danverschild wrote:

My bad Danvers. I went through and tried to re-read what I wrote, looking specifically for that type of reference. Apparently I didn't see them all.
I meant "the AFA", not "we or "them".

And quite honestly, I think shoeing horses professionally for 25 years entitles me to my opinion on what I'm looking for in a professional organization that represents my vocation, not whether I'm a member or not.

Yes, I am critical of and disappointed with the AFA leadership in recent years.
I was disgusted with the way 'that' organization seems to chew people up and spit them out, no matter what stance they seem to take and I wouldn't pretend to have an answer for that but it seems to be some sort of systemic issue. I know there are a lot of good people that still believe the AFA is needed and is a good thing. I think the AFA does not represent the average working stiff in the horse world, which is what a good organization should do.
I feel that IF the AFA actually rang true with the people out in the field, it's numbers would not reflect single-digit percentages of the people in the profession. It would at least be alluring to poeple to check it out.
And personally, maybe if the AFA was a little more transparent I wouldn't have missed it that far on the numbers. So what is the actual membership now? It is considerably less than it has been in recent years, yes?
What do you attribute it to, the economy?

vthorseshoe wrote:
I won't pretend to know exactly how things work or whos job it is to do what in the afa.
What I would do is sub out the competition to the wbc (if that is still an option). I would accept the offers of those willing to get the afa website up and running. Even if its a short fix until more money gets set aside to go in a different direction. I would want direct contact between the afa and state associations, especially to get the precerts up and running.

As for horse owners, its never been a concern of mine whether or not a horse owner new about the afa. But, I would guess it would be a good idea to get afa articles in various horse magazines and set up horse owner clinics around the country.

JimBondra in gray, deletia

The reason I'm tired and missed the AFA convention is I just had open heart 3 weeks ago. 4 bypasses and a stent put in a month before that.

My sincere best wishes to you for a speedy recovery.

I would wager that would even wear your old fat self out!

Thinking about another angiogram is not one of my favorite subjects. I can't imagine the courage it takes to undergo an angioplasty.

If it were any of your business.

LMAO! Your ticker ain't none of my business; but, whether you like it or not, I'm gonna hope you get better; in fact, it'd kinda tickle me if that ****ed you off.

That is exactly what we need.. the horse owners to understand what the AFA is. They simply don't understand. I am working on my CJF and was explaining it to someone and they said, you have been shoeing for 7 years and you haven't gotten certified yet? Others don't know or care what certification is. As far as farriers complaining about the practical exams... it isn't telling you how to shoe every horse.. it is testing your ability to shoe a horse to a certain fit. That says to me if you can fit a horse where you want it then you can fit the horse all the time any way you choose as opposed to just winging it and claiming "I meant to do that".
As far as the politics is concerned.. I hope things get going smoothly. The AFA needs to be for the membership, not lost in political red tape.

EDeSocio wrote:

Ya know, that is a legitimate question.:cool:

IRNWKR_2 wrote:
But the problem is, irnwrkr, that the general public equates "certified" with shoeing school diploma and doesn't know there is only a volunteer exercize for certification, which has no teeth in it. Certification means nothing to them since anyone who attends or completes shoeing school is certified.
Asking them to recognise the difference between AFA/BWFA/GPF/WCF certification will get you a lot of blank stares.

Hence the need for owner education.

one problem we have had in SE Idaho is guys getting out of school and assuming no one is going to check on their "supposed" AFA certification....and most horseowners don't know to go to the AFA website to look for themselves

How can I get involved with the AFA? I believe I can bring something to the table. The AFA is a much needed orinization and should be the pioneer of the industry.

About 5 years ago I stated the we do not need the AFA, the AFA needs us. I still believe this to be true.

Kind of like our customers do not need us, we need our customers.

Some of you will understand some never will.

Good night, and even though it is none of my damn business and Jim probably would not even stop if he saw me broke down on the side of the road. Jim I wish you a speedy recovery and God bless and welcome to the forum.

Try his first


http://www.americanfarriers.org/

Scott Chaney wrote:
I am all for Owner Edudation. That is why my customers Have a pretty good understaning of what The AFA certification is all about. I dont know who was behind the article in Americas Horse but it was a great article. Now if we could just see more of it.

Eric Russell wrote:
That is exactly the point Eric! Would it be more fair to ask someone who shoes to NB ideas to put on a shoe to a different standard for a test? I am not a NB farrier, but I think it is difficult to evaluate people on work they do not do on a day to day basis. This is why we have specialists for breeds and usage. I would not shoe a saddlebred with a double nailed package as well as someone who did this all day every day.

I don't want to derail the discussion, but I was asked what I would change.This would change the perception of the AFA and encourage more people to join, don't you think?

reillyshoe in gray

That is exactly the point Eric! Would it be more fair to ask someone who shoes to NB ideas to put on a shoe to a different standard for a test?

Without rigid standards, pass/fail becomes the sole province of the tester's opinion and the inherent subjectivity of any such a test carries a great deal of credibility baggage. The AFA testing standard does not necessarily reflect one's day-to-day work; instead, the AFA's tests involve standardized criteria to assure as much objectivity as possible in evaluation.

I am not a NB farrier, but I think it is difficult to evaluate people on work they do not do on a day to day basis.

The AFA's tests measure a testee's ability to meet a published standard, not the testee's ability to meet his personal standard or model.

This is why we have specialists for breeds and usage. I would not shoe a saddlebred with a double nailed package as well as someone who did this all day every day.

The AFA's tests are designed to determine the testee's ability to shoe to a standard, not a specialty. That said, I don't think any specialty farrier would have much trouble with the AFA's CF if he were inclined to take it - Most specialty farriers were driving 5s before they started driving 3 1/2s, sugar nails, or 16s.

Your points are all correct Tom. Would you agree that some people do not become certified because of the standard the AFA uses for its testing? Would you agree that many people believe the AFA is a group that advocates the "perimeter fit" as an ideal? Would you agree that there are other published standards to which testing would/could/is conducted?

People avoid the AFA and certification for a bunch of reasons, including these perceptions. Strasser has a published standard, but I wouldn't take that test on principle. I think many people have the same thought about the standards of the AFA tests (I am not equating the AFA to Strasser, just pointing out that there is a difference in what people believe). If the AFA does not advocate the testing standard as "correct shoeing" (as Danvers points out), mix it up for a few years and see if perceptions change and membership goes up.

Tom,
Would you take a test using NB principles as the standard? If you were inclined to take the test, would it be more difficult to pass considering you do not shoe in that manner on a regular basis?

Tom Stovall, CJF wrote:
I don't use 16s. If 12s won't do it I double nail and drop down to about a 6.