Google’ barney davis ssh’
As long as we are looking at dressage shoeing, too - re: weighted shoes being added to the bill.
This is also excerpted from the Dressage shoeing article linked by Renae:
Weighty Decisions
Farley does manipulate the weight of the front and hind shoes to aid dressage performance.
“I do a lot of things with the shoes that are an advantage to the horse,” he says. “For example, some of the older horses don’t lift in the shoulder as much, and if you add about 3 ounces of heel weight to the foot, they’ll lift their shoulder in the front and use their back end better, also.”
Weight plays a big role in the difference between front and hind, left and right feet, he says, “but I think on the bigger horses it takes more weight — bigger, wider shoes — then we believe it does. I know several horses that have a pour-in pad under a heavy plastic pad. The rider is convinced they go better. They go better because they’re staying on top of the ground and the pad is just enough weight to make him lift his shoulder higher.”
But, he notes, “I have a couple of good horses that cannot take any weight on the feet. They have good feet and they’re animated, but if you put a shoe on them, it really messes up their rhythm. They go very well barefoot.”
Now, I ask, you think this is therapeutic?
Or enhancement that alters gait = Unlawful?
Because it certainly isn’t prescribed by a vet for rehab or to prevent brushing or overreach injury - read the word enhance.
Why is there no measure of ‘too much’ in the proposed bill? 3 pads or 5 ounces or whatever is deemed hazardous by vets and farriers?
No mention of toe length or angles in the bill, either. So I guess messing those up is OK, or at least not soring?
If you want to put teeth in a bill put it in the enforcement side. Soring is already illegal.
[QUOTE=D_BaldStockings;6574667]
As long as we are looking at dressage shoeing, too - re: weighted shoes being added to the bill.
This is also excerpted from the Dressage shoeing article linked by Renae:
Weighty Decisions
Farley does manipulate the weight of the front and hind shoes to aid dressage performance.
“I do a lot of things with the shoes that are an advantage to the horse,” he says. “For example, some of the older horses don’t lift in the shoulder as much, and if you add about 3 ounces of heel weight to the foot, they’ll lift their shoulder in the front and use their back end better, also.”
Weight plays a big role in the difference between front and hind, left and right feet, he says, “but I think on the bigger horses it takes more weight — bigger, wider shoes — then we believe it does. I know several horses that have a pour-in pad under a heavy plastic pad. The rider is convinced they go better. They go better because they’re staying on top of the ground and the pad is just enough weight to make him lift his shoulder higher.”
But, he notes, “I have a couple of good horses that cannot take any weight on the feet. They have good feet and they’re animated, but if you put a shoe on them, it really messes up their rhythm. They go very well barefoot.”
Now, I ask, you think this is therapeutic?
Or enhancement that alters gait = Unlawful?
Because it certainly isn’t prescribed by a vet for rehab or to prevent brushing or overreach injury - read the word enhance.
Why is there no measure of ‘too much’ in the proposed bill? 3 pads or 5 ounces or whatever is deemed hazardous by vets and farriers?
No mention of toe length or angles in the bill, either. So I guess messing those up is OK, or at least not soring?
If you want to put teeth in a bill put it in the enforcement side. Soring is already illegal.[/QUOTE]
I know it sounds like a broken record - but the only reason soring is done it because of the weighted shoe, the chain, the stack of pads. Eliminate those devices and soring will stand out like the sore thumb is it.
These horses are not high steppers. Not in their walking gaits any way.
Oh - before I forget again, I would like to share a little bit of history I picked up recently which might make apparent why those particular breed venues are targeted by the HPA rule changes.
The Racking and SSH associations were initially a sort of sub group within the TWH association. Spotted TWH (aka the SSH) pretty much would be out of the ribbon if a solid colored horse of equal or similar gait was in the ring. And for what ever reason, the TWH just did not have the foresight to make a place for the racking horse. They simply coveted the nodding overstride of the walking type gaits.
So, the folks who started these break off groups did so to have a place to show and win “World Grand Championships” with their equally nice horses that did not do well in an exclusive TWH ring. For the TWH it was all about the walking type gait and not so much the racking *gait. (*For those who do not know the soft gaits, racking and walking gaits are both 4 beating with the main difference in the shape of the horse, head nod, length of stride, and of course speed of the gait).
And though these break off associations now have all manner of different “breed” horse in them - they were initially a venue for TWH specialty groups.
And even today you will see many spotted TWH are triple registered as Racking and or SSH or even Kentucky Mountain horses - though Kentucky Mountain Horse Association is not known for putting any value on a sored or stacked chained and weighted horse. Mostly cause they prefer the rack over the walk. Same with the MFT (Missouri Fox Trotters). Many of them come out of the TWH pot and closet.
But the bad news is those people that originated the Racking and SSH associations brought their training methods with them.
And as an added thought, other southern gaited breeds and their associations (Rocky Mountain Horse, Mountain Pleasure Horse) work hard to put some sort of limit on what devices can be on their horses on their grounds and in their rings. In fact, there is ongoing discussion among them as to whether to set a standard to eliminate the high stepping racking horse from their registries so as not to have soring and mechanized movement interfere with their breed’s future and reputation. I personally do not think that is a very well thought out course - but I understand why they consider it.
[QUOTE=katarine;6574406]
?they sore lite sbod horses too.[/QUOTE]
Do you think they don’t???
Cordial, Kat knows light shod are sored as well. I think she was.wondering what the other poster was referring to as bullshit.
I wanted to add that soring was around BEFORE stacks came around.
Get rid of stacks and soring will be around still. Get rid of chains and soring will still be around. Get rid of any mechanical device and you can still sore. So what then? Get rid.of the breed? No thank you.
Breed specific legislation is never good and is a slippery slope into having other things banned. As has been stated, soring is illegal. Actually enforce that law before creating more…
[QUOTE=cordial;6574380]
WELL SAID![/QUOTE]
Actually banning pads would at least eliminate hiding pressure shoeing which isn’t only a TWH thang to be sure.
[QUOTE=Rudy;6574998]
I wanted to add that soring was around BEFORE stacks came around.
Get rid of stacks and soring will be around still. Get rid of chains and soring will still be around. Get rid of any mechanical device and you can still sore. So what then? Get rid.of the breed? No thank you.
Breed specific legislation is never good and is a slippery slope into having other things banned. As has been stated, soring is illegal. Actually enforce that law before creating more…[/QUOTE]
There are 2 types of soring. Pastern and hoof. Without a pad the only thing they could do is road founder or quick the hoof. Which is something they already do but still…
If you think you require a pad to pressure sore you are sorely mistaken and misguided.
[QUOTE=cordial;6574868]
Do you think they don’t???[/QUOTE]
You misunderstood me. I KNOW they sore all levels of TWH show horses, I have seen sored lite shod horses with my own eyes. Barney Davis got caught soring SSHs, a breed that doesn’t even have padded horses.
I was refuting Baby Green’s adamant “BS” post, letting her know/reminding educating her that they do, in fact, sore all levels.
Not everyone sores TWH show horses, but there are those who sore at every level. I don’t see removing the pads from the ring as removing soring from the ring. Some among us think they are the only bad apples. There’s lots of bad apples in the bushel, you and I both know that.
And what of the 3oz added to a dressage horse’s fore shoes, heels- that’s not therapy. That’s sizzle. That’s enhancement.
[QUOTE=sunridge1;6575009]
There are 2 types of soring. Pastern and hoof. Without a pad the only thing they could do is road founder or quick the hoof. Which is something they already do but still…[/QUOTE]
Wow. Just wow.
[QUOTE=Rudy;6575013]
If you think you require a pad to pressure sore you are sorely mistaken and misguided.[/QUOTE]
Did you read my whole post?
[QUOTE=katarine;6575018]
Wow. Just wow.[/QUOTE]
Please clarify.
No, by all means, carry on. You have it all figured out.
Without the stacks it would be easier to use hooftesters to see if the hoof was overly sensitive.
[QUOTE=Rudy;6574992]
Cordial, Kat knows light shod are sored as well. I think she was.wondering what the other poster was referring to as bullshit.[/QUOTE]
I have no idea what the “other poster” was referring when she said Bullshit to me. Let me know if you find out.lol
[QUOTE=katarine;6575014]
You misunderstood me. I KNOW they sore all levels of TWH show horses, I have seen sored lite shod horses with my own eyes. Barney Davis got caught soring SSHs, a breed that doesn’t even have padded horses.
I was refuting Baby Green’s adamant “BS” post, letting her know/reminding educating her that they do, in fact, sore all levels.
Not everyone sores TWH show horses, but there are those who sore at every level. I don’t see removing the pads from the ring as removing soring from the ring. Some among us think they are the only bad apples. There’s lots of bad apples in the bushel, you and I both know that.
And what of the 3oz added to a dressage horse’s fore shoes, heels- that’s not therapy. That’s sizzle. That’s enhancement.[/QUOTE]
Don’t for get about, in my humble opinion, the worst abuse is pressure shoeing!
interesting link
Tennessee state law re: Animal Cruelty
http://asci.uvm.edu/equine/law/cruelty/tn_cruel.htm
excerpt: (all italics mine)
“39-14-202 Cruelty to animals.
(a) A person commits an offense who intentionally or knowingly:
…
(5) Inflicts burns, cuts, lacerations, or other injuries or pain, by any method, including blistering compounds, to the legs or hooves of horses in order to make them sore for any purpose including, but not limited to, competition in horse shows and similar events.
…
(d) In addition to the penalty imposed in subsection (f), the court making the sentencing determination for a person convicted under this section shall order the person convicted to surrender custody and forfeit the animal or animals whose treatment was the basis of the conviction. Custody shall be given to a humane society incorporated under the laws of this state. The court may prohibit the person convicted from having custody of other animals for any period of time the court determines to be reasonable, or impose any other reasonable restrictions on the person’s custody of animals as necessary for the protection of the animals.
…
(f) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.”
Reading the State statute, ‘at home’ soring can also be punished IF there are charges and a prosecution and conviction.
Note that the Federal law HPA in this case does NOT take away horses; and the State may.
Maybe some energy ought to be expended toward Tennessee enforcing it’s laws.
By the way, the original HPA does have a statement ‘any device…’ that would cover ALL the possible ways to mechanically sore a horse, so listing XYZ in the new version is superfluous anyway. If it results in soreness, charges can be attached, it doesn’t matter if it is your grandma’s lace hanky.
How about finding some funding or backing for enforcement of laws already here?
[QUOTE=katarine;6575034]
No, by all means, carry on. You have it all figured out.[/QUOTE]
I don’t have anything figured out. You seem to be denying that those things are done. There I will say BS.
I live in the part of the country where they allow hunting bear with dogs. I hate it. I hate how the dogs are kept the majority of the year. I hate the callousness to the dogs. Yes they are hunting type dogs and “love” to hunt. However they are really raccoon hunting dogs. Ill equipped to deal with an angry bear, and often lose their lives to bear mauling not to mention wolves. In years past bear dog hunters were very impervious to trespass laws, down right rude and obnoxious. The hunt with dogs was on the brink of BANNING. OMG!
Now the WI Bear Hunting Council is powerful in this state. They WANT to keep hunting with dogs legal. If you as a landowner have a legitimate complaint, don’t even bother with the DNR or law enforcement. Call the council, they’ll take the guys birthday away. Which is the way it should be.
TWHBEA did not, will not police their own. The cultish industry is to blame and it even spread.
BTW I owned a SSH way back in the beginning, 1989/90 They were strictly pleasure horses no pads or weights, no breaking level. I loved it. They were any Pinto horse that did a 4 beat gait. MFT, TWH, ASB crosses. Now…look at them. Pressure shod to death.
