I wrote this about a year ago. It was written for horse owner publication, got picked up by the USHJA, and just came out. I know we all have different opinions and experiences. Also know that there is more than one way to shoe a horse, but this is pretty much my thought process when I get called out on a new case that looks like someone nailed the kitchen sink on it. Curious as to what everyone here thinks...good, bad, or indifferent. Also like to know what your general protocol is when you get called out on a case like this. This horse is a 3 day horse BTW. Thanks! http://www.ushja.org/content/e-updates/enewsPros/documents/aapf_article.pdf
Anyone else having trouble viewing it or is it just my computer. I even went thru the website and couldn't view it.
Try this link in html then just scroll down...but it will still come up as a .pdf http://www.ushja.org/content/e-updates/enewsPros.htm
Good article scrubbs. Do you think it is possible that lack of grip could cause contracted tendons at a young age? All studs out here in saudi use desert sand paddocks which is an incredibly fine sand, that would create no resistance to the toe to get propulsion, exactly what you described as running on a beech. Ive been thinking about it the last week since Mr Perry started the debate on shovel/purchase in the other thread, its not something I had considered could be a cause of contracted tendons but the more I watch them move on the sand the more I think its possible. Its such a fine loose surface they are having to use their flexor unit a lot more to get grip. Maybe i'm completely wrong with this train of thought, any opinions?
Good job outa you Scruggs. Very clear and well written. The shoeing you replaced was done by someone fairly skilled. All the modifications seem to be placed right where the person wanted them. Unfortunately, not where the feet could need or benefit from. I'll bet that if I looked down at the shoe from the top of the foot and leg, your job would follow the hairline and support the foot. The trailer on the other shoe could not have matched any part of a foot. Very professional of you too, not to run down the other Farrier, or give out his name. A bit of a hint could have been given though, something like; "I don't want to give his name, but his initials are Jaye Perry". When I come behind a Farrier like you wrote about, I'll end up following him around, doing allot of miracle working, just doing things simply.
during the early 2000's, most endurance horses i did that ran in Dubia were in Equithotics and or very wide light shoes; 22x8 mm. They were always in the money.....
Exactly what you did Scrubbs, balance the foot and shape the shoe to the foot. Keep things simple and just do the basics right and usually the horse is happy in my experience but to be honest ive never been called out to look at a horse with a problem that has the kitchen sink" nailed to it as you said. We dont seem to have much trouble with guys doin that in Ireland we dont charge enough for guys to over do things, its generally the opposite whacking on half fitted shoes to unbalanced feet. I think what Im saying below ties in with what your talking about in the article sorry if im derailing with my questions. Bio mechanics is not something I have thought about much before so maybe im way off..... But would I be right in thinking the extra width in the material would be increasing the force created by the surface creating grip/friction/purchase? So my theory is.... In the extremely soft desert sand the foot is not fixed to the ground it is constantly slipping back The retractor muscles are working excessively to grip and therefore create propulsion so contract due to the excessive strain.(Im specifically thinking of 6 -10 month old TB foals constantly on this surface)
Snow shoe effect Dave..float.. mass.. would be my thinking of why what Jaye describes worked so well..
In my pea brain of thinking if I got one going to really deep footing I will make the hind toe a bit more narrow and even thin thin the toe width..then make the shoe get wider from the first nail hole back to the heel with fullering or pulling the foot side of the shoe with hammering.. it may be in total vain and may not have a postive effect ..and I have had someone say on forum it foolish for a horse to lose ( purchase) at the jump..but I don't see it as that..I see it as thinking about a track runner at the starting blocks...his feet are not flat at the take off ..they are toe down heel up..
Sincere thanks to everyone who took the time to read it. It is generating some good thoughts here as I hoped it would. I don't know but I would hypothesize that with deep, soft footing, the toe will depress into the ground further than it would on firm ground. If the horse spends much of its day with this substrate induced flexion of P3, during its formative years, I would assume the tendon and muscle head would shorten to accommodate the laxity created with the extra flexion of P3. I rarely, if ever, even ask who the previous farrier was. For all I know the owner or trainer could have told the last farrier that the horse had too much toe or too much traction so he/she tried to accommodate the request...but usually they are quick to go ahead and put it out there, even unrequested...as was the case with this horse. She came right out and told me. The guy used to (still may, haven't seen him in years) pride himself on being a 'movement specialist'. I believe he forgot about this horse's conformation and job, then started chasing his tail with 'movement.'...but that is my opinion, and not necessarily fact. Got to go help my wife hook up her trailer and get horses loaded...be back in a few with more thoughts on the rest of the posts.
Not derailing, adding to the discussion. Depends. Grip/traction/purchase all depend on a friction coefficient (which is essentially a measure of how much resistance to movement a certain material has...a cube of ice sliding over a smooth table top would have a lower friction coefficient vs. a cube of rubber sliding over rough concrete.), the surface area of contact between the two objects, and the amount of normal force pressing those objects together (usually the weight of the object on top). A bare foot has a higher friction coefficient than a plain stamped steel shoe. A good visual of this is sliding plates on a reining horse...not going to get a slide like that out of bare feet. As Travis says below, there is also the snowshoe effect...which is why sliding plates are thin, wide webbed. Essentially, yes...as the horse is trying to drive its mass forward, there is a rearward slip of the foot. Increasing traction increases the mechanical efficiency of applied force. Think of it this way...if you were on a slick, gym floor and were having a foot race, with a couple friends, from one side of the gym to the other, would it be easier for you to run the race with sneakers on, barefoot, or wearing socks? Which (sneakers, barefoot, or socks) would you be more likely to damage a muscle, tendon, or ligament during the race and why? What if you repeated the race on soft beach sand? How would that change the difference in effectiveness of sneakers vs. barefoot vs. socks? The job of the horse also has to be considered...imagine a jumper with the same analogy. Would it matter much (wearing sneakers, barefoot, or socks) if you were trying to jump up and touch the ceiling of the room? Granted the horse still has to get from jump to jump, but the action of jumping itself is not as dependent on traction because the direction of travel has changed.
I would see that more as a stroke of brilliance than pea brain. What do you think that is doing for the horse? i.e.. How is that helping it and why?
