. The more the foot gets out of shape, the more damage can occur and the more out of balance the horse can get. At least if the horse is shoeless, the feet can wear a certain amount. A shod horse cannot. So a shod hoof will just grow forward and distort, causing flaring, cracks and underrun heels.

How does the soft tissue adapt to the flight? Soft tissue is very changable. Thats why we can bring a bad navicular case sound. Because its very easily changed. And damaged.
You have to think about the bones too. How do they adapt?

If you dont like the bulkier boots, you dont have to ue them. If a certain boot suits your purpose, great. Stick with it.

But i dont think that you can compare the damaged caused by boots (if there is any) to metal shoes.

Why do you think that the cavalos or old macs cause problems. Why say they cause damage. Its an interesting topic so feel free to explain.
 
Last edited:
I've tried the Easycare Gloves, they just aren't right for certain shaped hooves. Ben wears his G2's for about 10 hours a week ( fronts only); NEVER have had a problem with rubbing even if going through water.

They are lighter in weight than a metal shoe, ok they look clumpy, but they do get used to them, and he can't half shift when he wants to;

He is nearly 20 years old now and I believe after 16 years of being shod I have made him more comfortable as he had to be sedated in the past to be shod ( he had been kicked and punched by a farrier before I got him 18 months ago)
He has no joint supplements at all, in fact the back lady said he has the joints of a 8 year old :D

He will never be shod again; as for transitioning, it takes time and effort, he is getting better by the day, one day I will have a barefoot pony that doesn't need boots at all!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top