# Grass & footiness- barefoot people please.



## teddyt (8 May 2010)

Before i start, this isnt having a go at anyone or trying to create an argument - i am just trying to get my head round something. I have read lots on this but still cant seem to get an answer that makes sense! Therefore i would appreciate the input/ideas from people.  

Time and again i read/hear that if a horse is to stay barefoot then diet is the key, one of the main points being to limit or remove grass intake. My question is why?

Its common knowledge that too much grass will cause laminitis, so by saying to limit grass in barefoot horses does that mean they are more susceptible somehow to laminitis than shod horses? Why is it that a barefoot horse (in many cases, not all) has to be removed or restricted from grass in order for it to stay sound?

Of course many horses, shod or not, need restricted grazing at certain times of year and i know much of the grass that people graze their horses on is unsuitable (grown for livestock). But i keep hearing that barefoot horses need restricting further as grass makes them footy or lame.

Surely this is just low grade or the beginnings of laminitis? Or is there some other reason?

I guess what i am trying to understand is _why_ grass gets the blame in many cases for the failure of being sound when barefoot. When to me there could be other reasons, such as the soles being thin or if the horse is lame when it has access to grass then it is bordering laminitic. So barefoot or shod, to any horse too much grass is bad but why is this more the case in barefoot horses?

Thanks for reading and input gratefully received!


----------



## MochaDun (8 May 2010)

I think that's a very interesting query to pose. I don't know the answer to it and look forward to reading what others post on this.  We've just had a barefoot horse on our yard go down with laminitis in last couple of weeks after being turned out on new field three weeks ago after the winter when the horses had had very limited grazing.  He was left out 24/7 though there are 2 other horses out on the same pasture also unshod (rather than strictly barefoot I think) who (fingers crossed) seem fine, one ridden regularly, one not as retired.  The horse that got laminitis is the classic native/good do-er type and the other 2 are finer so it might be purely a too rich grass issue rather than a barefoot thing.


----------



## TallyHo123 (8 May 2010)

I'm going to keep watching this thread!


----------



## AngieandBen (8 May 2010)

Some horses just can't tollerate sugar in the diet whether it be grass or hard feed; the first place ( usually) to notice in barefooted horses is the feet ie being footy.
Shoes on shod horses stops a lot of the  blood flow to the feet so obviously they don't feel 
it so much
My opinion is all horses/ponies should have restricted grass, we just don't have the right enviroment for them to have ad lib grazing.

My two live out 24/7 on a track system which is grass, but restriced; they are fine with this although Ben is a little footy on sharp stones ( but he was when shod too)


They are fed Fast Fibre too


----------



## lachlanandmarcus (8 May 2010)

You get the message from horses about their comfort or otherwise a lot more directly when they are unshod, footiness sometimes being ouch thats a stone rather than ouch my feet hurt cos of lami.

And the type of beasties who often have good enough feet to be barefoot in the first place are often native types who are also good doers and therefore more at risk from rich grass perhaps.

so I think the two things are intertwined but not directly related.

I have one barefoot and one shod, think its horses for courses. the barefoot one is the native type and needs poor grazing due to breed not due to lack of shoes.


----------



## mrdarcy (8 May 2010)

Just seen this and I'm on my way out again for the evening so don't have time to post my own explanation at the moment but in the meantime I recommend reading this article:

http://www.hoofrehab.com/LaminitisUpdate.htm

and this one:

http://www.unshod.co.uk/articles.php   (go to the article called Low Grade Laminitis - A New Understanding of Hoof Pathology)

Basically it is not the fact of being barefoot that makes horses more sensitive to sugars in the grass rather that you can more easily see the consequences in the barefoot horse as the sole makes contact with the ground. The shod horse is just as likely to have minor inflammation in the feet but as sole is prevented from having ground contact by the addition of the shoe you don't notice the consequences as quickly or as definitively. But shod horses that get a bit pottery in the summer, or have undiagnosed intermittent lameness, or just a shorter stride, or even get a bit nappy, or start refusing jumps - all these things may be indicative of low grade bilateral foot pain caused by too much sugar in the diet.

Now I really must go and get ready!


----------



## Kallibear (9 May 2010)

Laminitis comes in various degrees, ranging from the very mild increased blood flow to the feet to the full blown dying laminia (i.e 'proper' laminitis). The fromer can't really be called 'lamitintis' as there's no actual imflamaition of the laminia, but it's is the exact same mechanism, and the prelude to true 'laminitis'.

This very mild laminitis doesn't have to make the feet sore, it just makes them more sensitive (think how your hands or feet become more sensitive when they're hot) - that won't be noticed by shod horses, who have great big bits of metal protecting their feet, but an unshod horse will notice more, leading to 'footiness'.

Horses aren't designed to eat grasss, at least not the grass we have in most parts of britian. They're meant to be eating woody dry scrubby rubbish (and lots of it) but most horses are given plenty of lush green grass, which has far too much sugar in it.

And this overload of sugar causes 'laminitis'. A vast majority of horses will have some very very low grade laminitis in the spring and summer - every horse who's got growth rings in their feet! But because they have shoes on it's not noticed - they're possibly a little sluggish or slightly short striding etc (as Mr darcy said) but they're not lame as such.

it's the unshod horses that show it more, as their feet have to work harder - they start to notice those stones and bumps that they strode over before, plus most barefoot owners a bit more clued up and preceptive (i.e 'obsessed'  ) when it comes to all things feet related.

I've cetainly noticed that Toby is a little more sensitive now that he was 2months ago. Feet still look exactly the same, and he's doing the same work, he just noticed the stones a bit more. So he's on a more restricted diet now.

Basically, grass is bad of all horses (really, it is), it's just noticed more in barefoot horses!


----------



## AengusOg (9 May 2010)

Grass...bad for horses? What total rubbish.

Equines have evolved over millenia to eat herbage, mainly grasses, and wild horses such as zebra eat nothing but grasses. They follow the rains, eating the new growth as it appears, and walk for miles without shoes.

It's the modern management of horses, the type of grass available to them, the use of cereals in their diets, stresses of artificial living conditions and regimes, and the lack of common sense in some owners which cause foot problems in horses.

I visit lots of yards through my work and I can't believe the variation in shoeing performed by different farriers. Too much heel; not enough heel; toes dumped; splayed feet; boxy feet..........each of them with their own idea of what is correct and good for that horse.

Not all horses are suited to being barefoot. There are many reasons for this, such as their breed, foot and leg conformation, what they are fed, how they are kept, and the beliefs of their owners/farriers/EPs.

I have five horses, all native types, all kept out all year at grass and fed haylage in the winter. Four of them are unshod, one is generally shod because he does a lot of road work. At certain times of the year they have access to an area of steep banks and exposed gravel surfaces and their feet are always in fair order, I've kept them this way for twelve years and none of them have ever had laminitis.


----------



## reindeerlover (9 May 2010)

I'd just like to point out that "our" horses have not evolved in any way- back when survival of the fittest was paramount there were no thoroughbreds or KWPNs roaming the earth so how is it possible to say that horses evolved to eat a certain type of grass and be barefoot? Horses were selectively bred, some to run fast, some to jump high and over the last maybe 200 years we have inbred the things so much that they do have poor conformation, do have poor feet, do have to eat hard feed.

If we are looking at a wild equine such as a zebra, as Aengus mentions- they eat what they can and they don't need shoes because they live in a natural environment doing what they were made to do- survive.

I feed my horses as individuals, tailored to the work they do and their body condition and there is no way that I would consider locking any of them in a stable for half the day because I believe grass is bad for them. How "natural" is that?

I know that I will be shot down for this but frankly I don't care, my horses are happy and healthy. I do have one who is barefoot too but I wouldn't hesitate for one moment to put shoes on her if I needed to. Thanks for listening


----------



## AngieandBen (9 May 2010)

Like I said, some can be on grass 24/7 365 days a year some can't. 

Its like some humans; one may get diabetes the next might not. 

There's no gereralization, its just all individual and only the owner knows how/what the horse needs/and can tollerate

Both my ponies are natives and they could be on lush grass all day and never show any laminitc signs;( I've had one for nearly 9 years) BUT I don't let them as they would be the size of a house!


----------



## brucea (9 May 2010)

I think seasonal comromise and discomfort is a thing that most horses live with to one extent or another - whether it is a full blown laminitis event, an episode of LGL, or as subtle as a hoof ring and maybe a bit of WLS.

On the whole you are going to notice any compromise much earlier in a barefoot horse (WLS case in point - you can't see it in a shod horse because the shoe covers it up - so you only see that every 6 weeks!). Shoes do have an effect on the hoof sensitivity and they act a bit like a local anesthetic in some ways, so a horse who is shod will have a fair bit more compromise before the usual symptoms show - but very often all of the other indicators (behavioural, itching, altered gait and stance) will be there before they show any signs of unsoundness. 

By the time the problem is visible in a shod horse, much more preventable damage has already been done, and leaving shoes on a laminitic is going to be very damaging for them (explain how peripheral loading helps a hoof where the wall and solar connection is compromised, and the sole is in a bridging rather than a supporting function? I can't.)

The other thing simply is that more barefoot horses do have laminitis, navicular and other hoof pathologies - that's very often why they are barefoot in the first place. So yes, the incidence is higher among barefoot horses. 

What I have no patience with is the "barefoot mantra" assumption that if you're going down the barefoot route then your horse has to come off grass and ont o a track system/stables. That kind of lifestyle adjustment for a horse should only be made when you're sure that grass is an issue.

P.S. All of mine are barefoot. 2 have 24x7 grass, one has restricted, and one can have none.


----------



## Oberon (9 May 2010)

My two barefooters are on unrestricted grazing.  I think the basic premise is that a barefoot horse will show up any laminitic style changes in a grumbling before a full blown attack. That allows the owner to make minor changes before anything irreversable happens.

A few years ago, a friend and very experienced horse owner who has always managed her horse in a sensible way was shocked (as were we all) when her horse develpoed acute laminitis in all four feet. He was in alot of pain and it took time for him to recover. He is now muzzled in the field and micro managed to avoid another attack. His owner lives in fear of another acute attack comeing from nowhere.

If he were my horse I would take his shoes off, graze at night only and remove the commercial feed (labeled Laminitic Safe) which is covered in mollasses. This would allow the owner to relax a little as she would spot the warning signs long before an acute attack again.

He is not my horse though, so I keep my mouth shut.......


----------



## cptrayes (9 May 2010)

One thing I notice missing from this discussion so far is the fact that laminitis is a symptom, not the disease itself. The disease itself is an inability to digest sugars in grasses properly, and horses that have it have more going on in their bodies than simply feeling stones when they tread on them. Their liver is affected, and in one extreme case that I have now, they can be terribly itchy, get gastric ulcers, and have some odd behaviours, presumably because they feel like us when we have an overworked liver, hung over. Day after day throughout the spring, summer and autumn. 

Don't forget that the theory is that a bug (staphylococcus bovi, I think) jumps the gut wall and travels to the feet to attack the laminae. If that theory is correct then their whole body is being attacked by those bugs in the bloodstream, it just shows in the feet. It's my belief that it shows more in the feet of a barefoot horse than a shod one because there is a greater blood supply to the foot of a barefoot horse. (doppler ultrasound and thermographs both show this, and it also explains why barefoot feet grow at approximately twice the rate of a shod foot on the same horse.)

I and many other barefooters would rather listen to the fact that our horses are not as sound on stones as they are in the winter, and remove them from grass during the day in spring. It's not so I can ride him over stones, I would put boots on him for that. It's so his whole body is healthy. I consider it a big benefit to barefoot that it lets me know early that my horse has problems with the quality and volume of spring grass.


----------



## teddyt (10 May 2010)

Some valid points and interesting opinions from lots of people, thank you. Thanks for the links mrdarcy, very helpful- particularly the first one.




			Don't forget that the theory is that a bug (staphylococcus bovi, I think) jumps the gut wall and travels to the feet to attack the laminae. If that theory is correct then their whole body is being attacked by those bugs in the bloodstream, it just shows in the feet. It's my belief that it shows more in the feet of a barefoot horse than a shod one because there is a greater blood supply to the foot of a barefoot horse. (doppler ultrasound and thermographs both show this, and it also explains why barefoot feet grow at approximately twice the rate of a shod foot on the same horse.)
		
Click to expand...

From reading mr darcys links this is what i gathered- that because of the increased blood flow to the feet, barefoot horses are more susceptible. In the first of the following links, it also says that the foot is more susceptible to free radical damage, hence the problem shows up more in the feet.

http://www.dodsonandhorrell.com/fileadmin/user_upload/pdf/equitalk.pdf

This link (about latest research) confirms what i suspected that it is too much grass, rather than grass itself that causes problems.-

http://www.horsetalk.co.nz/news/2010/05/002.shtml

What i didnt know is that itchiness can be an early symptom of too much grass. I have learnt lots from this thread. Thank you everyone.


----------



## Brandy (10 May 2010)

A friend of mine is a trimmer for barefoot horses and I have never heard her say anythign about limiting grass.


----------



## cptrayes (10 May 2010)

My itchy one is unusual TeddyT, he is very compromised. He doesn't appear to be able to tolerate grass sugars at all, his feet go so thin that you can bend his soles with your fingers. He's probably insulin resistant (he produces far too much insulin when he gets grass sugars). He hasn't been tested but he has all the symptoms.

But I know of three definite itchies in the near area, mine, one of my friend's and another friend who has one whose skin comes up in lumps if she has carrots in winter and spring grass.

The latest laminitis theory is that it is excess calories over requirements which is causing the problem. This does fit with the fact that they are easier to control if kept off grass during daylight, when the calories are highest. But  I am personally unconvinced that fructans (short chain sugars) are not involved. The fructan theory has been debunked because the research was very flawed - it delivered directly into the horse's stomach more fructans than a horse can physically eat in one day. But the theory that it is simply excess calorie intake over what is needed just does not fit what I see with my warmblood. He is always fit and lean. I adjust his hard food and daytime forage so that he stays fit and lean. In other words, his calorie intake matches his needs. But if he grazes between 10am and 7pm, he is unable to go on the stonier paths around here without feeling the stones as he treads on them. I have also seen research which is suggesting that short chain sugars in fizzy drinks (corn syrup - i.e. fructose) is believed to be causing type two diabetes and heart disease in children. I know horses are not humans, but I can also see every reason why a constant drip-feed of fructans would be an equal issue in horses.

We need more research!!!

Brandy, either your friend has not got around to telling you, or she is missing part of her education. Excess grass consumption is one big reason that shoes are put back onto horses which have "failed" barefoot. I hear of so many horses that are fine in winter and then go footie in spring or summer, and their owners, and usually their farriers, assume that the reason is that the ground has gone hard. If they took them off the grass they might well be fine. 

Your friend also needs to know about mineral balances. My friend's horses and mine were on the same regime for the last five years, yet mine consistently outperformed hers in their ability to crunch rocks. I wracked my brains until I realised her water comes from a deeper source than mine (we are both on springs). The deeper water source, I knew, is contaminated heavily with manganese and iron. I asked a nutritionist (Maggie...) who posts on here, and she told me that excess manganese and iron will prevent the uptake of copper. I looked at my own nearly black horse, who had turned red during the winter when fed local forage (I normally buy in from further away) and a light went on! My friend now supplements copper and her horses match mine in their ability to tread on stones. Her mare, who used to have to be kept off grass full time to keep her sound, is now able to graze overnight (copper also has a role in insulin regulation, and it looks like this mare's deficiency was preventing her using grass sugars properly).

There is a AWFUL lot  more to barefoot than a trim. Having said that, there are plenty of horses out there that do it very easily with no real change except taking off the shoes. It's a case of listening to the individual horse.


----------



## millimoo (10 May 2010)

Interesting thread.....

My 8yr old novicey Neice, overhearing conversations about a neighbours pony, thought that Laminitis was kept at bay by literally keeping their feet off the grass - rather than 'off the grass'. And wondered how they were going to turn out or compete on the grass at shows - bless her!

She thought walking on the stuff gave them laminitis - she has subsequently been thoroughly educated


----------



## Indy (10 May 2010)

I've got 4 TBs who are all unshod.  They live out through summer on 28 well hedged acres of good grazing with 80 sheep.  I've never noticed in all my time of them being unshod being 'footy' during summer other than the 'I've stood on something sharp get my foot off it quick'

I've watched them in the field through the day and they aren't your head down eat as much as you can kind of horses.  They drift around, sleep and sunbathe (when there is sun), play but they never seem to just eat continuously.  I suppose you could say that they are restricting themselves maybe.  Maybe those horses who are on compuslory restricted grazing feel the need to stuff themselves silly when they are allowed on grass because grass isn't readily available to them all of the time and then that causes your problems.  A bit like binge drinking or binge eating in humans?


----------



## teddyt (10 May 2010)

Indy said:



			Maybe those horses who are on compuslory restricted grazing feel the need to stuff themselves silly when they are allowed on grass because grass isn't readily available to them all of the time and then that causes your problems.  A bit like binge drinking or binge eating in humans?
		
Click to expand...

Yes, that has actually been proven- that when horses that are restricted do get access to grass they will eat more in the short period that they are allowed grass than if they were allowed out for longer.

Unfortunately though there are frequent posts on here where YO/YM dont allow strip grazing or splitting of paddocks. Many people have to use what they are given- too much grass or too little! I am also of the opinion that many people think it is the YO duty to manage the land, when often they should do it themselves. Grass management is all part of owning a horse, wherever you keep it. And its not always easy and varies from year to year. This means that alongside the inappropriate grass itself, many fields are managed badly and this is to the detriment of the horse.


----------



## Brandy (10 May 2010)

cptrayes - I think in that case she is missing a bit of education. Worrying as she is working on people horses and getting paid for it. We have had longt and in depth discussions about the pros and cons of barefoot with her obviously being an advocate and me. while thinking its a grand idea, also think that it will never work for every horse. So as I say, the discussions have been lengthy, and never has this come up. 

Interesting. About to go back and read whole post.......

Also, as an aside - do any of your trim? And if so, under what method? Just curious.


----------



## cptrayes (10 May 2010)

Brandy the only thing I would change about what you say is that it will never work for every horse/owner combination. I'm sure it will work for most horses, but not all owners are able to provide what their particular horse needs. This is no criticism, it's just a fact of life. Strip grazing is a good example. As is some dry footing in winter for horses turned out 24/7. And some of them need Sherlock Holmes to get to grips with their mineral imbalances, cereal intolerances and toxic reaction to wormers!

Your friends lack of concern/knowledge about nutrition when she is a paid and presumably qualified trimmer is worrying. 

I trim for myself and I would say that there isn't, or shouldn't be, "a method". I trim to replicate what my horses create for themselves if I give them enough work on abrasive surfaces. They grow the foot they need in order to balance the leg above it, which like us is not always perfect   Feet change through the seasons, with work and with different food. Jaime Jackson, for example, sees lots of mustangs in the US with their frogs not in contact with the floor on a flat surface. I believe that AEPs are taught that this is correct and to trim for higher heels to make the frog ground passive (please someone correct me if I am wrong). In the UK, in wetter climate than JJ is used to, the vast majority of hard working barefoot horses have their frog in full contact with the floor if stood on a hard flat surface. (Bowker, also in the US, advocates frog contact so that you cannot slide a steel ruler  between the frog and the floor).  I couldn't make my horses grow longer heels if I tried. For many horses in this country, particularly the TB types, if their heels are allowed to grow longer all they will do is slide forwards and underrun the foot. 

So basically, after all that - it's horses for courses, they are all different and there is no one "correct" answer except "listen to the horse".


----------



## maggiesmum (11 May 2010)

teddyt said:



			From reading mr darcys links this is what i gathered- that because of the increased blood flow to the feet, barefoot horses are more susceptible. In the first of the following links, it also says that the foot is more susceptible to free radical damage, hence the problem shows up more in the feet.
		
Click to expand...

Shoes appear to have a numbing affect on the feet, so its not that barefoot horses are more susceptible more that they can actually feel the ground underneath their feet properly.

Someone else also rubbished that fact that grass is bad for horses, grass isn't bad for horses per se, more that the type of grass most of our horses are kept on is bad for them, over fertilised single species rye grass isn't what horses digestive systems were designed for.
I also watch people restrict their horses all summer and then spend all winter stuffing them with food, maybe if a few more people allowed their horses to get a little leaner in the winter they wouldn't have to spend all summer starving them? Just a thought!


----------



## Amymay (11 May 2010)

Worrying as she is working on people horses and getting paid for it.
		
Click to expand...

Which is why it is so important to use someone actually qualified to look after a horses feet, rather than someone who's done a couple of days training, which they _think_ makes them qualified.


----------



## mrdarcy (11 May 2010)

cptrayes said:



			Feet change through the seasons, with work and with different food. Jaime Jackson, for example, sees lots of mustangs in the US with their frogs not in contact with the floor on a flat surface. I believe that AEPs are taught that this is correct and to trim for higher heels to make the frog ground passive (please someone correct me if I am wrong). In the UK, in wetter climate than JJ is used to, the vast majority of hard working barefoot horses have their frog in full contact with the floor if stood on a hard flat surface. (Bowker, also in the US, advocates frog contact so that you cannot slide a steel ruler  between the frog and the floor).  I couldn't make my horses grow longer heels if I tried. For many horses in this country, particularly the TB types, if their heels are allowed to grow longer all they will do is slide forwards and underrun the foot.
		
Click to expand...

Here I am to correct you! We aren't trained to leave the heels higher to make the frog ground passive... not sure where you got that from as it is completely wrong. There is also the myth that Jaime teaches to rasp/cut concavity into the sole. Again a complete falsehood - the AANHCP has never taught that and never would. I can point you in the direction of our trimming guidelines if you're interested. The AANHCP trimming method is completely uninvasive - wish I could say the same of the trim Pete Ramey teaches! Or the things some other trimmers do. I've heard of trimmers who are so obsessed with the frog having to make ground contact that they will rasp away at the heels until they bleed. That is totally wrong in my book and one of the dangers of people doing a few days of training, reading a few books, going on a forum or two and thinking they know what they're doing. The AANHCP guidelines let the individual foot tell us how it wants to be. If the frog touches the ground with a correct trim then that's what that foot wants to do, if the frog doesn't touch the ground then that's okay too.


----------



## teddyt (11 May 2010)

maggiesmum said:



			Shoes appear to have a numbing affect on the feet, so its not that barefoot horses are more susceptible more that they can actually feel the ground underneath their feet properly.
		
Click to expand...

Of course they feel the ground more but if they have increased blood flow to the feet then it also means they receive more of the triggers of laminar degradation- so they are more susceptible.

Totally agree with the over feeding bit. Over rugging is an issue too. I see loads of cob types rugged up to their ears and fed in the winter 





			I've heard of trimmers who are so obsessed with the frog having to make ground contact that they will rasp away at the heels until they bleed. That is totally wrong in my book and one of the dangers of people doing a few days of training, reading a few books, going on a forum or two and thinking they know what they're doing.
		
Click to expand...

This is the sort of thing that makes me so angry  The amount of people who use people who arent properly trained is horrifying- not just for feet but for teeth and backs too. There really needs to be a law on this sort of thing


----------



## Orangehorse (11 May 2010)

I would be alarmed if a "trimmer" had never heard of diet issues.  It is a big part of the transition from shod to barefoot.


----------



## Orangehorse (11 May 2010)

I have also just remember that there was an article a couple of years ago by, I think, Robert Eustace, who said that an awful lot of people take horses to vets thinking that their (show) horse has a bad back, shoulder, etc. etc. when in fact they are suffering from their feet, in that state of nearly but not quite full blown laminitis.


----------



## cptrayes (11 May 2010)

Thanks for that correction Mr Darcy, I got the wrong info from someone who was JJ trained and used to post on here and on UKNHCP under different names. I understood her to say that the frog should not touch the floor (I could have misinterpreted what she said, but my impression was strongly reinforced by a co-founder of the UKNHCP). I am happy to hear you say that the AANHCP training allows the horse to create the foot that it needs. If a horse is sound on all surfaces, then I wouldn't argue with it! 

I think there is still a problem with  "qualified" trimmers. I'm aware of one set of qualifications which requires (or did when I last looked two months ago) the trainee to have done the same 5 day course 5 times in order to qualify. With one man as the trainer. And the same man as the examiner. Another organisation offering qualifications does not, I am told, teach its trainees even a basic modicum of how nutrition affects the feet. And at the same time I know of completely unqualified trimmers who have rock crunching horses and know about nutrition. Right at the moment I would say that a good trimmer is the one who can show you horses that they trim doing eventing, showjumping, long distance, hunting and hacking plenty of miles on tarmac and stony paths, whether they are qualified or not.

I originally started trimming myself because there was no-one in this area who I could trust to pay to do it for me. I personally think that the future of barefoot lies in the Worshipful Company of Farriers teaching their trainees how to support hard working barefoot horses, and make it obligatory for them to encourage their clients not to shoe their horses unless they really need to. Some horse/owner combinations are always going to need shoes, and if we could get back to a situation where the farrier is the all round hoofcare professional everyone would know where they stand again. 

Did I see a pink pig float gently past my window then  ?


----------



## mrdarcy (11 May 2010)

cptrayes said:



			but my impression was strongly reinforced by a co-founder of the UKNHCP).
		
Click to expand...

As I understand it the founders of the UKNHCP all started with the AANHCP... so they must have misunderstood what they were taught. They shouldn't really be going round stating things about other organisations that aren't true - it'll get them in trouble if they're not careful. The AANHCP has recently revamped their whole training program because they weren't happy with the standard of some of their field instructors. JJ wants the highest possible standards and some people just weren't cutting it. Those field instructors who refused to redo the parts of their training in which they were deficient were invited to leave the organisation! We all now sing from the same hymn sheet.

Here's a brief summary of the AANHCP approach to trimming:

"We use the AANHCP Trimming Guidelines to conduct the natural trim -- our method of natural hoof care based upon the hooves of the wild, free-roaming horses of the U.S.  Great Basin.  When adhered to properly, these guidelines enable NHC practitioners to "mimic" the exemplary hooves of the wild horse, which provides the template and foundation for natural hoof care.  This method prohibits invasive trimming practices as well as those that leave excessive growth which may also have a deleterious impact on the hoof's integrity.  *The natural trim does not yield a 'cookie cutter' approach but instead facilitates the unique individual growth patterns of each horse without causing harm or obstructing the natural gaits*"

And a useful question and answer session:

http://www.isnhcp.net/News---Articles.html

As you can see from that article the frog is most definitely accepted as having ground contact and a weight bearing role, along with the hoof wall, bars, heel bulbs and sole. This is what the AANHCP has always taught - maybe you could point out to the UKNHCP folk that they are mistaken?


----------



## maggiesmum (11 May 2010)

teddyt said:



			Of course they feel the ground more but if they have increased blood flow to the feet then it also means they receive more of the triggers of laminar degradation- so they are more susceptible.
		
Click to expand...

I think I was going along the thought train of them having 'normal' circulation rather than increased circulation and that shod feet have 'decreased' circulation, I think??? LOL


----------



## Yeehaa! (14 May 2010)

This is what the AANHCP has always taught
		
Click to expand...

Oh really?  mrdarcey SHAME ON YOU! 

... mrdarcey you were Gendenskis Girl on this forum and Lazeearabians on UKNHCP forum and you have changed your  story just a tad. Not sure that cptrayes has cottoned on yet.  

Here is a reminder  

http://uknhcp.myfastforum.org/ftopic1451-0.php


.


----------



## cptrayes (14 May 2010)

I just want to make a quick addendum to my "I would use any trimmer who has hard working barefoot horses" statement.

I would NOT use any trimmer who ever draws blood deliberately in a trim. That rules out all Strasser trained trimmers unless they have modified their trimming away from their training guidelines. Ask your proposed trimmer this question:

"Is it acceptable to trim a horse and have it walk away from the trim less comfortable than it walked into it?" If their answer is not a resounding "NO!", turn and run!


----------



## JustaFlash (15 May 2010)

Hi there.
I had my TB go barefoot on his fronts 4 months ago and on his backs 2 weeks ago. My natural hoof care lady has not refered to limited grazing at all, there are 3 other horses on my yard barefoot and 1 unshod and none of them have any problems. My TB has paper thin front soles and was having pads etc under his shoes but was getting absesses all the time so shoes came off. Was very concerned as all farriers I have used told me his were the worst feet they have ever seen, but I perserved and things are going well. I use Old Mac G2s on is fronts for hacking with comfort pads. He has no heel on backs so am looking for some second hand size 4 Old Mac G2, dont really want new ones cos his feet will be changing dramatically over next few months.


----------



## mrdarcy (15 May 2010)

Yeehaa! said:



			Oh really?  mrdarcey SHAME ON YOU! 

... mrdarcey you were Gendenskis Girl on this forum and Lazeearabians on UKNHCP forum and you have changed your  story just a tad. Not sure that cptrayes has cottoned on yet.  

Here is a reminder  

http://uknhcp.myfastforum.org/ftopic1451-0.php


.
		
Click to expand...

Hummmm... well if you want to discuss the difference between active pressure/wear and passive pressure/wear, which was my original point, then lets do it. Cptrayes was originally saying that horses walk only on their frogs and soles, not the hoof wall, which is incorrect. Horses actively wear their hoof wall, followed by passively wearing their frogs and soles. There is a difference - if you don't understand what that is then I suggest you read Jaime Jackson's books. All structures play a part and it is dangerous to go around saying things like horses weight bear only on their frogs and soles to vets and other professionals when it is clearly incorrect. The wild mustang hooves clearly show that the hoof wall is the primary weight bearing structure and the frog is not weight bearing unless on soft or uneven ground. I have seen horses in this country with frogs like that and I have also seen the opposite - both are correct and dependent on ground conditions, diet, individual horse etc. Unfortunately the UKNHCP have become so inward looking that you can't debate or disagree with them on anything. Cptrayes has found this out recently - it didn't reflect well on the UKNHCP at all... though I think it's more down to a few individuals than the majority of the members.


----------



## cptrayes (15 May 2010)

Allow me to clarify what I meant, if not what I said 

MY horses, standing still on a flat hard surface, bear weight only on their heels, frogs and sole callous. They do not bear weight on the on the outer hoof wall in that situation and it's very close to call whether they bear any weight outside the white line at all, other than at the heel plane. Since my horses are some of the highest performing jumping barefooters in the country, and sound as a pound on every surface, then I think they have it right for a performance trim for the UK. I don't do this trim, by the way, they do. They are not alone, every really high performing foot I have seen looks very similar. 

The hoof wall may be the primary weightbearing structure in a mustang in dry parts of America, but that model seems to me to be far from common in a performance horse in the UK. If a horse chooses it, and is sound in all situations, then that's fine, but it isn't what mine or any other high performing horse I know chooses. 

I have nothing to say publicly here about the UKNHCP forum and would ask people not to quote my name in respect of what went on there, please.


----------



## mrdarcy (15 May 2010)

We'll have to agree to disagree on that one - which I'm always happy to do, everyone is entitled to their opinion after all... at least on this forum anyway! Certainly observing my own horses (high performance endurance horses) they bear weight on their hoof wall, along with bars, frog and sole but we're talking a matter of fraction of inches of hoof wall, specifically the water line, being higher than the sole. On a flat hard surface can you pass a sheet of paper under the hoof wall all the way round? I can't with my horses. The mustang roll is done to make sure the water line is the most distal part of the horse. The only thing I would ask is if the hoof wall is not there to share in bearing weight what is it there for? And why on a hard working hoof does the hoof wall thicken up? 


Sorry to bring up the other stuff.


----------



## cptrayes (15 May 2010)

My impression is that the hoof wall is there to glue the pedal bones in place, to protect  the foot from damage and to damp down the shock that runs through the foot when it is smacked to the floor. I think that it thickens up on a hardworking foot to stop the foot flexing too much and causing damage either to the attachment or the internal foot.

My rehab had very flexible feet because of diet issues. When his feet were part grown he escaped me and went for a hooley. The pressure of doing too much with too long a toe cause his weak foot to crease at the event line. That made him sore and he bled into the quarters of the white line (no pink at the toe or heel, just at ten and two o'clock where the pressure was very severe.) He very quickly grew buttresses of horn from the inside outwards (not down from the coronet, out from inside) at the points where there was most pressure to bend and when he had done that he was sound even with the long toe still growing out.

The faster a foot works  and the higher it jumps, the more pressure there is trying to pull the attachment off the pedal bone, and the more solid the hoof wall needs to be to resist that pressure. That's my theory, anyway.

On a flat hard surface the piece of paper you ask about would touch the outside edge of the white line from ten o'clock to two o'clock and most of my horses remove their hoof from ground contact completely at the quarters - I can get a hoof pick under, never mind a piece of paper   The sole callous, white line and hoof wall are in one continuous, unbroken curve. At no point from ten to two is the hoof wall longer than either the white line or the sole callous. The hoof wall is higher than the sole at the quarters and seat of corn, but the sole there is so curved, that as I have said, there is no hoof at all in contact with the ground. 

We could all do with meeting up at some huge convention in the middle of the country and seeing each others feet, couldnt' we? I'll show you mine if you show me yours!


----------



## Yeehaa! (16 May 2010)

.....one of the dangers of people doing a few days of training, reading a few books, going on a forum or two and thinking they know what they're doing.
		
Click to expand...

MrDarcey I was just wondering what qualification and experience you have, since you appear to be so knowledgeable on all things barefoot.  

Congratulations on completion of the AANHCP Foundation Course. Every journey starts with a single step 
http://www.rockcrunchers.co.uk/index.php?p=1_5_News

As your name is not included on the list of UK AANHCP trimmers, I was wondering how you are able to claim such lofty status.  Is it an oversight -or is it that you are not quite there yet?

As you suggested, thank you, I have looked on AANHCP website.  I see that your foundation course comprises 125 hours of study at 'Training Camp', over 12 days. A large part of this time spent in a classroom environment working on cadaver hooves, attending lectures, demonstrations with a bit of keep fit (for you, not the horse).   There is one fleeting mention of diet referring to colic, laminitis and natural boarding.  It is a big subject to shoe horn into an afternoon's study! 




			I think there is still a problem with "qualified" trimmers. I'm aware of one set of qualifications which requires (or did when I last looked two months ago) the trainee to have done the same 5 day course 5 times in order to qualify. With one man as the trainer. And the same man as the examiner. Another organisation offering qualifications does not, I am told, teach its trainees even a basic modicum of how nutrition affects the feet.
		
Click to expand...

Agree with the above quote from cptrayes.  'Training' can mean anything.  Wondering where you stand in all this, mrdarcey? 

Am I right in concluding that you are now able to offer your service to paying barefoot clients - with little more than six months personal experience, 12 days foundation training - with implied status as a _*graduated*_ AANHCP barefoot practitioner?  It all seems a bit misleading to me.


----------



## mrdarcy (16 May 2010)

Wow Yeehaa - you seem to have a real grudge against me. Can't imagine why....

When deciding what training to undertake I looked at all the courses, including the UKNHCP, compared all the syllabuses, the number of hours spent training, the back up provided by each organisation during training and after training and the qualifications of the people doing the training. I also spoke to people who had done, or at least started, training with the various organisations. The AANHCP stood out head and shoulders above all of them. And to answer your question I'll be taking my final exam in the next few weeks but, just like students of the UKNHCP, my intructors are happy for me to take on paying clients.

Now you can continue to attack me personally for whatever reasons you have but I think it says a lot more about you than it does about me.


----------



## Rouletterose (16 May 2010)

maggiesmum said:



			Shoes appear to have a numbing affect on the feet, so its not that barefoot horses are more susceptible more that they can actually feel the ground underneath their feet properly.

Someone else also rubbished that fact that grass is bad for horses, grass isn't bad for horses per se, more that the type of grass most of our horses are kept on is bad for them, over fertilised single species rye grass isn't what horses digestive systems were designed for.
I also watch people restrict their horses all summer and then spend all winter stuffing them with food, maybe if a few more people allowed their horses to get a little leaner in the winter they wouldn't have to spend all summer starving them? Just a thought!
		
Click to expand...

Completely agree with this..give me an old meadow field anyday, rye grass is not ideal for horses but it's difficult to find anything else as so many yards now are on farms that have diversified so it's all rye.
Mine are on a field with little grasss but enough and they have to walk, trot, canter to get the best bits ie|: plenty of exercise at the same time. Shod and always have been.
I had a few years ago a horse that was unshod for about 8 months as well, he was treated the same 'grass wise' no problems.


----------



## Yeehaa! (16 May 2010)

Wow Yeehaa - you seem to have a real grudge against me. Can't imagine why....
		
Click to expand...

No grudge, just enjoy a robust debate with passion   all in the interests of healthy discussion as this is such a hot potato  under extreme scrutiny.  Don't take it personally ...unless the cap fits.  Good luck for your final exams.

You have not really answered my points raised. I am not particularly interested in your selection of  'school' even after your Strasser, UKNHCP and anyone-else bashing.  I am much more concerned with your implications of expertise.  

When, exactly, did you first go barefoot with your own horse/s? I see from your website that you were having problems with one of your shod horse quite recently.  

http://www.rockcrunchers.co.uk/index.php?p=1_3_About


.


----------



## mrdarcy (16 May 2010)

Yeehaa! said:



			No grudge, just enjoy a robust debate with passion   all in the interests of healthy discussion as this is such a hot potato  under extreme scrutiny.  Don't take it personally ...unless the cap fits.  Good luck for your final exams.

You have not really answered my points raised. I am not particularly interested in your selection of  'school' even after your Strasser, UKNHCP and anyone-else bashing.  I am much more concerned with your implications of expertise.  

When, exactly, did you first go barefoot with your own horse/s? I see from your website that you were having problems with one of your shod horse quite recently.  

http://www.rockcrunchers.co.uk/index.php?p=1_3_About


.
		
Click to expand...

Robust debate is great. As a new forum member perhaps you should look back at some of the lively debates we've all been having on HHO in the last few months about barefoot - lots of great info for you to mull over. And if there's anything there you disagree with then we can debate on that, with pleasure. As for questions about me personally this forum isn't really the place - I don't want to contravene any forum rules about self advertising and I'm sure you don't either - so if you'd like to know more about me, my background or anything else then PM me or email me and I'll answer any of your questions. And as I've said before any one who wants to see me trim, or see my horses' feet they are very welcome. We love visitors!


----------



## Shysmum (16 May 2010)

recommend the book "Feet First".....it will answer a lot of these questions. sm x


----------



## cptrayes (16 May 2010)

Rouletterose said:



			Completely agree with this..give me an old meadow field anyday, rye grass is not ideal for horses but it's difficult to find anything else as so many yards now are on farms that have diversified so it's all rye.
Mine are on a field with little grasss but enough and they have to walk, trot, canter to get the best bits ie|: plenty of exercise at the same time. Shod and always have been.
I had a few years ago a horse that was unshod for about 8 months as well, he was treated the same 'grass wise' no problems.
		
Click to expand...


I agree absolutely with every comment made about the quality of modern grazing. But with one of mine, that still isn't the answer. My grazing is hill flower meadow at 1100 feet. My growing season is 8 weeks (4 at each end) shorter than the Cheshire plain. My field has not been fertilized for, to my certain knowledge, at least 21 years. Yet my warmblood is rock crunching if he is kept off it at night, and not if he is on it 24/7.

I wonder if there is some kind of "pulse" effect going on, where the gut gets a break from the green stuff for a few hours when he only gets haylage. He isn't starved when he is in, which is why I am so sure that the "excess calorie" argument is not the whole picture. But I do think maybe his gut gets a chance to recover while the haylage is going through, which allows his feet to stay rock crunching all year round. 

I know that Richard Vialls of the UKEP has suggested that one of the reasons that autumn laminitis has been so bad for the last few years is because the wet summers kept the grass very lush and the gut never got a break over the "hot" summer before the autumn fructan levels rose.

I wish we knew!!!


----------



## stormybracken (16 May 2010)

cptrayes said:



			Yet my warmblood is rock crunching if he is kept off it at night
		
Click to expand...

Did you mean day?


----------



## cptrayes (16 May 2010)

Yes of course I did. How stupid of me !!! I'm still overexcited from my written off rehab coming second in a National Qualifier yesterday. I'm so sorry to hear about Storm's diagnosis SB, I hope you have better news for him soon.


----------



## stormybracken (17 May 2010)

Thank you!  I think everyone except the vets saw that one coming - still hopefully by the end of the week he'll be in the best hands to deal with it, and if nothing else I've finally found a vet who is serious about helping him.

Sorry, rather hijacked the OP's thread, but a lot of this is still answering your questions!


----------



## Indy (17 May 2010)

I understand what everyone is saying about the grazing being too rich.  

But why do horse owners feel the need to tillage and tillage their grazing and then it's the very same horse owners who complain later on in the season that their grazing is too lush and they're having problems with their horses... surely it's commmon sense that tillage = richer grazing = fat/ laminitic horses?


----------



## mrdarcy (17 May 2010)

Indy said:



			I understand what everyone is saying about the grazing being too rich.  

But why do horse owners feel the need to tillage and tillage their grazing and then it's the very same horse owners who complain later on in the season that their grazing is too lush and they're having problems with their horses... surely it's commmon sense that tillage = richer grazing = fat/ laminitic horses?
		
Click to expand...

Unfortunately most people are on livery yards and have no control over their grazing management plus there is still this belief that only ponies get laminitis. A lot of livery yards in my area are ex-dairy farms, so have a long history of rye grass planting and yearly fertilizing. The farmers have got rid of the cows but still think that fields should be fertilized for horses - it's a mindset that will be difficult to change. Plus there are still lots of horse owners who want their horses out on lush grass because they think it's good for the horse. Education is the key and the more we all discuss it on forums like HHO the better.


----------



## teddyt (17 May 2010)

Indy said:



			I understand what everyone is saying about the grazing being too rich.  

But why do horse owners feel the need to tillage and tillage their grazing and then it's the very same horse owners who complain later on in the season that their grazing is too lush and they're having problems with their horses... surely it's commmon sense that tillage = richer grazing = fat/ laminitic horses?
		
Click to expand...

I agree that land management amongst horse owners isnt great and a relatively ignored part of owning a horse. Lots of horses are kept on unsuitable grass, overgrazed in winter (too many horses per acre), then fertilised. I understand that some owners have a slim choice of yards and so have to make the best of a bad situation however i also think many owners dont realise the importance of grass management. They agonise over hard feed and hay and take no notice of the grass (except to complain theres too much/not enough)! 




			Sorry, rather hijacked the OP's thread, but a lot of this is still answering your questions!
		
Click to expand...

No complaints from me- im very interested in everyones comments and stories. Im learning 


Yeehaa- i have got involved in alot of the debates about barefoot because of some dubious statements and claims that seem unfounded. The very question on the start of this thread was an attempt by me to get further clarification of a much mentioned 'fact' by some barefoot people. I am honestly interested in the barefoot debate and what benefits can be given to our horses. However i have found that some of my challenging questions have been carefully ignored! One of my biggest 'issues' is also the minimal training that people can have before going out in the big wide world and trimming other peoples horses for money. I also havnt been able to find/see a clear explanation of what exactly is involved in being a qualified trimmer. 

I have seen and disected lots of dead legs. I have studied anatomy, physiology, movement, nutrition, etc for 7 years at university and still wouldnt go anywhere near my horses feet with a rasp! So to me a few weeks learning horrifies me. Many barefoot followers see it as 'just a tidy up with a rasp' but to me that is still unacceptable, even on your own horse, without extensive knowledge. 

So i do understand your points of view, although i am unsure as to why you have taken the debate personally with mrdarcy. You obviously have your background info and reasons. I agree with some of your comments but please dont get too personal as i dont want these debates to turn sour- selfishly because i am learning alot!


----------



## cptrayes (17 May 2010)

TeddyT your reluctance to trim for yourself after all your training is interesting. It  doesn't feel any more risky to me now than filing my own nails. Of course when I started I thought their feet might drop off if I went cross country without shoes , but as long as you follow a mantra of never going any further if you see the slightest tinge of pink, there is very little harm you can really do with a straightforward horse as long as you don't touch the sole. Especially if you do plenty of roadwork, when your horse will largely trim his feet for himself. What we seem to have forgotten after centuries of tacking metal to our horses' feet is that they really do know how to grow the best foot for their own leg, as long as we let them. The difficulty is the corrupted ones and knowing what to do then, and that does need experience.

There are five trimming organisations offering paper qualifications:

UKNHCP
AANHCP (US based)
UKEP
USEP (US based)
Strasser.

UKNHCP and UKEP were involved in setting up the new National Occupational Standards which are in place but not yet being monitored.

Strasser trimmers are the only ones who have been prosecuted, and successfully too. They are the only ones that I know of who advocate an invasive trim - they will cut into live foot in order to creat the "right" shaped hoof. The foot will bleed. The other organisations consider this unacceptable.

'UK' organisations are both spin-offs of the US versions but there are considerable differences between them and their "parent" and you would need to check the websites of all of them if you want details as to what their training involves.

In addition there are a number of other people who from time to time run one-off courses in the UK and the US, which could in no way be counted as offering any valid qualification for a professional trimmer. 

It is perfectly legal for anyone to trim any horse and to offer their services as a paid trimmer.

There, clear as mud, innit??

I'm not aware of ignoring any questions myself, challenging or otherwise. Can you ask the questions people have ignored again - I'm sure I'm not alone in wanting to answer them if I can.


----------



## teddyt (17 May 2010)

Thanks cptrayes- helpful as always  

I dont want to trim my horses feet because i dont see it as my job. Much as i have had more training than many professional trimmers  i havnt spent 4 odd years on specific training like a farrier and experienced the number of horses that they see, many hours a day, 5+ days a week. I therefore dont see that i should do their feet just as i wouldnt rasp their teeth. Part of it is also that i know what damage can be done to joints, tendons and muscles by poor foot balance, not just the damage to the foot itself. I am happy with my farrier (ive sacked plenty ) and i talk to him if i have any concerns and he is happy to discuss things- hes not got his head stuck up his a**e like many! The risk of causing a problem (if not immediately then longer term) outweighs any thoughts of trimming them myself, im just not happy to do it.

Thanks for the outline of organisations. I have looked some of them up individually but they dont exactly make it clear about qualifications! Not to me anyway.

 I know that it is legal for anyone to trim, which i disagree with. Unfortunately you are one of the very few who sound like they know what they are doing and i cringe at some of the things people say about trimming their own horses.  As with dentistry, i feel it would be much safer for horse welfare if you had to be qualified and registered. 

As i have said before, you have taught me alot on this subject and i respect your opinion. you havnt skirted any questions and if the answer has been unknown you have said that rather than ignoring it. I cant remember specific examples but in previous threads some of my queries have been ignored by others though. i will ask you when i remember them!


----------



## cptrayes (18 May 2010)

My hunter has on opinion on ground bearing frogs!

He has been ground bearing all winter while he was hunting. I laid him off at the end of April and have ridden only twice since. This morning, his heels had grown to such an extent that he is the first horse in my yard not to have ground bearing frogs on concrete.

So it looks as if, in the UK, it's work related. Horses in hard work seem to wear their heels down to where they are level with their frogs, pack their frogs to a solid lump and then keep those levels by growing as much as is worn. Without enough work, my hunter's frogs are no longer ground bearing and they don't look as healthy as they did. Needless to say, his heels came off sharpish and he is now ground bearing again, because I believe what he makes for himself while he works hard is what nature wants him to have, so I will recreate that wear for him while he isn't working hard enough to do it himself. 

Interesting! I must thank him later for adding to the discussion


----------



## LucyPriory (18 May 2010)

Cptrayes - there were more than two trimming organisations involved in setting up the NOS.  Even though it might make some people bleed rather than admit it


----------



## cptrayes (18 May 2010)

Ah, thankyou for the correction, I have only heard of one organisation from the people concerned, and the second sort of "let slip" over a dinner conversation. The problem now as I understand it is that no organisation is coming forward to "police" the NOS, so they are pretty much pointless?


----------



## brucea (18 May 2010)

But...a bit of balance.

I trim my own horses. I have done some training, a small amount in the UKNHCP but also with other organisations. I do a good job of my own lads, and have had to deal with some interesting hoof problems. 

My vet knows what I am doing, has seen all of my lads regularly, has commented on how good their hooves are,  is happy with their feet - and even has objective measures like xrays showing perfect balance.

I also trim a couple of horses owned by friends, and I get paid in red wine   for a couple of mares that are basically basket cases and have been traumatised, but they like me and behave beautifully for me (mostly) and the owners can't face the sheer stress of going with someone else and dealing with the behaviour issues - anyway they like what I do and their horses have great feet. 

Also I know a few barefoot owners who trim their own horses - they are happy to do so and do a great job. One stud farm I know has so many horses they would be bankrupt if they brought in a trimer to do them all! But the feet I saw were beautiful.

So they hysteria that gets spun up over unqualified, non organisational trimers can be a bit overblown, and in the end of the day it is down to the individual to choose what works for their horse. 

I am sure there are awful trimmers out there, and their reputation will preceed them, but there are equally awful semi professionals and professionals in other equine services. 

But if you have a mind to learn, and know when you're out of your depth, then basic trimming for your own horses is not hard to master. Honest. It's the other 99% of keeping them barefoot that is the hard bit!!


----------



## teddyt (19 May 2010)

brucea said:



			One stud farm I know has so many horses they would be bankrupt if they brought in a trimer to do them all! But the feet I saw were beautiful.

So they hysteria that gets spun up over unqualified, non organisational trimers can be a bit overblown, and in the end of the day it is down to the individual to choose what works for their horse.
		
Click to expand...

Picking holes here but lack of finances is NOT a reason to start trimming your own horses feet! If they cant afford a trimmer/farrier then they shouldnt have so any horses! (Not saying that this is the only reason why they chose to do their own trimming). 

Also, trimming (or not in many cases) youngsters is arguably where you can do the most damage- because the bones are still growing and any minor inbalance could have a catastrophic effect on future soundness. You may see this as me being hysterical but horses generally get a tough life anyway, without the added disadvantage of a predisposition to unsoundness because unqualified people have trimmed their feet at a young age. 

Of course its up to individuals to decide what to do with their own horses- this doesnt mean they will make the right decision though. They may not actually really know what works- they may just think they know! And choosing to trim your own horse to save money on paying a professional is not a good choice in my eyes. And as i said previously, i know what damage can be done to a horse of any age (let alone a youngster) by poor trimming and i personally feel that this should be done by qualified or very well educated and experienced individuals. In the case of trimming for others then the trimmer should definately be answerable to a governing body in order to minimise the risk of cowboys!


----------



## soloequestrian (19 May 2010)

Devil's advocate question:  why is trimming your own horses feet different to deciding what it has to eat, what saddle it wears, what bit it has and how it is ridden?  All of these things can damage a horse if done badly, but trimming seems to be the one that sparks most controversy.  Is it just because in some ways it's a relatively new thing?


----------



## teddyt (19 May 2010)

I quite agree with you, theres many decisions made that can cause a problem. There are plenty of saddle fitters (qualified and not) that shouldnt be fitting saddles! Teachers that shouldn teach, etc. 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). 

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)

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.

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?


----------



## cptrayes (19 May 2010)

Teddy T the big problem with farriers' balancing a horse's foot is that they have been taught to set the foot square. I know of one who even uses a joinery set-square measure. Very, very often the horses that are lame in shoes and sound out of them don't want the foot "square" to the ground, they need it differently balanced. Allowed to choose for themselves, they grow the foot that best suits the leg and body above it. Set hard with a shoe, they are in constant low-grade pain. (You can tell some of these horses by a change in behaviour when the shoes are removed. They are often labelled "difficult", only to turn into little lambs once their feet don't hurt any more.) 

A foot trimmed too far grows back quickly and it's pretty easy to see from how the horse walks away from the trim whether you have the balance better or worse. (How many farriers ever watch the horse move before they shoe it - even one they are just taking on?  I've never seen one do it in over thirty years in three different counties and six different stables. )  I've lost count of the dishers that I have seen come out of shoes and straighten up their action when they have a foot to match the fact that their legs aren't straight. We aren't symmetric - why do we shoe them as if they are?

It's my experience that it is far easier to damage a horse with shoes than it is with a mistaken bit of trimming, which the horse usually corrects for itself within days. We seem to have lost track of the fact that a horse actually knows how to grow a good foot for himself. I think that there are many horses out there who would breathe a sigh of relief if their owner was forced into barefooting them by a choice of "sell the horse because I can't afford to keep it" or "learn to trim it for myself and save £800 a year". I've seen such enormous benefits to my horses from being shoeless that I'm happy for it to be any reason at all that encourages people to try it, though I do agree that cost is not an ideal motivator and that paid trimmers should be regulated and insured. 

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. What they DON'T get taught, and need to have included in their syllabus, is  how to keep a barefoot horse performing at top levels on all surfaces. It should be routine for a farrier who is called to shoe a three year old for the first time to ask what work it is going to do, watch it move, and advise the owner how to keep it without shoes if they possibly can.  One day, I think it will be, but for the moment we are watching those pigs flying past the window again!

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?

My own faith in farriers was destroyed by having one with 30 years experience and one newly out of college, so bang up to date, tell me that my horse could never work without shoes because of his flat feet and collapsed heels. That horse competed affiliated eventing barefoot well within a year. Of course at that point in time he had neither flat feet nor collapsed heels, both of which had been caused by his shoes in the first place.

I feel sorry for people right now, to be honest. Most people like to pay for the advice of an expert and unfortunately all this barefoot stuff is causing people to question who the experts really are. It's an uncomfortable place for many people to be. I feel lucky that I was forced to start by a farrier-damaged horse in an area where there were no paid trimmers yet operation, so for me it was an easy decision. It is much harder now.

That's why I wish the Worshipful Company of Farriers would grab this wholeheartedly and change their syllabus to include the barefoot stuff -  trim, nutrition, environnment and work, and change their ethos to one of shoes being used when they are proved necessary and not routinely applied to every horse and pony. Then everyone would know where they stand again with regard to professional hoof care for horses. 

More pigs with wings!!


----------



## Orangehorse (19 May 2010)

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 (19 May 2010)

cptrayes said:



			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.
		
Click to expand...

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?
		
Click to expand...

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 (19 May 2010)

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


----------



## soloequestrian (19 May 2010)

teddyt said:



			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).
		
Click to expand...

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.



teddyt said:



			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)
		
Click to expand...

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.



teddyt said:



			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.
		
Click to expand...

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.



teddyt said:



			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?
		
Click to expand...

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 (19 May 2010)

soloequestrian said:



			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.
		
Click to expand...

yes, thats why i said on the whole




soloequestrian said:



			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.
		
Click to expand...

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  





soloequestrian said:



			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.
		
Click to expand...

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?




soloequestrian said:



			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?
		
Click to expand...

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 (19 May 2010)

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 (19 May 2010)

"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 (19 May 2010)

cptrayes said:



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

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.



cptrayes said:



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

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 (19 May 2010)

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 (19 May 2010)

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 (19 May 2010)

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 (20 May 2010)

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.


----------

