And JB is right. Nothing will happen until a standard is created. But what should the standard BE?
I am NO expert. I’m asking for input for what the standard should be, in language that would be acceptable to the various breed registries. All you people who actually KNOW things, please contribute…
The reason I’m interested: When I bought my mare, and had to get her lameness diagnosed, the vet said, “Well, there is what’s left of a Saddlebred shoeing”, then he took the radiographs, and determined a bone chip. Love the mare, but the vet bill for the bone chip was over $2,500, and I still keep an eye on her even this long after her surgery. If we can get a standard determined, that keeps hooves healthy for ANY HORSE SHOWING, then I hope we can prevent these sorts of lameness issues to surprise people in the future.
NO HOOF, NO HORSE. That’s a maxim for a reason; it’s a true word. How can we all prevent injury to horses due to stupid showing practices? What language can we devise, to give to the breed groups, which will require healthy hooves, by definition?
The standard for a healthy hoof is actually fairly well accepted by farriers and vets outside of breed associations like gaited and some draft that alter the foot deliberately.
Anyone from the nongaited world that sees stacks and long toes is horrified.
There is of course poor foot health through ignorance and incompetence. Run forward heels, contracted heels, etc. But no one knowledgeable says these are OK.
The breed/show associations should not be defining standards for a healthy foot, they should be accepting what is already out there.
As Scribbler said, we already know what healthy feet look like. Well, let me clarify - we know what textbook healthy feet look like. We also know that some feet don’t look like that, but are still healthy for that horse at that time.
This isn’t talking about some variations in shoeing - you don’t put anything even similar to a sliding plate on a horse who jumps. And while the Reiner might need some tweaks based on his job, it’s not the degree of difference between a normal healthy foot and that of the grossly stacked TWH foot.
To me, this shouldn’t be difficult. Feet should not be grossly deformed on purpose. Ever.
I realize it’s a really weird slope of governing that. At what point does the foot go beyond “well that’s just a crappy farrier” to “clearly you’ve done that on purpose”? I have no idea, especially since I have seen some feet that were just SO pathological in shape, it boggles my mind that someone didn’t know better :rolleyes:
But the feet purposefully grown for flares and long toes (from the Scotch Bottom shoes thread this came from), and the mile-high stilts in some gaited show worlds are clearly deformed on purpose, and that has to stop.
It’s like when I trim. I make it abundantly clear: I trim to the conformation of the horse - NOT the gait.
Had someone who wanted me to leave more toe so he would rack. I politely said: This horse dropped out of mama racking. He’ll rack no matter what, so I will trim him properly. Oh and by the way: Bend your finger nail back. – How’d that feel? – Hurts, huh? – Well when toe is left, that’s what he feels as that laminae are ripped & stretched.
I trimmed the hoof, the little girl got on him bareback and that lil bugger racked right down the driveway
I suspect the sticking point with some organizations will be about hoof length. Many claim that you can grow the hoof and add pads as long as the correct angle is maintained. But there are those outside those disciplines who feel that exaggerated hoof lengths are not healthy no matter what.
As much as this sounds like a positive and necessary proposal to support horse wellbeing, I highly doubt this level of consensus will ever be reached. Heck, we can’t even agree on which side of the neck the mane should fall
That doesn’t mean that judges in competitions should ignore these aberrations, but should be looking for anything that obviously changes a horse’s way of going and marking them down if not outright eliminating them. Without that, I doubt things will change, and we may even see more disciplines cross that line over time.
One of the problems with a standard, is it doesn’t take into consideration the natural conformation of the horse. My horse has a minor up/down in his fronts. Trimmed with this in mind, and is very sound, but he wouldn’t meet a text book standard.
I think the short answer is “no” beyond the absolutely most basic of standards, like “trim the horse to anatomical correctness.” But the details of what this means will vary widely dependent upon environment, terrain, use, condition, nutritional status, etc.
Spending time chasing chimeras is time you don’t have to chase real and substantial answers to real and substantial problems.
Good post. Based on the huge number of hoof and lost shoe threads, there are issues with a lack of quality farriers, which is the beginning of the problem. Obviously, trimming and shoeing a horse is not simple and easy, so just demanding that judges fix the problem is almost silly. Judges are supposed to be experts at what they are judging - as defined by the rule book. I’ve yet to see a rule book that defines a healthy hoof, just some prohibited practices. And how the heck is the judge supposed to do an in-depth examination of the hoof when there are 30 horses going round and round and 30 more waiting at the gate?
Given the number of farriers I’ve gone thru in the last few years, I have started to think there should be some stringent criteria education and licensing required, along with continuing education required to keep said license.
Anybody with a pair of nippers and a rasp can hang out a shingle and call themselves a “farrier”.
I really and truly appreciate those who take their craft seriously.
But that’s all we need. That’s exactly what all this means - trim to anatomical correctness for that horse. My horse won’t look like your horse. A TB bred for racing likely isn’t going to have feet that look like old Morgan blood.
The intent isn’t to see which horses are trimmed to perfection.
But none of then should look like stacked ASBs, or the artificially created flares of the show drafts.
You’ve missed the point of what this is intended to be. And I already stated it would indeed be difficult because at what point will a judge be able to determine if it’s just poor farrier work, or intended deformities. Bou cannot tell me that the stilts of the gaited horses and the extreme flares of the show drafts is just poor skill. No, those are done on purpose and judges reward it.
Judges are supposed to be experts at what they are judging - as defined by the rule book.
Well, that’s quite a laugh, since many show associations and breed registries make up their own rules. Of course they are experts(allegedly) at judging according to the rule books. That’s why HUS and WP horses with polls lower than withers continue to win despite the rule book stating otherwise, though thankfully that is changing. That’s why far, far too many Halter QHs are bred for posts for hind legs and tiny pencil necks because that’s what judges are rewarding (that needs to stop too).
I’ve yet to see a rule book that defines a healthy hoof, just some prohibited practices.
There are any number of places you can find definitions of well-trimmed feet. How do you think the people who are good at trimming have learned? The rules don’t have to define how every single healthy foot looks. But it CAN define excessive flaring, excessive height, and it has to start somewhere. A foot that looks like it was modeled after a ski jump track is not natural. A foot that looks like the Liberty Bell is not a natural foot.
And how the heck is the judge supposed to do an in-depth examination of the hoof when there are 30 horses going round and round and 30 more waiting at the gate?
The same judges some last minute investigations on a class he has temporarily pinned - they line up and he does a quick walk around. That’s not a new thing, that goes on today in certain classes. Hunters get preliminarily placed, and then jogged without their saddle for soundness.
Yeah, there are a lot of people who think the US needs formal and official certification requirements like in other countries. We have to be careful with that though, because we are so much larger than many other places that have licensing and all that goes into it. We NEED owners to become more educated on what healthy feet look like. This isn’t rocket science. They might not see that the feet are just a bit off, but there’s no excuse for every owner and trainer to see that bullnosing, dishing, flaring, heels run forward of the front of the cannon bone, are very unhealthy, and sadly, so many don’t even know that.
Breed shows that allow and reward obvious exaggerations of the horses’ hooves, and participants that spend time, money, skill, to get this deformed look. These people have knowingly chosen this route and are very defensive to criticism. Similar points could be made about deliberately bad breeding in halter disciplines and with mini horses.
That is different from people, owners, farriers, who think they are doing a good job but lack skill knowledge and perhaps funds.
I was doing some back country riding out of a campsite a few years ago and was quietly shocked at the number of contracted run forward heels in the horses there.
The latter might be open to education and better farrier work if they can afford it (I think a lot more people routinely go too long between resetting shoes than will admit it, to save money).
High dollar ASB being deliberately crippled for ribbons and a week end trail rider on a budget that doesn’t see how bad the feet are tending, are two different problems needing different solutions to solve.
I didn’t miss the point at all, and I can say anything I want. But I forget, you are omniscient and have seen all horse shows everywhere. I don’t see that kind of poor farrier work since I mainly compete in performance western events and have extensive h/j/eq experience as well, but we’ve already established that I run with a different, more educated crowd than you.
100% agree with you. Anything that has become entrenched, especially when it comes to winning big money and/or prizes becomes very, very difficult to change. Think HYPP and the struggle to get to the point of even disallowing HH QHs to be registered :eek:
So you can honestly say, with a clear conscience, that the “the stilts of the gaited horses and the extreme flares of the show drafts” are just poor skill? That they can’t be easily identified by someone who knows even a little bit about healthy hoof form?
Do you honestly think that your world of performance western events and H/J is immune to poor farrier work? What crowd do you think I am part of, exactly? NO discipline or area of the country is immune to poor farrier work. Some areas have many more competent farriers and trimmers than others.
Just because “your” disciplines don’t subscribe to butchering feet for the sake of exaggerating movement doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. It doesn’t even mean the farriers doing it don’t know what they’re doing. Some of them have decided they’d rather have more work than less.
I don’t support any organization or competition that condones practices that are detrimental to the health and well being of the horse. I don’t hang with people who put stilts on horses or extreme flares. So honestly, the only thing I can say is they suck.
My world of horses is actually pretty good - I seek out people who have similar interests as me, and enjoy their company and try to learn something from each and every one of them. Horses with bad feet as a result of poor farrier work don’t usually stick around long in my area.
Because you don’t see it in your narrow slice of the world, it ceases to exist? That’s amazing! I’m sure all those baby TWHs in the huge stacks will like to know they’re really just fine.
This is an excellent example of why the “single standard” won’t, and can’t, work.
This is NOT an argument for “no standard.” It’s a rational recognition that different is not, by definition, “evil.” In no way does it mean condoning extreme hoof practices (either in farriery or breeding).
