Trimmer prosecuted for 'shoeing'

Disingenuous picture Tigertail as the two are not put into the wall in the same way. It's not the length of the farrier nail you should compare, it's the width - the screw is put in at a right angle to the outside wall, and I would say has as much danger of going right through to the sensitive structures as the nail put in at a right angle (or thereabouts) to the sole.
 
Paulag said:
. . . And yet the alternative practitioner still managed to **** it up.
Click to expand...

well the screw came out... so wasn't long/invasive enough ;)

I'd be interested to know if the screws make a big difference to the wrap or not.

SC I agree re the factions, but spose equally there is more than one way to skin a cat and perhaps anything with its main base in the US isn't going to be so bothered with the legislation of it over here.
 
I'm not suggesting that everyone has to do things the same way, just that there needs to be an overarching consensus of principles which all agree on and which can be regulated.

As an example, you can be a chartered Environmentalist, but the routes to do so cover a myriad of professions with different governing professional bodies.
 
One of the problems is that health professions generally need to have an evidence base and to function within that evidence base.

One of the defining features of alternative health is to offer a solution to an intractable problem. They tend to then get very aggressive when asked for evidence.

This doesn't mean that I don't think some horses do perfectly well without shoes, but noone should be bullied into it and it shouldn't be offered as a panacea for foot problems. Personally I'd still us a farrier, in the same way as I work with my vet when I do a minimum intervention approach with some of my elderly rescue animals.
 
Would any of you bandage said screws to your horses feet? As that sounds like that is exactly what has happened in this case.
 
Brightbay said:
Thanks for clarifying :)

Agree about bad farriers vs bad trimmers - in fact I currently use neither, since I can't find anybody local whose work reassures me enough to use them.

The current situation is not good. The FRC does not provide a good mechanism to deal with poor farriery (or we'd have at least some evidence of them taking action rather than endless threads on here of dire shod feet) and the trimmers are fragmented and do not have a single regulatory body to reassure clients and uphold standards.

This is a bad situation for horse welfare, let alone a cause of constant confusion and anxiety for many owners - and then having the two sets of professionals at one another's throats over petty definitions of what consitutes "shoeing" doesn't help move the situation forward at all.
Click to expand...

Agree :)

I wish we could all get together and go bowling. But I doubt it will happen any time soon :(
 
Don't care if you're a farrier or trimmer, if you screw up something should happen to you. Fines, malpractice insurance to cover getting horse better.

Also I'm new to barefoot. Loving it actually and the horses are doing very well. My trained farrier is coming Wednesday. We both agree the girls need this. I've also discussed at length what I expect and how we can accomplish the bare for both girls so that they continue on normally. As in training and competing later on. I have no reason to doubt this considering the work he's done on my 2yo. He's taken care of her since she was a weanling. She gets rasped twice a year. That's all she needs. When he started doing her she needed some work in getting her heel lower of all things. Something that was getting worse and previous BS wasn't managing. So I'm pretty confident my farrier can get the job done correctly. I don't think I would have taken the bare root if I couldn't use him.

Terri
 
There's a lot of emotive language going on here-people saying they are 'just' screws, but 'banging' nails on is damaging etc. Why can people not just say, it's not correct and yes we have a dodgy trimmer in our midst rather than trying to defend 'tiny' screws and casts which are certainly not natural nor taken off like hoofboots!
 
The trimmer didnt screw it up - that isnt what the court case is about - its about whether or not a wrap is a shoe and therefore should only be applied by a farrier. The FRC tried to imply that the trimmer caused harm to the horse, there was no evidence to support this so they didnt make it the fulcrum of the case.

From the farriers forum
The services of Jonathon Hodge were terminated due to his conduct in response to the change in hoof care provision to the pony in question. This included events leading up to his entry onto the site without a prior appointment and the subsequent actions he took without the authorisation of the RDA.

The RDA acted in response to the advice of their Equine Vet to change hoof care provision.

The Pony in question was not being treated for a fractured pedal bone confirmed by the vet during conversations with the above. Radiographs taken in connection with this historic event confirmed the fracture had completely healed. Hoof care provision was changed to address hoof imbalance, consequential uneven joint alignment and excessive removal of structure all evidenced by recent radiographs.

The Equine Vet involved has been supportive throughout and has not submitted any complaint to the FRC and was fully aware of the Poly Wraps used and the reasons why. An Equicast was not suitable in this instance or used.

The FRC attempted a test case by raising a Summons to be issued for alleged unlawful farriery. This Summons was subsequently withdrawn by the FRC’s solicitors.
Click to expand...


TBH I think the whole thing is over farriers defending their patch so to speak and trying to protect what they see as what provides their income - which I can understand to a point - not to when the horses welfare is compromised though. Seriously murky water for everyone :(
 
Last edited:
Tiger tail do you believe the wrap causing bruising and the screw becoming loose and getting stuck under the wrap is acceptable then?
 
Paulag said:
One of the problems is that health professions generally need to have an evidence base and to function within that evidence base.

One of the defining features of alternative health is to offer a solution to an intractable problem. They tend to then get very aggressive when asked for evidence.

This doesn't mean that I don't think some horses do perfectly well without shoes, but noone should be bullied into it and it shouldn't be offered as a panacea for foot problems. Personally I'd still us a farrier, in the same way as I work with my vet when I do a minimum intervention approach with some of my elderly rescue animals.
Click to expand...

The trouble is, when you look for it there is very little proper evidence base for shoe use, particularly remedial shoeing for pathologies.
Have said before and am sure I will again, I would very much prefer there to be more proper research results on using barefoot, unfortunately it isn't really there but seems to be working for my little case-study :), vet was in agreement with taking shoes off if I wanted to bother although had not used barefoot for his specific problem previously (now he has!)... and when last saw the horse told me he should be hunting and why was I taking so long ;) :D. Can you actually bully someone into doing something into the decisions they make to do with their horse?
 
TigerTail said:
The trimmer didnt screw it up - that isnt what the court case is about - its about whether or not a wrap is a shoe and therefore should only be applied by a farrier. The FRC tried to imply that the trimmer caused harm to the horse, there was no evidence to support this so they didnt make it the fulcrum of the case.

From the farriers forum
Click to expand...

Boring as it is for me to disagree with you again, this is hugely disingenuous. The quote is from a trimmer posting on the farrier's forum. When asked to come up with evidence to support her assertions she subsequently disappeared. So it coming from said forum most definitely does not make it a farrier's opinion.
 
ester said:
Can you actually bully someone into doing something into the decisions they make to do with their horse?
Click to expand...

Quite probably - certainly if some of the things that have been said about me for shoeing my footsore mare or asking for evidence for supplements recommended are anything to go by. Seen this sort of thing lots of times on forums where you get group think and anyone who disagrees gets shouted down.
 
do people pay that much attention to others on forums :eek:.

This forum introduced me to the concept/possibility several years ago but I went away and did my own investigations elsewhere first.. and those I spoke to on here initially when he went lame didn't shout at me for putting bar shoes on in the first instance.
 
ester said:
do people pay that much attention to others on forums :eek:.
Click to expand...

I think that people who are desperate for a solution may well listen to someone offering one. That was why the cancer act was put into law - people suffering for cancer were an easy mark for snake oil salesmen.
 
iamSanta said:
I've used this trimmer before, only had him around once or twice before returning back to shoes. We were concerned about taking our lami mares shoes off because she was so foot sore, but he convinced us to do it, he then proceeded to hack her hooves down to about half the original size :eek: he did not suggest any form of hoof boot, he then left us with a very lame horse. Decided to presevere and next time he came out he hacked it all off again! Nothing gradual or progressive, just straight into what it 'should' look like. We then had our old farrier back to put her shoes back on, who couldn't because he'd actually trimmed pretty much all her hoof wall off :( we then spoke to another trimmer (a very good one) who said she has had to fix many of his old clients horses.
This doesn't really have much to do with the OP but it really doesn't surprise me that he's done this!
Click to expand...

Me too!
 
Bad trimmers should be punished. Bad farriers should be punished. Farriers need to wake up and smell the coffee and stop burying their heads in the sand. Hoofcare
 
....damn phone....hoofcare is evolving and it cannot be ignored by arrogant farriers forever. And I use a trimmer for one and a farrier for the other. Everyone needs to try to do the best for their horse and learn.
 
Paulag said:
The scary thing is because there's no regulation, there's nothing to stop him going back to trimming again.
Click to expand...

HE DIDNT DO ANY HARM TO THE HORSE this has been ascertained already - therefore him trimming isnt an issue! The whole thing is over his use of wraps which the FRC is trying to say is a shoe and therefore under their jurisdiction. Given that a farrier who recently purposefully went out and lamed a horse wasnt taken off the farriers registry and only given a slap on the risk, having a regulatory body means diddly squat.
 
I don't think its has been ascertained that he did no harm - apparently the horse became very lame and had an impending abcess.

And of course that farrier should have been struck off - but having a profession with no regulation at all isn't the answer to that.
 
Paulag said:
it shouldn't be offered as a panacea for foot problems.
Click to expand...

Not even if it works much better than conventional treatments for life-threatening conditions ;) ?

Before you answer, by the way, neither the conventional treatment nor barefoot rehabs have any valid scienctific evidence to back them up.


Paulag said:
The scary thing is because there's no regulation, there's nothing to stop him going back to trimming again.
Click to expand...

Same is true of farriers, of course, Mr Wellfair is now able to shoe again.

Paulag said:
And of course that farrier should have been struck off - but having a profession with no regulation at all isn't the answer to that.
Click to expand...

I completely agree with you that paid trimming should be regulated.


The profession with no regulation at all has arisen because of training failures by the FRC, turning out apprentices with no instruction in how to trim or manage fully working horses. This goes on to this day, with young farriers leaving college thinking that it is correct to trim the callouses of a barefoot horse or that it is really good if a horse grows a "shoe" of horn and takes the frog out of contact with the floor. The only ones who get this instruction are those who have farriers with hardworking barefoot horses on their books.
 
SCREWS!

I had a horse with cracks in his feet. The bar attached to stablilise one was done with screws of half and inch in length at the top of the hoof and 5/8 an inch further down. It was a big horse, but people are getting over-excited about he idea of screwing a screw into a horse's foot, it's done all the time and I'm guessing this trimmer has seen it done and how safe it is.

Once I had seen it done once I too did it myself on another foot that went unstable.

Of course if I knew then what I know now I would have sorted out the horse's copper deficiency, caused by too much iron and manganese in this area, and taken his darned shoes off instead of putting some on at two years old !!
 
How are wraps different than shoes?

The wraps allowed his feet to adjust to the new situation without pain. They differ completely from shoes in allowing the sole and frog to bear weight and adjust to that role. Whilst they do to an extent prevent expansion, like a shoe, they are a good half-way position to enable a sore horse in a situation where he could not avoid being sore for a few weeks, to transition more easily.


ps My opinion is that the trimmer was very unwise to use screws, not because they were unsafe, see above, but because of the risk of being prosecuted for providing either veterinary or farriery.
 
Last edited:
TigerTail said:
HE DIDNT DO ANY HARM TO THE HORSE this has been ascertained already - therefore him trimming isnt an issue! The whole thing is over his use of wraps which the FRC is trying to say is a shoe and therefore under their jurisdiction. Given that a farrier who recently purposefully went out and lamed a horse wasnt taken off the farriers registry and only given a slap on the risk, having a regulatory body means diddly squat.
Click to expand...

This. It all smacks a bit of hypocrisy really.
 
Apparently hoof boots are also classed as a shoe technically. They are supposed to be fitted by a farrier. Wonder if anyone will get prosecuted for this? It is frankly ridiculous. My sister knows the trimmer concerned and personally knows of one horse that is alive today because of him and the wraps because she recommended him.
 
Wagtail said:
Apparently hoof boots are also classed as a shoe technically.
Click to expand...

Removable hoof boots aren't classed as a shoe as they are temporary. However, there is a blurry line..... We use glue on hoof boots (fitted by a very modern minded farrier) and use them like shoes leaving them on for a shoeing cycle. A friend of ours uses the same glue on hoof boots as a temporary hoof boot (fits them himself) and takes them off after every ride.
 
Of course hoof boots are not shoes and unlikely to classified as such in law when the farrier act was framed hoof boots did not exist those who framed the act meant the nailing of shoes to the feet.
As to wether this case would have been classed as shoeing we simply don't know because it was never argued in court .
Personally FWIW I would not be happy having anything like this done with any one but a vet in charge.
Will it change my attitude to BF not one jot .
I feel perfectly confident I can judge wants best for my horses regulation is not helping the horses of this country to be well shod so I fail to see how it should help the trimming situation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top