Why does your horse wear hind shoes?

[PNWjumper]

I’ve had a couple of horses over the years who were absolutely night and day in the differences in their hind end “engine” with and without hind shoes. And with those horses I had done shoes up front (only) for the first few months and then added hinds when we got ready to head to a show where I would need to caulk them. Adding shoes increased the power and drive from behind significantly. So now when my young horses get to the shoeing stage, I put shoes on all 4 feet (rather than my former plan of shoeing up front first and following with hinds 6-12 months later).

I’ve also had horses that felt no different when hinds were added - so I don’t think it always makes a huge difference. But I’m not interested in taking my chances on which type of horse I’m sitting on, and eventually shoes will go on all around anyway.

I do have one mare who’s in fronts only. She’s 21 years old and packs around my 9 year old daughter. So I’m not terribly concerned with her ability to drive from behind (though I do think she goes better when she’s shod all the way around). But also, she’s my alpha mare in my herd of mares, and is the one who does the most (if not all of the) kicking in the pasture. So after she nailed one of my young horses in the shoulder years ago, she lost hind shoe privileges!

[Mondo]

These responses are so bizarre to me that I’m sure mine will be soundly flamed - why in the hell would you ever put only 2 shoes on a 4 footed animal? No shoes or 4 shoes is the only thing that makes sense.

Why? Oh, shoot, I don’t know…maybe because I would look askance at you if you decided to run a few miles with only one shoe on? It’s just a very strange concept to me that you would only put shoes on the front.

Now - some people have mentioned some very good reasons for NOT shoeing some horses (behind?) and that is fine and logical. However, I wouldn’t put shoes on ANY of that particular horse’s feet. Why would you unbalance him like that?

Have any of you ever ridden a horse that has thrown a shoe (or 2)? They tend to go pretty unevenly, even on the best of surfaces.

Just my opinion. Flame away.

[MoonoverMississippi]

I have 3 mustangs, all from different herd management areas. You CAN NOT compare most mustang feet to domestic horses, imo. My farrier cusses my mustangs’ feet; they are hard with thick walls, from generations of “survival of the fittest”, i.e., staying sound enough to live long enough to breed.

Comparing horses from that environment, where they can also pick where they travel and carry no weight, to domestic horses that have been bred for generations for specific uses (often at the detriment of the hoof), and are limited to the footing we supply is disingenous at best.

[netg]

@Mondo

These responses are so bizarre to me that I’m sure mine will be soundly flamed - why in the hell would you ever put only 2 shoes on a 4 footed animal? No shoes or 4 shoes is the only thing that makes sense.

Why? Oh, shoot, I don’t know…maybe because I would look askance at you if you decided to run a few miles with only one shoe on? It’s just a very strange concept to me that you would only put shoes on the front.

Now - some people have mentioned some very good reasons for NOT shoeing some horses (behind?) and that is fine and logical. However, I wouldn’t put shoes on ANY of that particular horse’s feet. Why would you unbalance him like that?

Have any of you ever ridden a horse that has thrown a shoe (or 2)? They tend to go pretty unevenly, even on the best of surfaces.

Just my opinion. Flame away.

Well, if you want to make unsound comparisons… I would look at you very strangely if you chose to put shoes on your hands.

[Mondo]

So to you 4 legs = 2 arms and 2 legs? I don’t think it’s an “unsound comparison.” But, using your logic, wouldn’t the front legs be the “arms” and therefore the ones not requiring shoes? ETA - I don’t walk (trot/canter) on my hands…

[rjr]

@Mondo

These responses are so bizarre to me that I’m sure mine will be soundly flamed - why in the hell would you ever put only 2 shoes on a 4 footed animal? No shoes or 4 shoes is the only thing that makes sense.

… …
Just my opinion. Flame away.

Not flaming, just explaining my viewpoint. Horses carry more weight on the front (even if dressage trained and carrying more than usual behind), and in my experience horses get bruises and tender feet A LOT more in front than behind. So if shoeing to prevent this, front only works fine. Also when horses who need shoes due to soft feet or abrasive sand wearing down the feet, this usually happens a lot more in front (I think due to the shape of the hoof and mechanics of how it rolls over on the toe). Yes, horses feel “out of balance” if the right and left sides don’t match. But they don’t feel strange if the front and back don’t match. It might SEEM theoretically like the horse would feel strange. But in practice, lots of people do it, and it just ISN’T a problem. Horses are fine with it. I have ridden horses on the first day that hind shoes were pulled or that front-only were put on, and they go just fine. It just isn’t a problem. So, if a horse needs shoes in front for one of these reasons, but doesn’t need shoes behind, why NOT shoe just in front, save $50 per month, and avoid the risk to pulled/lost shoes, etc. behind. Also, some prefer to leave hind shoes of if the horses are turned out in groups as there is less injury in case of kicking.