Grass & footiness- barefoot people please.

[Orangehorse]

As usual cp is being sensible. When my horse was out of shoes it was quite amazing how his feet changed shape, and he grew the foot he needed, not the foot that the farrier was giving him for showing - which looked wonderful, but he ended up with a lump above his knee. After the shoes were removed and he was growing the foot HE needed to support his slightly weird leg conformation, the knee lump disappeared. He went to being very pigeoned toed, and then gradually back to a more normal shaped foot but his feet never looked better.

I eventually returned to shoes as I found I was unable to give him the necessary consistant work load. He was never sore or lame,but I became a bit obsessed and decided that it was something that I might be better not to have to cope with. I have his shoes off when he isn't showing and I am so glad that he had time out of shoes as it improved his foot fall (he was landing toe first which I didn't really recognise at the time but just thought something wasn't right) and I think that had he continued in shoes he would now be lame, either from the knee problem or from navicular type problems.

 

[teddyt]

In answer to your question about 4 years training for farriers, they spend a whole year of that learning how to bend metal. Why? There are very few farriers these days who don't use factory shoes. They are taught how to run a business and how to balance a foot to fit a shoe.

They learn to bend metal so they can make a shoe to fit a foot. That is what i consider to be a good farrier- one who makes the shoe to fit the foot rather than the foot to fit the shoe. Until relatively recently remedial shoes also had to be made, with few ready made ones available in the full range of sizes. (and things havnt moved on from when it was the blacksmith who made the shoes and shod the horse too-so yes, the training is a bit outdated)

I know that certainly in the case of navicular you will say that you dont need remedial shoes, you need no shoes! However, this is what has been thought of as the way forward for a long time and the training has been organised to reflect this. Things may have changed recently- advances in knowledge, etc but theyre not going to throw out decades of research and development and traditional techniques until the barefoot route has more evidence, research and use and its still early days for alot of that.

Look at bitting- the majority of bits available are ones that were designed 100 years ago! The eggbutt snaffle- thought of as the kindest bit and the first choice of many. But it doesnt actually suit many horses conformation and the joints are huge and crude! Still used though, to the detriment of the horse.

As with regards to making the foot fit a perfect template. I have had this discussion with lots of different farriers. The good ones wont do that- they recognise that some horses have to be trimmed to their individual requirements rather than going by the book. Although i agree that good (what i consider good anyway) farriers are in the minority. I could name at least 10 farriers that i could use but i wont, and just a couple who i am happy to let near my horses for various reasons.

How can we have faith in farriers in general when we can all see that there are thousands of horses in this country walking from their stables to an arena, to a paddock, to their stables, who have no need of shoes whatsoever - yet their farriers continue to turn up month after month and nail metal, definitely unnecessary but quite possibly also damaging, to their feet, pocket the cash and drive away again?

Because the farriers dont know any different! And the owners want them to because they dont know any different! Just like all the instructors out there that recomend an eggbutt snaffle or using a dutch gag with only one rein- its normal, fashion, everyone does it so thats what is done! A self perpetuating problem when the students become the teachers. And its very hard for a genuine person to come along and swim against the tide and say that there is a different and sometimes better way, especially with limited 'proof'. Even harder again when there is a not so genuine person who is also recommending the change but for different reasons and less genuine intent.

 

[stormybracken]

Absolutely agree, cptrayes, with all you said in the last post.

 

[soloequestrian]

With regards to the bit, saddle and being ridden the consequences are on the whole short term i.e. discomfort for a shorter time period (not that tis excuses it).

It could be argued that it's not short-term - poorly fitting saddles can cause changes in movement patterns that do long term damage, and some of the psychological problems created are certainly long term.
Poor feeding can result in catastrophe as we all know.

With trimming the feet, if it is done badly then the horse has to put up with discomfort or pain 24/7 until the foot grows. In some cases the poor trim can also seriously affect the whole body- joints, muscles, tendons, etc and even cause catastrophic damage. Put a piece of wood on one side of your shoe and see how quickly your back starts to ache! Imagine you are a growing child and see what happens to your bones and joints if you walk lopsided. Go out and perform an athletic sport and see if you find it easy. Land from jump after jump with one side of your foot higher than the other....(but you cant tell anyone because you speak a different language, you can only explain by your behaviour and hope someone understands you)

As cp says, this is likely to be less of an issue if there is no shoe to stop the natural wear patterns. I don't think anyone would suggest that just jumping in there and having a go at trimming without any help would be a good idea but on the other side of the coin, it really isn't rocket science.

Also, once hoof is taken off you cant put it back on. In the case of cutting someones hair, the worst this will cause is embarassment if done badly but i still dont cut my own hair! But if too much hoof or the wrong amount/balance is removed this causes a much more severe issue than embarassment.

Doing things like hacking off excess hoof is actually covered in the law - the Animal Health and Welfare Act makes actions that cause, or are likely to cause, unnecessary suffering, illegal.

Furthermore, if it were that easy then why the four year extensive training to become a farrier? Yes, they nail on shoes but the foot has to be balanced first so a huge amount of training is done before they start nailing on shoes. Why should a trimmer be allowed to skip most or all of this training when the consequences on the welfare of the horse have the potential to be so severe?

As you say yourself, there are many poor farriers out there for whom the four years of training have made no difference. Perhaps the quota system for farrier training should be abolished so those in business are subject to a bit more in the way of competition?

 

[teddyt]

It could be argued that it's not short-term - poorly fitting saddles can cause changes in movement patterns that do long term damage, and some of the psychological problems created are certainly long term.
Poor feeding can result in catastrophe as we all know.

yes, thats why i said on the whole

As cp says, this is likely to be less of an issue if there is no shoe to stop the natural wear patterns. I don't think anyone would suggest that just jumping in there and having a go at trimming without any help would be a good idea but on the other side of the coin, it really isn't rocket science.

It may not be rocket science to you but how many owners know the external anatomy of the horse, let alone what they cant see? Few people have the ability or knowledge to trim imo. Many cant even feed or bit their horses correctly, let alone trim them! Many dont have lessons to ride better- so what makes you think they will to learn to trim. Not every owner is like cptrayes, in fact she strikes me as remarkably different to most

Doing things like hacking off excess hoof is actually covered in the law - the Animal Health and Welfare Act makes actions that cause, or are likely to cause, unnecessary suffering, illegal.

I see unecessary suffering regularly due to ignorance. And who defines it if someone creates an on -off chronic lameness or discomfort due to trimming their own horse?

As you say yourself, there are many poor farriers out there for whom the four years of training have made no difference. Perhaps the quota system for farrier training should be abolished so those in business are subject to a bit more in the way of competition?

The quota sytem is dictated by finance and facilities- like any other college course. There is only so many people that can be trained at any one time. I agree though that farriers can treat their customers like **** and get away with it due to the no of horses exceeding the no of farriers.


But if we let owners trim their own horses with no set requirement for training and knowledge, where does it end? I find saving money an apallling reason to trim your own horses feet. If you cant afford to pay a professional then you cant afford a horse imo. Are the people trimming going to rasp their horses teeth too? Where do you draw the line?

 

[Oberon]

On my yard there are three other owners using my trimmers, all with previously lame horses (who also had behavioural problems...hmm interesting). My trimmers recommended body worker input with these horses due to problems they'd picked up on not related to the feet.

Two of the horses have been successfully rehabbed and are now sound and much happier. Interestingly doing all the research and trinkering with their horses has developed a close bond between them. Both horses had been for sale at one time - now their owners wouldn't part with them...

The third owner stepped back and ignored all the trimmer's advice on getting a body worker in or addressing the horse's dietry issues and waited for the 'magic trim' to work.

The horse is now reshod. His behavioural problems (so presumably his pain) are a little less pronounced now, but still there.

Of the barefoot owners I know - the most successful ones have learnt so much more about how to look after their horse in all aspects, not just the feet. As a result they are much more questioning of professionals and less likely to take things at face value than before.

I know I have put alot of work into improving my knowledge, and I am not a trained trimmer and have no intention of taking rasp to hoof.

 

[cptrayes]

"Because the farriers dont know any different!"

But we are TELLING them different and most of them don't want to hear!! The Turkeys won't vote for Christmas and a £25 trim instead of an £80 set of shoes until the WCF teach the new ones more and tell the old guard that they must.

Did you know it was dentists who pioneered anaesthetics because surgeons thought it spoiled their skills to be able to operate slowly on a patient rather than in a mad dash to stop him screaming?

Meanwhile there will be more horses like my original one, and my latest rehab who has no symptoms of navicular at all after only 11 weeks (and he is no isolated case), when his farrier thought he needed bar shoes.

I did rasp my horses teeth, by the way, that's not rocket science either! I gave it up because it's too hard work and the gag was going to cost too much money to do it properly. Horses teeth were never rasped at all 30 years ago unless they started quidding, equine dentistry is a new profession.

 

[teddyt]

But we are TELLING them different and most of them don't want to hear!!

Then you will have to tell them in a different way and hope you can get through! Maybe with some more evidence that isnt just anecdotal more of them will listen There will always be those that wont listen though- plenty of closed minds in the horse world.

Horses teeth were never rasped at all 30 years ago unless they started quidding, equine dentistry is a new profession.

Horses were fed oats and bran 30 years ago and one saddle fitted all- doesnt make it right, or acceptable! Theres nothing wrong with new professions- times and hence needs change. But with the case of something that can affect the welfare of the horse so markedly i think it should be mandatory for these new professions to be better regulated!

I have the knowledge and ability to castrate my colts, thats not rocket science- should the law allow me to do it? Because for every person like me who can do it there will be 100 who cant and what happens to the horses then?

 

[soloequestrian]

The point I'm trying to make really is where do you stop in terms of regulating stuff. Suffering can be caused by many different means (feed etc as discussed) but it's unlikely to become the law that you need a qualified equine nutritionist to devise all your feeding programs. It's the same for trimming - the law says that you can't prepare a foot for shoeing or shoe it without the proper qualifications, but outside of that you can do what you like until you hit the Animal Health and Welfare Act in terms of causing or doing something likely to cause suffering. If horses are suffering due to their owners ignorance, those owners are in contravention of the law and can be prosecuted. If owners trim so badly as to cause suffering, they can be prosecuted. If the owner is doing a good job of trimming ie the horse is sound and happy, presumably there is no problem. I presume the only thing stopping you castrating your colts would be that the procedure is a surgery and therefore can only be carried out legally by a vet?
I thought the number of farriers trained was regulated by the Worshipful Company - I'm sure if it wasn't many more colleges would be jumping onto that bandwagon?

 

[teddyt]

No, even if legal i wouldnt castrate my colts! I was just trying to explain my view on the need for regulation. I think we are saying a similar thing- you = where do you stop in regulating and me = where do you stop in what you allow.

 

[cptrayes]

I think the main reason why trimming by owners will never be regulated is that it is impossible to define in legal terms the difference between rasping off a small chip, (which is something that every owner should know how to do in order to prevent a chip becoming a bigger tear, crack or a home for infection) and a "trim".

The other main reason why it will remain legal is that it is actually quite difficult to do a horse harm by trimming it unless you have been taught a Strasser trim or to take away sole callous. Most owners would make the mistake of taking too little off, not too much, and the horse will correct that with chipping bits off, or grow feet that are obviously splayed, or tall but probably still be completely sound. If an owner makes a mistake and takes too much off, ignoring seeing faint pink and rasping another stroke, for example, then the horse will be unsound or at least footie for a day or two - and the owner will hopefully not make that mistake again. If that did happen, which I think would be rare, then I believe that it's a lesser evil for the horse to feel stones for a day or two than for it to be in shoes unnecessarily for its whole life.

Farriery was regulated relatively recently - when I first owned horses mine were shod by an unqualified farrier who was absolutely excellent. I often wonder if it was not done as a measure to protect the income of farriers rather than for any animal welfare reasons. It is extraordinary that it's a closed shop, which is in breach of all the competition rules that other businesses have to abide by. In the big countries like Australia and the US, which are impossible to cover with qualified farriers, it's perfectly legal to shoe your own horse and many people do so perfectly well. I believe that the training on the continent is very, very much shorter than in the UK and yet I know importers who say that continental farriers are doing a better job than UK ones with warmbloods, which have a reputation in this country for high levels of navicular syndrome (and my rehab came from Portugal sound and went lame under a UK farrier who allowed his toes to lengthen by one and a half inches on a five and a half inch wide foot until it looked "English" - his words.)

There are many farriers whose right or left handedness causes them to take more off one side of the horse's foot than the other. They then shoe on that and the imbalance is set for the four to six to ten weeks that shoe stays on. If a trimmer does the same thing and the horse is in work on the road, it will right that imbalance sharpish for itself. I would much rather someone who is strapped for cash does not keep a horse at all, but if they do, I'd also much rather they trimmed it themselves than left it eight or ten weeks between shoeing, which is the alternative way to save money that lots of people choose. It's far and away the lesser of two evils.

As poor trimming is far and away the lesser of two evils than poor farriery, and you say yourself how many farriers you know who you won't use. Extrapolate that to the whole country and we have a lot of very unhappy horses out there. That's what drives my passion on this subject! (and no, I'm not really normal

 

[cptrayes]

I should add though, that I would, of course, rather a horse was shod than kept barefoot and sore if the owner can't provide, or it's too difficult to identify, what the horse needs in diet, environment and work to keep it sound.