The Barefoot vs Shod debate - where do i stand?

[Amaranta]

Remind me where that was, because I sure as hell can't remember it.

It doesn't sound like me to backtrack, quite honestly, neither does it sound like me to say "if you can't be bothered to put yourself out", since I have always acknowledged that it is not easy for some people, especially in livery yards, to do what some horses need to be barefoot, and that those people are better off shoeing.


Can you please point me to the reference of my dreadful behaviour?


Oh and by the way, if you call stuff people write "rubbish" without saying what is rubbish about it then surely you expect to be challenged on that?


ps terribly sorry I misquoted you earlier. I mistook you for someone with a similar tone.

Actually, perhaps you ought to read my posts on this thread again, my 'tone' did not change until you misquoted me.

I simply cannot be bothered to trawl for the aforementioned thread, it is really not that important to me.

Thanks for the heartfelt apology.

 

[cptrayes]

I simply cannot be bothered to trawl for the aforementioned thread, it is really not that important to me.

It's important to me. You have accused me of being rude, making an owner feel guilty and then backtracking.

Either withdraw your comment or substantiate it please.

 

[Amaranta]

It's important to me. You have accused me of being rude, making an owner feel guilty and then backtracking.

Either withdraw your comment or substantiate it please.

I will, when you prove that my 'tone' was rude before your falsly accused me

 

[cptrayes]

I will, when you prove that my 'tone' was rude before your falsly accused me

I find your tone rude, as I am entitled to if I feel that way. It was another poster who called you rude, not me, so I am not the only one. All your posts in this thread are on view for anyone to make up their minds about.


You have accused me of being rude to another person, of making an owner feel guilty and then backtracking.

Either withdraw your comment or substantiate it please.

 

[Cedars]

Oh my god cptrayes!!!!!!! You are arguing like you're in court with a faceless person on a forum!!!!!

 

[Amaranta]

I find your tone rude, as I am entitled to if I feel that way. It was another poster who called you rude, not me, so I am not the only one. All your posts in this thread are on view for anyone to make up their minds about.


You have accused me of being rude to another person, of making an owner feel guilty and then backtracking.

Either withdraw your comment or substantiate it please.

They sure can

One thing I have noticed about you is that you respond very aggressively to anyone who even remotely disagrees with you, why is that?

 

[MerrySherryRider]

They sure can

One thing I have noticed about you is that you respond very aggressively to anyone who even remotely disagrees with you, why is that?

Seems to be a common theme amongst the barefoot diehards in general. Personally, I'm not intimidated either.

 

[Nocturnal]

Ooh, am I a rubbish spouter, do you think?

 

[lazybee]

Originally Posted by horserider View Post
Mine are unshod and in work, I prefer not to use shoes but the extremism of some of the diehard barefooters puts me right off, as does farrier and feed company bashing.


Instead of trundling off to find a trimmer with limited training or a self styled Ebay backroom supplement supplier, surely its better to canvas the professionals who have the expertise and resources available.

With the increasing trend of leisure horse ownership, times have changed, the experts are catching up to the needs of underworked, overfed pets, but in looking for answers, don't throw the baby out with the bath water. Self proclaimed experts may be good at challenging old beliefs, but that doesn't mean they know the answers.

This post hits the nail firmly on the head.


I wonder which self proclaimed expert you mean???





You really don't have to Einstein to work out though.

 

[tallyho!]

My old horse was half and half.
I am not evangelical about either, I think both work for certain horses.

Absolutely, there's a middle ground I currently have 4 unshod and 2 with fronts. It all depends on the needs of the individual. Not the evangelical crusade we see on here everyday. There shouldn't be diehards and there certainly shouldn't be any 'camps'. Some on this forum will argue for ever and think they're leading authorities? Don't listen to them or me, listen to the horse.

LB, a barefoot realist

And does it really matter if horses have shoes on but don't need them? REALLY? Compared to all our starving, neglected, beaten equines who are literally living life on a knife edge. Compared to the greater issues in the world, like children dying, like poverty, like the damage we're doing to our planet. Does it REALLY matter? It's not abuse, yes it might be a waste of money but that's the choice of the horse owner-plenty of people waste money on matchy matchy which I think is a far stupider expense, but we're not all kicking off about that?

The barefoot terrorists amongst you will come back now with statistics about how horses are crippled by shoes, they're in constant pain etc-I don't care. Because I know our horses, I know MY horse, I know what's best for them, and they will be shod, or not, accordingly. Shoes have been used for hundreds of years by thousands of people, they're not suddenly the enemy.

Simple: do what is best for your horse.

Actually Oberon, I don't think of you as one of the diehard barefooters, you come across as much more reasoned and well informed. There are one or two however, who spout rubbish with great authority

Just reading back through the thread, I find the above posts directed at people you possibly have no personal contact with, no knowledge of who they are quite rude.

Perhaps also to me personally too, but I resent being called an evangelist, crusader, a TERRORIST. Since when have barefooters been terrorising you?? Did we seek you out personally and terrorise you with our notions?

I can't remember ever calling these names to people who shoe their horses. I do remember commenting on badly shod horses, not well shod ones. I can't ever remember any other "terrorist" doing so neither.

If we are so offensive to you, go ahead and push the button. All I ever wanted to do personally was to help people who had similar problems to me and my horses, horse-owner to horse-owner. If I ever terrorised anyone then I apologise. I do not believe I have though.

To see that myself and others you may be referring to, as the scum of the horseworld, quite hurtful.

 

[amandap]

To see that myself and others you may be referring to, as the scum of the horseworld, quite hurtful.

TH, it's only hurtful if you a) value the opinion of the poster b)believe what they say c) take it personally.
I've worked hard (through anger, pain and suffering lol) on forums over the years to develop a thicker skin and ignore people making nameless random accusations which are usually born of defensiveness or a wish to control their world. These random accusations are designed to affect lots of people. Just ignore, it says more about the poster than anyone else.

FWIW, I've never thought of you (or cptrayes) fitting into any one of those adjectives.

ps. The sun is shining, have a lovely day.

 

[MerrySherryRider]

To see that myself and others you may be referring to, as the scum of the horseworld, quite hurtful.

I've missed that, who has said that ? This is the type of hysterical reaction that does no service to your cause.

To suggest that those who disagree with your viewpoint just go away and refrain from posting suggests you don't want debate. Should we just accept everything that the more extreme barefooters say, as gospel, without question ?
Anyone who does a google search while looking for answers may see a link on to HHO and think that a one sided viewpoint is endorsed by all.

In order to keep to the middle ground, some of us have to speak out.

 

[Amaranta]

Just reading back through the thread, I find the above posts directed at people you possibly have no personal contact with, no knowledge of who they are quite rude.

Perhaps also to me personally too, but I resent being called an evangelist, crusader, a TERRORIST. Since when have barefooters been terrorising you?? Did we seek you out personally and terrorise you with our notions?

I can't remember ever calling these names to people who shoe their horses. I do remember commenting on badly shod horses, not well shod ones. I can't ever remember any other "terrorist" doing so neither.

If we are so offensive to you, go ahead and push the button. All I ever wanted to do personally was to help people who had similar problems to me and my horses, horse-owner to horse-owner. If I ever terrorised anyone then I apologise. I do not believe I have though.

To see that myself and others you may be referring to, as the scum of the horseworld, quite hurtful.

Now you see I am quite confused but I cannot for the life of me see where anyone has called anyone 'scum of the horseworld' for being barefoot - hell I believe LB is a barefooter herself?

I have never read any of your barefoot posts, but to try to close down debate by accusing perfectly reasonable people of being rude just because they do not agree with your ethos is just a little fanatical tbh. Debate is how we learn and is not a personal attack. It is interesting how three posters have come back in a very aggressive manner and one has to wonder why. Oberon (sorry to drag you into this ) is a barefooter, but because she debates in a reasonable and informed way, I listen to her point of view and find that sometimes I agree with her and sometimes I don't, I respect her views and this is because she also listens and respects others views.

To counter debate with aggression actually says more about the aggressor than it does about the doubter. Debate is a two sided animal and shouting down (OR misquoting) people who disagree with you is NOT debate and quickly turns into all out cyber war! To respond in anger is to lose the debate.

FTR I believe some horses can wear shoes - others cannot, I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that the barefoot movement has indeed helped SOME horses when more traditional farriery has failed, (I have learned this through debates on here) BUT and this is a big but, I dislike zealots who put their horses through pain just so they can go without shoes. My own horses are unshod but should one of them find themselves unable to cope without, then they would be shod in a heartbeat.

 

[tallyho!]

Debate away, by all means, but why do it nastily by calling people terrorists, or taliban or evangelists? That to me is not debate, it is just name-calling. How does it contribute to your precious debate?

Speaking out? About what? About barefoot terrorists/evangelists/whatever? I don't think you have "spoken out"? I think you will find "barefooters" on here are not anti-shoeing as the posts here seem to suggest.

I'd like for you to show me these "zealots" who put their horses through pain just to go without shoes... then show me the same amount who put their horses through the same pain in shoes and tell me the difference. I'm trying to learn.

Also, please can someone point to me where I have been aggressive? I'd like to know for future reference. In my mind, I have been defensive, very, but not aggressive. If I have, I apologise. I'm well up for a healthy debate, but not in the tone this has turned out to become particularly when it starts off with accusatory tones. That to me isn't healthy.

 

[cptrayes]

BUT and this is a big but, I dislike zealots who put their horses through pain just so they can go without shoes. My own horses are unshod but should one of them find themselves unable to cope without, then they would be shod in a heartbeat.

So do we all. And what is more, I can never find any posts on this forum from anyone, taliban or not, who thinks otherwise, and yet the accusation is raised again and again and again that there are people posting who do. *

Who ARE these people you are referring to?

And can you not understand why, in the face of such continued posting, some of what we write sounds defensive?

I would not treat my horses any differently than you do. The only difference may be that I would move heaven and earth to make changes to their diet, their work or their living arrangements before I would put shoes on long term, and maybe you would not (maybe you would, I don't know), but if my horses needed shoes they would get them.

What has been written about me on this forum by you, Amaranta, comes precious close to libel if not actually right there, and yet the unchallenged response from another person was to criticise me for the words I used in challenging the unfounded accusations which you made.

Where is the justice or balance in that?




* I make an exception for rehabs which otherwise face a death sentence, where a few weeks of being uncomfortable is, I think, justifiable if the end result produces a sound horse who returns to full work, as it often does.

 

[Amaranta]

Debate away, by all means, but why do it nastily by calling people terrorists, or taliban or evangelists? That to me is not debate, it is just name-calling. How does it contribute to your precious debate?

Speaking out? About what? About barefoot terrorists/evangelists/whatever? I don't think you have "spoken out"? I think you will find "barefooters" on here are not anti-shoeing as the posts here seem to suggest.

I'd like for you to show me these "zealots" who put their horses through pain just to go without shoes... then show me the same amount who put their horses through the same pain in shoes and tell me the difference. I'm trying to learn.

Also, please can someone point to me where I have been aggressive? I'd like to know for future reference. In my mind, I have been defensive, very, but not aggressive. If I have, I apologise. I'm well up for a healthy debate, but not in the tone this has turned out to become particularly when it starts off with accusatory tones. That to me isn't healthy.

Right, for the record, I have never called anyone a terrorist or a member of the barefoot taliban, please stop attributing every single anti post on this thread to me, I am sure the posters of those threads are more than able to debate on their contents with you. I will only comment on what I have posted so..........

The zealots are out there, please do not deny it, these people flatly refuse to believe that some horses just cannot cope barefoot, or if they do admit it, it is always some farriers fault or the owners fault for not getting the diet right. It is this that I call 'spouting rubbish' as these people do not take into account the horse's genetic makeup or conformation, that is MY point of view, I have called no one any names just stated my opininion, if you don't agree - fine, if you want to tell me why you don't agree even better.

I will not get into another slanging match, I dislike them intently

 

[tallyho!]

Amaranta, I'm just tarring you with the same brush. How does it feel?

 

[Amaranta]

So do we all. And what is more, I can never find any posts on this forum from anyone, taliban or not, who thinks otherwise, and yet the accusation is raised again and again and again that there are people posting who do. *

Who ARE these people you are referring to?

See my post above, where I explain who I think they are, as for raising again and again, this thread is the first time I have mentioned it

And can you not understand why, in the face of such continued posting, some of what we write sounds defensive?
You came in like a bull in a china shop last night and attacked me personally for a post I did not write, by the same token are you surprised I responded in the way I did?

I would not treat my horses any differently than you do. The only difference may be that I would move heaven and earth to make changes to their diet, their work or their living arrangements before I would put shoes on long term, and maybe you would not (maybe you would, I don't know), but if my horses needed shoes they would get them.

My horses are on an optimum low starch/high fibre diet so if they needed shoes it would be because the diet alone would not be to blame - you have to credit people with some knowledge and intelligence, some of us may even know more about diet than you know

What has been written about me on this forum by you, Amaranta, comes precious close to libel if not actually right there, and yet the unchallenged response from another person was to criticise me for the words I used in challenging the unfounded accusations which you made.

Oh please - get real



Where is the justice or balance in that?

See my second paragraph




* I make an exception for rehabs which otherwise face a death sentence, where a few weeks of being uncomfortable is, I think, justifiable if the end result produces a sound horse who returns to full work, as it often does.

I would agree with this

 

[Amaranta]

Amaranta, I'm just tarring you with the same brush. How does it feel?

Oh for goodness sakes, please read my posts! I have NOT and never will tar everyone with the same brush!

ETA: Now would you like to tell me why you don't agree with my comments?

 

[cptrayes]

The zealots are out there, please do not deny it, these people flatly refuse to believe that some horses just cannot cope barefoot, or if they do admit it, it is always some farriers fault or the owners fault for not getting the diet right. It is this that I call 'spouting rubbish' as these people do not take into account the horse's genetic makeup or conformation, .......... if you want to tell me why you don't agree even better.

I am a zealot. Many of us who have saved horses that farriers and vets have told us cannot be saved are zealots because what we have seen with our own eyes seems nothing short of a miracle.

I believe that there are very few horses who are genetically or conformationally unable to work barefoot. I believe that genetics in particular are nowhere near as important as people perceive them to be because of the number of "genetically unable to cope" thoroughbreds that I have seen succesfully go barefoot. Clearly there are some issues with certain genes like the recently discovered one in Connemara ponies which leads directly to inner/outer hoof wall separation in both shod and barefoot ponies.

I believe that there are thousands of horses with insulin regulation issues due to IR, EPSM, EMS or PPID (Cushings), mostly undiagnosed, who cannot cope barefoot without stringent diet control, if then.

I believe that most of those horses could go barefoot it the owner was able to provide them with perfection in terms of feeding, work and lifestyle.

I believe that perfection is VERY DIFFICULT for an ordinary working horse-owner in a livery stable to provide and that that is NO FAULT OF THE OWNER.

I see no problem with being passionate about the welfare of the horse and for me, barefoot done properly is entirely to the welfare of the horse (especially the metabolically challenged ones), not only its feet or its owners's pocket.

 

[cptrayes]

by Amaranta
"My horses are on an optimum low starch/high fibre diet so if they needed shoes it would be because the diet alone would not be to blame - you have to credit people with some knowledge and intelligence, some of us may even know more about diet than you know"

I said diet/work/living arrangements. It's not only a diet thing and I did not say so.

 

[cptrayes]

by Amaranta
See my post above, where I explain who I think they are, as for raising again and again, this thread is the first time I have mentioned it

No you have not answered. We have asked you to point out the posts and name the posters who make the kind of comment you are referring to and you do not seem able to do that, which is why we are so fed up with your generalised comments.

As for the specific one you made about me upsetting a poster, making them feel inadedquate and backtracking on the advice that I had given them I see you are unable to substantiate that either, which is no surprise because it did not happen.

 

[tallyho!]

Oh for goodness sakes, please read my posts! I have NOT and never will tar everyone with the same brush!

ETA: Now would you like to tell me why you don't agree with my comments?

"some people out there who spout rubbish" kind of suggests you are referring to a few people. Then you say you are not, so then you must be referring to everyone. So, then all these 'barefooters' are spouting rubbish according to the dialogue.

Which comments was I suppose to agree/disagree with?

One more thing, could you explain what you think my ethos is? Do you know? Or, is just perception that I even HAVE an ethos?

I'm still waiting for you to show me where I have been aggressive?

 

[Amaranta]

I am a zealot. Many of us who have saved horses that farriers and vets have told us cannot be saved are zealots because what we have seen with our own eyes seems nothing short of a miracle.

Believe it or not, I can understand that, as I have said on other posts, I have over the years had very very good farriers, I cannot believe this is purely down to luck, I dislike the farrier bashing that goes on - they are not all bad.

I believe that there are very few horses who are genetically or conformationally unable to work barefoot. I believe that genetics in particular are nowhere near as important as people perceive them to be because of the number of "genitically unable to cope" thoroughbreds that I have seen succesfully go barefoot. Clearly there are some issues with certain genes like the recently discovered one in Connemara ponies which leads directly to inner/outer hoof wall separation in both shod and barefoot ponies.
I will have to disagree, imho conformation and genetics play a big part

I believe that there are thousands of horses with insulin regulation issues due to IR, EPSM, EMS or PPID (Cushings), mostly undiagnosed, who cannot cope barefoot without stringent diet control.

agreed and a lot of those horses are genetically disposed and even with stringent diet control will never be able to go barefoot

I believe that most of those horses could go barefoot it the owner was able to provide them with perfection in terms of feeding, work and lifestyle.

I believe that perfection is VERY DIFFICULT for an ordinary working horse-owner in a livery stable to provide and that that is NO FAULT OF THE OWNER.

The trouble with perfection is that what is perfect for one horse may not be for another, but in general terms it is fairly easy, the only time a horse needs cereal in it's diet is when it is working VERY hard, ie eventing, racing etc, the majority of horses in this country do not need cereal at all, owners think that a hack 3x weekly is working hard and therefore feed too much cereal, I believe that it is this that has been a real contributory cause to the diseases you mention

I see no problem with being passionate about the welfare of the horse and for me, barefoot done properly is entirely to the welfare of the horse, not only its feet.

I agree, I care passionately about horse welfare and it is this that fuels my argument, I personally feel that it is unfair to put a horse through unnecessary pain when it is perfectly sound and happy shod, if it ain't broke don't fix it

 

[Amaranta]

"some people out there who spout rubbish" kind of suggests you are referring to a few people. Then you say you are not, so then you must be referring to everyone. So, then all these 'barefooters' are spouting rubbish according to the dialogue.

I am not sure whether I would understand your ethos even if you tried to explain it, I find your logic quite baffling tbh. I did same ONE OR TWO, how you have managed to equate that to ALL, I simply cannot fathom

Which comments was I suppose to agree/disagree with?

I did not ask you to agree/disagee, I asked you to tell me why you did not agree, you really need to read posts properly

One more thing, could you explain what you think my ethos is? Do you know? Or, is just perception that I even HAVE an ethos?

Have no idea which is why I asked - am still waiting for you to explain as per paragraph above

I'm still waiting for you to show me where I have been aggressive?

right now for instance

 

[Littlelegs]

Cptrayes- very interesting fact about connemaras. I have a Connie x tb, & her feet have always been her weak point. She was shod from being 4 until her late teens when her reduced work load led the farrier to suggest just trimming. She never needed a transition period & would not be happy trotting great distances on gravel but that to me for her current work load is preferable to damaged feet from nail holes & the farrier assures me her feet are better unshod for light work. In my teens I blamed her feet on her tb sire until farrier said connies hooves are less hardy than other natives. I've always had remarks that its the tb in her that's led to less than perfect feet, you are the first person to mention its a connie trait, beginning to think mine must be an exception, so thankyou

 

[amandap]

You might find this interesting littlelegs. This is Connies that have the gene not all Connies though so don't panic. http://connemara-pony.blogspot.com/

 

[Littlelegs]

Thankyou amandap. I'm on my phone so have only had a brief scan but what I've seen is very much worth further reading later. I think it is something that effects her to a degree, without regular shoes or trims every 6 weeks I imagine her feet would easily look like the pics. Dam was overheight & therefore only ever put to tbs that I know of, & mines never foaled. At 23 now i'm not expecting them to have any major changes. Again, thankyou can't wait to read on pc fully this eve.

 

[MagicMelon]

I do both. I have a barefoot trimmer who trims my 2 veteran ponies - both have had hoof problems in the past and I would definately say going barefoot has helped them, especially one who we were told to keep shod for most of his earlier years (and was on and off lame with it but not since being barefoot). My competition horse is done by my farrier though, he is shod through the outdoor competing season and over winter I have his shoes taken off and the farrier just trims him. I would love to keep him barefoot too but sadly its just not practical from a slippage point of view when Im eventing and show jumping.

 

[Oberon]

My competition horse is done by my farrier though, he is shod through the outdoor competing season and over winter I have his shoes taken off and the farrier just trims him. I would love to keep him barefoot too but sadly its just not practical from a slippage point of view when Im eventing and show jumping.

Sounds like a very sensible compromise.