Video of interest in the barefoot debate!

I don't think I'm a squeemish person, but blurgh!! ... and again!!
Really really interesting vid - I would have loved to see the same but with an equivalent but shod hoof next to it.
Ours are both unshod/barefoot.
 
I agree, ThePony, would be interesting to have seen a shod comparison.

Very interesting, but the words 'proof' and that "shoeing is cruelty to horses" are very strong statements to be made IMO.

However, it is very interesting to see the hoof mechanism during the loading process.
 
Pod77 said:
Very interesting, but the words 'proof' and that "shoeing is cruelty to horses" are very strong statements to be made IMO.
Click to expand...

agree - I think it actually detracts from what is a very interesting vid as it doen't help to give the impression of an impartial scientific demonstration
 
really interesting video, but the mark of a shod hoof in the sand doesn't look quite right....every hoof mark I see in soft ground you can still see an impression of the frog! whereas in this there's no frog impression, looks like just a shoe has been placed without it being on a horse!
 
firstponyMinto said:
really interesting video, but the mark of a shod hoof in the sand doesn't look quite right....every hoof mark I see in soft ground you can still see an impression of the frog! whereas in this there's no frog impression, looks like just a shoe has been placed without it being on a horse!
Click to expand...

Being a bit of a sad case I have had a good look at this at the firm but giving mud surface on the track down to the fields on the livery yard I'm on. Our two barefoot girls leave prints just like that one on the vid. The shod ones vary alot (there are quite a few farriers that shoe the horses - big variation in ability imho), most are just as if a shoe has been pressed in, some show a hint of a frog, but nowhere near as deep in the imprint as the shoe.
 
very interesting videos, but my conclusion wasn't that barefoot or shod is better, more to the point that correctly trimmed and frog loaded foot is better than one that is only periferally loaded :)
and yes, fpM, the shod print doesn't look right ;)
 
No, that horseshoe imprint dosent look quite right does it!

If a horse had done that print, then, particularly in a loose sand footing, the horse will have flicked a bit of sand in front of the print at toe off?

Unless they used a crane to lower the horse down, then lift it up again!

I cant see the 2nd link?
 
Maybe they did it with severed legs?! I mean they are using a dissected hoof in the demo.

It is interesting, and I truly believe that barefoot is much more healthy for the horse's foot, but I'm not sure that a dissected foot proves anything much about how the structures work, because obviously half of the support is missing.
 
Naturally said:
Maybe they did it with severed legs?! I mean they are using a dissected hoof in the demo.

It is interesting, and I truly believe that barefoot is much more healthy for the horse's foot, but I'm not sure that a dissected foot proves anything much about how the structures work, because obviously half of the support is missing.
Click to expand...

So true.

Much as that video provides an interesting look at how the hoof behaves under loading,it does not represent the real live loading of a horse's foot.

There are other extrinsic and intrinsic factors that need to be taken into account.
 
martlin said:
very interesting videos, but my conclusion wasn't that barefoot or shod is better, more to the point that correctly trimmed and frog loaded foot is better than one that is only periferally loaded :)
and yes, fpM, the shod print doesn't look right ;)
Click to expand...

How do you load the frog with a standard thickness shoe on, though????
 
Last edited:
Just throwing this out there - What about bar shoes then? Was having very interesting chat with farrier last time he came out who has the firm belief that all showjumpers/high level dressage horses should be shod in them because of the stress put on the heel landing or something like that! He also said barefoot is better for the structures of the hoof but not practical for a lot of people and horses with feet that just cant be left barefoot. He said its great if the horses are just chucked in a field though as allows nail holes to grow out etc :p.
 
I may have this completly wrong but I thought a well shod horses frogs should touch the ground.

I'm in the process of going barefoot atm for costs more than anything and my horse has such good feet I really don't think he needs shoes.
 
I've just gone to look at this vid and the second one - basically, what he's saying is that the frog needs to be allowed to work naturally, and in his opinion that's best achieved by the horse not being shod. But, that's what our farrier has been saying for years, that's why he hates to see my sister's horse with his boxy feet (that's his conformation unfortunately). That's not to say that the frog should stand proud of the shoe as in this video (you'll prob need to be a horsehero subscriber to watch it all) http://www.horsehero.com/45764/59751/62609

Ron's frogs just touch the ground even on tarmac/concrete, and he doesn't exactly wear racing plates! - so I agree with Martlin - It can be done.
 
Snowysadude said:
Just throwing this out there - What about bar shoes then? Was having very interesting chat with farrier last time he came out who has the firm belief that all showjumpers/high level dressage horses should be shod in them because of the stress put on the heel landing or something like that! He also said barefoot is better for the structures of the hoof but not practical for a lot of people and horses with feet that just cant be left barefoot. He said its great if the horses are just chucked in a field though as allows nail holes to grow out etc :p.
Click to expand...

Ah bless him. "Barefoot is great if the horses are just chucked out in a field". He's a little bit out of touch, and would have been even when I was a child. All the ponies I rode in the old days were "barefoot" and we did miles, competed, hunted, the lot. A look at the Rockley Farm website should convince most that barefoot is a relalistic option for most horses, given the correct trimming and care of the horse. However, if people choose to have their horses shod, that is entirely their choice as far as I'm concerned, I can't be bothered preaching.
 
Pod77 said:
No, that horseshoe imprint dosent look quite right does it!

If a horse had done that print, then, particularly in a loose sand footing, the horse will have flicked a bit of sand in front of the print at toe off?

Unless they used a crane to lower the horse down, then lift it up again!

I cant see the 2nd link?
Click to expand...

I think it was done as a intro rather than scientific picture of a hoofprint.

click on the youtube posters name and the 2nd vid is in his profile.
 
Its nice to have this sort of thing discussed. Makes a change from unhelpful accusations generalising opposing points of view :)
 
Kokopelli said:
I may have this completly wrong but I thought a well shod horses frogs should touch the ground.
Click to expand...



Bob Bowker, who has done a huge amount of research, says that in a correctly functioning foot, you should not be able to slide a steel ruler under your horse's frog when stood on a flat hard surface (tarmac/concrete). I've never owned a shod horse who would pass this test, and I've owned about 40. I'm sure there are some, but they don't seem to be common, and I suspect that the farriers of some of them would be describing them as having "prolapsed frogs" and thinking the horse had a problem. There have certainly been posts on the Vet forum about frog "prolapse".

Most shod horses that I see around, I could put my fingers under their frog if stood on concrete, never mind a ruler. OK I have thin fingers, but even so :) !
 
I think showing a dissected hoof is incredibly helpful with or without the rest of the hoof! It's purpose is to demonstrate how the pedal bone moves inside the hoof capsule and the hoof dynamic as a whole - short of dissecting a live horse and making it walk, I think this pretty much gives a good impression.

Can't believe some of you are still questioning even that!
 
Just seen this thread and it is along the lines of the 'no frog, no hoof, no horse' Facebook stuff. From reading the posts so far many are doubting the shod imprint as the frog does not touch the ground.

However, whether or not the frog touches the ground is not the issue as I see it, as the frog needs to be LOADED with the weight of the horse when the hoof touches the ground.

It is the weight of the horse supported on the whole of the hoof which causes the natural expansion and contraction of the hoof which makes the action of the hoof work properly.

Obviously when the hoof expands blood rushes into the lamina to fill the vacuum, when the hoof is lifted and contaction occurs then the blood is forces back out. As the circulatory system is bringing oxygenated blood to the hoof tissues then this is restricted as the shoe stops the pumping action of the hoof.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top