American Morgan Horse Assoc. opposes Horse Protection Act?

[QUOTE=ASB Stars;8849678]
My take? Those who would be affected, but are trying desperately not to be are hoping to get their $hit together, and come at this with some legal firepower. They need time to do that.

There was a petition put out by the ASPCA looking for support of the law- as written. They were looking for 30K signatures, and last I saw, they had over 36K. As an example, there aren’t even 6K members of the ASHA, I don’t think, although I could be incorrect.

I haven’t commented yet, but I plan on it.[/QUOTE]w

The TWH people have already raised $500,000 and I believe have already hired a lawyer to fight this rule.

The problem is that the proposed regulations do not keep consistent language throughout the document…sometimes “related breeds” and sometimes “breeds with accentuated gaits” and sometimes “breeds in which soring is suspect” this leaves the regulations open to interpretation and as someone indicated, allows for “cherry picking.”

Sure, they may pass the law now and say that it “really” only applies to the TWH and the breeds they are already inspecting, but what will stop the next director at the USDA or a new Secretary of Agriculture from expanding it specifically because the regulations are so broad and unspecific? It creates a loophole for future exploitation.

Once the TWH industry is under control, APHIS still has their funding and will broaden the shows that they inspect and will move on to another breed, then another,. If they don’t use the funding, it will be cut from them on the next budget. That is how these things work…

As for the pads and bands, it isn’t necessarily “nailing on talent.” You have to have a little knowledge of physics to understand.

Horses that do not perform with any kind of motion have a leg and shoulder that swing forward and back move the hoof like a pendulum. Horses that do perform with motion have conformation that allows their legs and shoulders to move the hoof in a circular motion from the time the hoof leaves the ground to the time it makes contact, it travels a circular path.

That circular path, especially as the horse moves out at faster speeds of the trot, creates forces on the hoof and shoe. You have centrifugal/centripetal force, you have g-force, you have tension. If anything is out of balance, the circular motion and the speed at which the hoof travels creates more imbalance. Think of your tire on your car when it is out of balance, you hit a certain speed and the wobble gets worse.

As an example, a horse has one hoof with a higher heel and one hoof with a longer toe…a true club foot with the x-rays to prove it. You can only do so much trimming to balance them because you have to keep the bony structures in the hoof capsule balanced. This horse with a high heel will not bend that knee as much. Horses “pull” the weight differently. A heavy heel opens up the knee and gives more “reach” with the hoof. The other hoof that is balanced heavier at the toe, will have more bend at the knee and a shorter stride, because the heavy toe is pulled up under the horse more.

The ability to put a wedge under the short heel and maybe a little toe weight on the hoof with the tall heel will help to balance out the horse’s gait to make the strides more evenly match each other. Otherwise you would have a horse with an uneven trot that would be more easily subject to injury.

I have this exact case in my barn RIGHT NOW. He is a clubfooted horse with a very clubby right. He is a SUPER talented horse who was a mediocre park horse and has been an outstanding Walk/Trot Pleasure horse for us with a 3rd at Nationals and 7th in the World Championships.

This horse gets his shoes pulled when we are on breaks from the show season and sure enough, he was barefoot in pasture and tore his superficial flexor tendon in February.

Another example is a horse that hits himself. I had a saddlebred in training who would travel in with the right front and hit himself in the left leg. He had already broken the top of his left splint bone before he came to me. I lightened up his shoeing and we added weight to the underside of the shoe but instead of centering it we offset it so that the horse would slightly pull away a little more and avoid hitting himself. That horse went on to win quite a bit in Amateur and Junior exhibitor Show Pleasure.

The shoeing didn’t “create” the motion, but it helped to even out the strides to keep the horses from injuring themselves.

Right now the only horse I have in pads is my 25 year old Arabian lesson horse. He just is more comfortable in pads. He travels like a daisy-cutter and has slightly more motion than a WP QH. The pads don’t create the motion, it is the “whole package” that does.

What is the “whole package?” It starts with having the correct conformation (the lay of the shoulder, the position of the foreleg under the chest, the position of the withers in relation to the shoulder and back, having an uphill build), after you have the conformation then you need to have the correct balance on the horse…he has to be able to work his hocks up underneath his body (or at least not trail them out behind) and lighten his forehand and this comes from the rider asking the horse to use his conformation to this benefit, then the horse has to have the athleticism…he has to have the shoulder muscles developed to lift the foreleg high, he has to have the neck muscles developed to allow for a tuck to the nose and a lifting of the crest, he has to have the haunches developed to carry his hind end underneath him and propel him forward (he should have “rear wheel drive” pushing him forward and not be pulling himself along with his forelegs).

It is more than simply slapping a pad and a heavy shoe on the horse.

As for the bands, I am in FL and I have to rely on bands quite a bit because of the wet that we get here. The rain starts in June usually and doesn’t end until September/October. One big late summer Tropical storm can drop 15 inches of rain on already saturated ground. When you have to work your horses on soggy ground they sometimes need a little help keeping those shoes on.

The reason for the bands is to relieve the stress put on the nail holes, especially since the back of horse shoes cannot be nailed to the hoof. All of those aforementioned forces…G forces, Centrifugal, centripetal, tension…all cause the shoe to “pull” on the nails. Soft or crumbly walls need a little help sometimes so the shoe doesn’t come off and tear the hoof wall with it.

As for the need for pads for “concussion” you need to consider that yes, even though the arenas are groomed, many of the high-motioned horses are hoof pounding machines. They slap the ground pretty hard with every step. The footing for these horses cannot be overly soft or deep because deep footing causes stifle problems in these breeds.

So, in summary, the ability to use pads helps us even out the motion of our horses and helps against concussive injuries, the use of weights allows us also the ability to even out motion, the use of bands helps to take stress off of the nails where the hoof wall may be weak.

I know the question that many of you will then pose is “why have or why show horses with those defects…breed for more correct horses”

Our gene pools are small. Nobody breeds for these defects on purpose, they breed for the athleticism and the conformation. Unfortunately you do have a club foot or legs that are less than straight. What do you do? Do you take the otherwise talented horse out back behind the barn and shoot it, or do you find a use for it? Obviously you don’t want to continue to breed for it but with so few horses already in the gene pool we have to work with what we have.

There are a lot of people that have their Morgans and their Saddlebreds who keep them flat shod and do flat shod events with them. That is OK. I don’t have a problem with it. But there are plenty of other people that prefer the look of the high-headed, high-stepping horses.

The pads and bands and weights do not hurt the horse. In many cases as I have pointed out, they can help the horse. Why take it away from EVERYBODY because of the few that abuse it?

Do we take cars away from everybody because a FEW people drink and drive?

Do we take guns away from everybody because a FEW people commit crimes with them?

Excellent post Amwrider. Food for thought.

Bands do help keep shoes on. But they are an easy mark I suppose.
Good post amwrider.
I am not bringing up the slippery slope per say but do we what to ban helpful items?
What is the feeling on the shoes some of the dressage horses wear? They are very unusual compared to what is considered standard.
How do we account for the weight of the shoes of horses with big feet if weight is limited.
Many questions about these types of regulations and the wording.

the comment period has been extended til 10/26, if you still want to weigh in:

http://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=APHIS-2011-0009

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-09-22/html/2016-22855.htm

[QUOTE=roseymare;8855087]
Bands do help keep shoes on. But they are an easy mark I suppose.
Good post amwrider.
I am not bringing up the slippery slope per say but do we what to ban helpful items?
What is the feeling on the shoes some of the dressage horses wear? They are very unusual compared to what is considered standard.
How do we account for the weight of the shoes of horses with big feet if weight is limited.
Many questions about these types of regulations and the wording.[/QUOTE]

Agree–good post, amwrider

As to the question about shoes on dressage horses–and and other “devices” such as pads, clips (works like a ban, but you have to cut into the outside hoof wall to affix them) and bell boots that I see in the eventing world–none of these instances would currently be under consideration.

While not part of the offical propsed law, this paragraph appears on the .gov site:

“As we indicated we would do in the 1979 rule cited above, we have given serious consideration to prohibiting all action devices and pads, as the current industry inspection program has failed to adequately address instances of soring. The Department believes that 38 years has been more than enough time for the gaited horse industry to reform its training practices to comply with the Act. Therefore, to successfully and significantly reduce the number of sored horses shown, exhibited, sold, and auctioned, we are proposing to prohibit the use of pads, action devices, and substances on the limbs of any Tennessee Walking Horse, Racking Horse, or related breed.”

My bolding–these rules would only impact what someone in the government considers a “related breed” to the TWH or racking horse. As further defined in other parts of this rhedoric, related breeds are defined as ASBs, Arabs, Morgans, Hackney ponies…

So, while “devices” such as pads, clips/bans, boots etc would be forbidden for the above mentioned breeds, they would be ok for everyone else. I have to wonder, since I event my ASB, would I be forbidden from putting a pad on him because of his breed while the OTTB in the next stall can wear them??? If pads and heavy/unusual shoes are signs of/enable soring, then why isn’t the government going after the dressage horses??? I’ve seen the kind of motion Valegro has… he sure can “pop that knee!”

So, before everyone flames me, I AM BEING REDICULOUS ON PURPOSE to illustrate my point, which is…

Devices are not soring. Because they happen to be used in tandem for ONE BREED ONLY–a breed that won’t even participate in the USEF–there is no reason to go after other discplines/breed that happen to use something that in someone’s mind looks similar. It’s just silly.

Oh, and BTW–my ASB eventing horse is my retired country pleasure show horse. He wears heavier shoes now that he did as a show horse. Hmmmmm…

[QUOTE=roseymare;8855087]
Bands do help keep shoes on. But they are an easy mark I suppose.
Good post amwrider.
I am not bringing up the slippery slope per say but do we what to ban helpful items?
What is the feeling on the shoes some of the dressage horses wear? They are very unusual compared to what is considered standard.
How do we account for the weight of the shoes of horses with big feet if weight is limited.
Many questions about these types of regulations and the wording.[/QUOTE]

Agree–good post, amwrider

As to the question about shoes on dressage horses–and and other “devices” such as pads, clips (works like a ban, but you have to cut into the outside hoof wall to affix them) and bell boots that I see in the eventing world–none of these instances would currently be under consideration.

While not part of the offical propsed law, this paragraph appears on the .gov site:

“As we indicated we would do in the 1979 rule cited above, we have given serious consideration to prohibiting all action devices and pads, as the current industry inspection program has failed to adequately address instances of soring. The Department believes that 38 years has been more than enough time for the gaited horse industry to reform its training practices to comply with the Act. Therefore, to successfully and significantly reduce the number of sored horses shown, exhibited, sold, and auctioned, we are proposing to prohibit the use of pads, action devices, and substances on the limbs of any Tennessee Walking Horse, Racking Horse, or related breed.”

My bolding–these rules would only impact what someone in the government considers a “related breed” to the TWH or racking horse. As further defined in other parts of this rhedoric, related breeds are defined as ASBs, Arabs, Morgans, Hackney ponies…

So, while “devices” such as pads, clips/bans, boots etc would be forbidden for the above mentioned breeds, they would be ok for everyone else. I have to wonder, since I event my ASB, would I be forbidden from putting a pad on him because of his breed while the OTTB in the next stall can wear them??? If pads and heavy/unusual shoes are signs of/enable soring, then why isn’t the government going after the dressage horses??? I’ve seen the kind of motion Valegro has… he sure can “pop that knee!”

So, before everyone flames me, I AM BEING REDICULOUS ON PURPOSE to illustrate my point, which is…

Devices are not soring. Because they happen to be used in tandem for ONE BREED ONLY–a breed that won’t even participate in the USEF–there is no reason to go after other discplines/breed that happen to use something that in someone’s mind looks similar. It’s just silly.

Oh, and BTW–my ASB eventing horse is my retired country pleasure show horse. He wears heavier shoes now that he did as a show horse. They told me he needs that heavy shoe for “stabilty.” Hmmmmm…

oops… sorry for the double post

I understand exactly what goes into shoeing a show horse- thanks! I had the pleasure of learning from some of the best. And, if you watch todays top Grand Prix dressage horses, you will see horses moving with huge suspension and elevation in the trot, in all phases of the trot, along with being able to demonstrate the same kind of athleticism in the canter. These horses manage this through training, breeding, and natural ability. Do you want to tell me that ASBs do more? Because you’d be wrong. If you truly believe what you are saying, you do not understand the reality of what a horse truly needs to be athletic- naturally.

Having said that- it amazes me that the ASHA is putting up such a fuss when they have country pleasure horses- who trot well over level, and don’t seem to be the slightest bit worried about them. In fact, the top country pleasure horses consistently trot over level- some with better trots than the walk trot horses. And WITHOUT PADS OF ANY KIND.

Oh, the hypocrisy of wanting to be able to keep the horses that they are adding foot and weight to in order to try and make a hen’s purse out of a sow’s ear, and swearing that it is all about protecting the horse. For those who are not competitive at the National level- I get why you are trying to do more with less. However, I don’t think it is a reasonable premise for the horses.

Removing the ability to pack on foot, weight and shoe levels the playing field, whether those in the breed want to admit it, or not. You aren’t doing a single worthy thing, therapeutically, or ethically, by adding more crap onto a horses foot.

The law, as written, will allow for therapeutic shoeing. However, these horses do not need it for what they are doing.

From the USEF Saddlebred division COUNTRY PLEASURE rules:

“2. English Country Pleasure horses must be plain shod or unshod. Permissible as plain shod shall be a shoe (inclusive of caulks), which may be thicker at the heel and may include toe clips and side clips. Also permissible is an eggbar shoe. Not permissible as plain shod: bands, bars, pads of any kind, wedges, lead, springs, any attachment that extends below the bottom of the shoe, and any foreign substance not specified as permissible. The sole and entire frog of the foot must be visible.

My bolding, of course. There is no restriction on weight of the shoe if you think clips will hold it on.
Fuego would not be able to show in ASB Country Pleasure, nor would many other Dressage horses, since they may wear pads or their sole and frog is covered.
Nor would American Pharoah
https://hoofcare.blogspot.com/2015/10/american-pharoah-breeder-cup-horseshoe.html

To say the new writing would bring things ‘in line with USEF rules’ leaves out the reality of ‘and then goes beyond’: Country Pleasure is just ONE segment of Saddlebred rules and obviously the Show Pleasure and Performance divisions would be considerably altered/restricted.

Either this is directly pointed at ‘high action, gaited breeds’ only, or it isn’t. Breeds being horses belonging to registries - as is the USDA definition of same.

If they are NOT pointing at USEF competitions, they need to say so.

Surely one doesn’t want ASB, Morgans, Arabians, Hackneys dismissed from the USEF because they fall under the ‘must be inspected’ designation of ‘related breeds’ as the USEF is certainly not going to appreciate that additional cost to their shows?
The ‘soring others’ left USEF voluntarily because of their choices being outside USEF rules: now those high actioned breeds IN USEF will be ostracized because -why? Really?

Alternatively, the veterinarians will be getting much more business as everyone has vets present at their shoeing sessions to sign off that all is therapeutic - therefore exception to the new rules.

Note that farriery has moved light years beyond what is ‘permissible’ and ‘not permitted’, with epoxy, different forms and materials, not to mention casts, gloves, and hoof covering boots.

Go after those who sore, whatever breed or division they are in.
Don’t try to fit all equestrian endeavor into a limited shoebox. It probably isn’t the ‘appliance’ that is at fault, but the people wielding them as a means to sore.

Kool-aid, while not an ideal drink, did not kill the people in the Jonestown massacre: it was a vehicle for poison and the poison did the killing.
I’m relatively sure in the absence of Kool-aid, another drink mix would have been just as lethally misused.

I apologise for using that tragedy in poor taste, but Soring is and always has been the problem, not an appliance.

Even Hunter farriers use pads IF NECESSARY for that horse. Not to mention shoe variations.

https://www.americanfarriers.com/articles/653-the-farriers-role-in-enhancing-hunter-and-jumper-performance

And you ask why ‘gaited and related’ breeds feel singled out because ‘the ducks are being sored’ and ‘you breeds’ are also waterfowl, therefore our ‘duck regs’ will apply to you -only?

Arabians have been a distinct breed/type for over 400 years (underestimating).
Hackneys for 200? plus?
Morgans for a bit over 170.
Saddlebreds for about 150.

TWH since about the 1920’s or so.
Racking horses and SSH maybe since the 50’s?

The relationship is interesting to say the least.

[QUOTE=D_BaldStockings;8856054]
From the USEF Saddlebred division COUNTRY PLEASURE rules:

“2. English Country Pleasure horses must be plain shod or unshod. Permissible as plain shod shall be a shoe (inclusive of caulks), which may be thicker at the heel and may include toe clips and side clips. Also permissible is an eggbar shoe. Not permissible as plain shod: bands, bars, pads of any kind, wedges, lead, springs, any attachment that extends below the bottom of the shoe, and any foreign substance not specified as permissible. The sole and entire frog of the foot must be visible.

My bolding, of course. There is no restriction on weight of the shoe if you think clips will hold it on.
Fuego would not be able to show in ASB Country Pleasure, nor would many other Dressage horses, since they may wear pads or their sole and frog is covered.
Nor would American Pharoah
https://hoofcare.blogspot.com/2015/10/american-pharoah-breeder-cup-horseshoe.html

To say the new writing would bring things ‘in line with USEF rules’ leaves out the reality of ‘and then goes beyond’: Country Pleasure is just ONE segment of Saddlebred rules and obviously the Show Pleasure and Performance divisions would be considerably altered/restricted.

Either this is directly pointed at ‘high action, gaited breeds’ only, or it isn’t. Breeds being horses belonging to registries - as is the USDA definition of same.

If they are NOT pointing at USEF competitions, they need to say so.

Surely one doesn’t want ASB, Morgans, Arabians, Hackneys dismissed from the USEF because they fall under the ‘must be inspected’ designation of ‘related breeds’ as the USEF is certainly not going to appreciate that additional cost to their shows?
The ‘soring others’ left USEF voluntarily because of their choices being outside USEF rules: now those high actioned breeds IN USEF will be ostracized because -why? Really?

Alternatively, the veterinarians will be getting much more business as everyone has vets present at their shoeing sessions to sign off that all is therapeutic - therefore exception to the new rules.

Note that farriery has moved light years beyond what is ‘permissible’ and ‘not permitted’, with epoxy, different forms and materials, not to mention casts, gloves, and hoof covering boots.

Go after those who sore, whatever breed or division they are in.
Don’t try to fit all equestrian endeavor into a limited shoebox. It probably isn’t the ‘appliance’ that is at fault, but the people wielding them as a means to sore.

Kool-aid, while not an ideal drink, did not kill the people in the Jonestown massacre: it was a vehicle for poison and the poison did the killing.
I’m relatively sure in the absence of Kool-aid, another drink mix would have been just as lethally misused.

I apologise for using that tragedy in poor taste, but Soring is and always has been the problem, not an appliance.[/QUOTE]

Theraputic is fine- Fuego would be fine. If a horse requires therapeutic shoeing- then, you do it. As long as it is within the parameters of the law, and supported by a Vet.

My point, and I do have one, is that this is an opportunity for the ASB world to strip it down, and show people we really don’t have anything to hide, and care more about the horses than anything else.

We need to move away from anything that resembles, or smacks of artifice. Our horses really can do this without a pile of crap on them. The discussion about different kinds of shoeing to stop horses from interfering, or support lower limb deformities is proactive. However, we need to do the minimum that produces the maximum effect. NOT pile on more.

Not sure if your comment is directed at me or just happened to come after my post. However, since I compete cross-discipline, I have a pretty good idea of the “reality of what a horse truly needs to be athletic–naturally.”

I happen to have one of those country pleasure horses that trots above level naturally and she needs no shoes to make it happen. She wears less shoe than my eventer lol.

IMHO no decent horse person wants to see an animal going around with overly long feet and big shoes–and I actually agree with your assessment above about seeing that in horses that aren’t really competitive but have the sad misfortune of a trainer who is trying to fit a square peg in a round hole, so to speak.

I HATE to see big shoes/pads in the show ring. I think that our horses can and should do what they do without anything “extra.” I’ve always heard that “the good ones go lite” and I think it’s true.

My issue is that the government is threatening to impose regulation in the guise of preventing soring. We don’t sore. Period.

And, quite frankly, this whole thing feels like a witch hunt backed by animal rights crazies. These proposed regulations unfairly target certain breeds… what happens next? Who and what do they go after next? My guess is that the main-stream sport horse disciplines and racing are safe for now given the international influence and money involved.

To me, what ASBs should wear in their feet in the spirit of good horsemanship is a different issue than the government imposing extreme regulation, citing a false premise as reason to interfere…

Guess the Libertarian in me is coming out.

[QUOTE=earsup;8860653]
Not sure if your comment is directed at me or just happened to come after my post. However, since I compete cross-discipline, I have a pretty good idea of the “reality of what a horse truly needs to be athletic–naturally.”

I happen to have one of those country pleasure horses that trots above level naturally and she needs no shoes to make it happen. She wears less shoe than my eventer lol.

IMHO no decent horse person wants to see an animal going around with overly long feet and big shoes–and I actually agree with your assessment above about seeing that in horses that aren’t really competitive but have the sad misfortune of a trainer who is trying to fit a square peg in a round hole, so to speak.

I HATE to see big shoes/pads in the show ring. I think that our horses can and should do what they do without anything “extra.” I’ve always heard that “the good ones go lite” and I think it’s true.

My issue is that the government is threatening to impose regulation in the guise of preventing soring. We don’t sore. Period.

And, quite frankly, this whole thing feels like a witch hunt backed by animal rights crazies. These proposed regulations unfairly target certain breeds… what happens next? Who and what do they go after next? My guess is that the main-stream sport horse disciplines and racing are safe for now given the international influence and money involved.

To me, what ASBs should wear in their feet in the spirit of good horsemanship is a different issue than the government imposing extreme regulation, citing a false premise as reason to interfere…

Guess the Libertarian in me is coming out.[/QUOTE]

My post quoted someone else, and came a bit after yours, so please understand that it wasn’t directed at you. In fact, it was simply directed at those who are not wanting to understand that it is long past time that we take a hard look at the kinds of things we are doing to show horses.

The fact that your country pleasure horse trots over level, and “needs no shoes to make it happen” is EXACTLY my point. If a horse is talented, they are going to show that to you. If not, loading them up with foot and a show package is just folly, but it is also grotesque. I have referenced a fine harness mare who wore what I have heard referred to as “anvils” on her front feet, when she finally won the WGC. I have also noted a certain bay three gaited mare who had a ridiculous amount of foot, and barely broke level, when she won her WGC. The fact that this is supported at the very highest level should be an embarrassment, but these people are so deep into it that they cannot see out.

And, while the soring is not caused by shoeing that is as ridiculous as it is shameful on the walking horses, or caustic agents, there ARE crappy things done to the horses. Pressure shoeing DOES happen. Hideous amounts of lead in shoes DOES happen.

I do not particularly care who has to stop it- but it needs to happen, for all of the breeds noted in the USDA act. These breed organizations are working furiously behind the scenes to retain their ability to continue these practices, and guess what? This does NOT need to happen.

We aren’t preserving some great way of life for these horses- we are removing artificial appliances, and leveling the playing field. It is that simple. Anyone who wishes to complicate it is doing so for their own purposes- NOT for the horses.

Have the draft folks weighed in on the issue?

Why does the regulations continue to mention trotting?

Now they are dropping the age and saying keg or related shoe?

Limiting the wording to keg shoe pretty much negates any innovation in shoeing such as the European rocker shoes the upper level dressage horses wear to facilitate lateral movement.
How much heavier are sliding plates?

Reading the comments on various threads on Facebook, I just can’t get over the amount of people who seem to believe that every horse should be barefoot. And they should just be bred for better hooves. I agree more people should breed for soundness but it is a bit of a pipedream because horses are well horses.
The more they mess with this rule the more I don’t like it and wonder who is writing it.

Reading the comments on various threads on Facebook, I just can’t get over the amount of people who seem to believe that every horse should be barefoot. And they should just be bred for better hooves. I agree more people should breed for soundness but it is a bit of a pipedream because horses are well horses.
The more they mess with this rule the more I don’t like it and wonder who is writing it.

[QUOTE=roseymare;8861341]
Reading the comments on various threads on Facebook, I just can’t get over the amount of people who seem to believe that every horse should be barefoot. And they should just be bred for better hooves. I agree more people should breed for soundness but it is a bit of a pipedream because horses are well horses.
The more they mess with this rule the more I don’t like it and wonder who is writing it.[/QUOTE]
I think the same people who are writing this are the same people who have gone after and continue to do so, carriage horses. Same people who want to ban any pet shop from selling dogs. The same people who believe that breeders should be fined, taxed, etc. The same people who want all dogs to be s/n, all dogs to be adopted only from shelters etc. we have laws against abuse and cruelty. They need to be enforced. Not new laws that are not specific and open ended in wording. I dont trust these people. I think no one dhould.

Some of them seem to have horses themselves. Probably the same folks who can’t tell when their own horses are lame.

[QUOTE=roseymare;8861285]
Have the draft folks weighed in on the issue?

Why does the regulations continue to mention trotting?

Now they are dropping the age and saying keg or related shoe?

Limiting the wording to keg shoe pretty much negates any innovation in shoeing such as the European rocker shoes the upper level dressage horses wear to facilitate lateral movement.
How much heavier are sliding plates?[/QUOTE]

I’ll have to find the link, but my understanding of the new phrasing us that it will affect gaited, trotting and “other moving” (?) horses, and that no shoe can weigh more than 16oz. That’s a size one shoe. Also, my understanding is that timed event horses are the only exemptions. This is going to affect all if us, even if my understanding is wrong