I have been one of those occasionally accused of "unprofessinal behavoiur" here, simply because I openly criticise poor shoeing.
And by "poor" I mean either grossly unskilled OR skilled shoeing that badly misses the mark for the horse biomiechanically.

The barefoot practice is rapidly growing, and many farriers are up in arms about it but the kinds of shoeing I criticizeis one reason I do it. I do what I do to first to help horses AND second to HELP the farrier trade improve.

In this country the number of grossly unskilled farriers is far to high and those farriers will just go on blithly doing the same thing for years unless they get a wake up call. Losing a client because the owner was concerned enough about the job to come here for other opinions and help is a pretty good wake up.

As well there are far too many very skilled blacksmiths who don't understand the biomechanics of a horses foot and continue to shoe in a manner that is very pretty but is causing problems that could be prevented.
It is exactly that sort of thing that is driving the barefoot industry. People are getting better educated about their horses hooves, and getting sick and tired of spending big bucks on skilled shoeing but having lameness or performance issues with their horses. So they turn to barefoot.

So.for those of you who think we should keep the problems in our trade under the rug and out of sight ......GET OVER IT.

It is NOT OK to defend the indefensable, when it comes to raising the bar of skills competence AND *science* in our trade.
I am doing what I do to RAISE the bar as to the level of *veterinary science* as well as the level of basic skills of our profession, and help weed out those who lack those basic skills. When I tell someone to get another farrier it should help the first farrier to see that he or she needs more
training. It might just HELP them in the long run, and it sure as heck wil help that horse right now.

I get too many thank you's from horse owners, AND from young farriers about what the learn from his forum to believe we should not discuss these things openly.

It would be equally wrong Patty to comment that one theory of shoeing is "correct", or that we know another shoeing to be "wrong". There is not enough evidence to make a definitive conclusion in general, much less for any individual foot.
One can respectfully make a point without putting down other styles of shoeing. I do not direct this to you specifically, but points here are too often mentioned as absolutes on topics ranging from Natural Balance to toe clips to handmade shoes as well as anything and everything else. It seems a bit of an obvious statement to make but JPT, Rick, Phil, you and I all have many sound horses in our respective practices in spite of the fact that we all use different materials and theories.

As a ' user ' i find it's very helpfull and without your help i would'nt be as enlightened about my horse's condition. We are in a era of new technologies. The ones that do not follow it might end up left behind....

The internet has no frontiers...it's amazing to be able to speak with some of the finest of your profession likes this.

I think the people who do not like this forum should carry on with their regular activities and leve it alone. There are forums made for ' *****i'n ' if that's what they need...

Here's a tip = Blogging is like an argument... think about what you will say before posting. If it's nasty, type it and wait a bit until you have cooled down. Your posts will reflect who you are to others and will determine how people will perceive you online. If you don't want to send the wrong image of yoruself, make sure you dont ! (speaking from experience here - the Kannuk has quite a temper)

Red,

Thanks for the input, but I ask that you refrain from posting on the Farriers Helping Farriers forums. Ditto for Shadow.

Baron

Woops.... sorry !!! I did'nt realise it was CF to CF only.

Baron,

At the risk of seeming ungracious and with your permission I would like to disagree with the rules that keep none farriers from engaging here in the political section, with the proviso that they abide by the same full name disclosure rules as everyone else.

Personally, I think that the most important input for us as farriers to listen to in regard the effectiveness of our organizations and attitudes will come from the horse owners themselves. We are all in service to horses and horse owners and the foundation of all of the farrier organizations out there is in part toward marketing to the horse owner isn’t it? Would it be advisable for the political arena to become a forum all on its own?

The Political Arena already is a separate forum, though residing in the FHF section. I do understand what you meant, though.

I have previously had similar thoughts about allowing non-farriers to post in the Poltical Arena, as is does seem logical that their input may indeed be valuable.

Although the decision, ultimately rests with me, I would like a little input on the issue. But so as to keep this thread focused, I suggest you start a new thread concerning the allowance of non-farriers in the Political Forum, and lets see what others think as well.

Baron

Not all horse owners are ' educated ' about equines, or articulate, and i fear this could lead to an other spiral of out-of-controlism !

You had a point, but you are also speaking with someone who has lots of 'equine ' knowledge. And lots of customer service skills and psych. background. I don't self-proclaim any titles here, but i do have my share of experience with horses & their sometimes ****** owners.

I agree with Baron, horse owners should stay out, what you do for one you have to do for all, and you might like me but you could not like
others.

(key to good postings = no emotions, remain objective and evidence-based)

reillyshoe wrote:
So if I said glueons suck you would be offended? If yes then Why?

I highly doubt Smitty or Craig is offended, they are not insecure to let something I say offend them.

I can tell you Craig is not offended. Just talked to him today. That thread has generated an excellent discussion and many have taken the time to explain what they do and why.

Better than National Enquirer stuff, it is about bridging the cap we have in this trade, maybe an opportunity for everyone to learn how to agree to disagree and realise we can all learn something.

I'm not going to worry about those who are easily offended. People that are that easily offended are in the wrong trade.

red_hush21 wrote:
Well let me ask the pro about posting. Should I change anything?

I don't agree with Baron, you have a lot to offer and your right up their with Thomas Ride and Drive.

reillyshoe wrote:
Totally agree with you Pat. Craig and I talked a little about this on the phone. I bet if we all got together we could find some of the common reasons what gets horses in trouble. For example the lack of vertical depth and if a method of shoeing can maintain good depth and sound feet then I want to learn about it, even if it is the use of toe clips. I thought Uncle Rico did an excellent job explaining what he does and why. The problem we face in this trade is not the lack of information but the overwhelming amount that is available and a lot of it makes sense. One of the biggest challenges I have with feet are horses with poor quality feet, brittle, seperation, nothing to nail to and when I am trying to fix that horse the last thing I think about is mapping out the foot, biomechanics, balance, Duckets dot or whatever. I think about getting good quality feet that I can keep shoes on because the only issues the horse has is sore feet. So if a WCB or AFA farrier comes to me and says, hey Phil I can get those feet to improve by perimeter fitting handmades and using toe clips you bet I'm going to listen.

Phil Armitage wrote:
Perhaps not offended, but disappointed that you would need to use a term such as "suck" to describe anything related to hoofcare other than a method to clean up fluids or the action on a hoof being pulled out of the mud. Do you, or anyone else on these forums, have trouble getting your hands on a thesaurus? There are plenty of ways to express your disapproval of something without using a term that sounds so degrading. A while back I requested that everyone stop using the word "hack" on the forums, and I'm glad to see that everyone has abided by that request. Let's add "suck" to that as well (unless used in the prior noted contexts). If everyone simply stops using derogatory terms, and expresses themselves in a "higher tone," it will change the whole tenor of the threads.

Baron

http://www.reference.com/browse/all/suck

Phil its very upsetting to see you use that wording. What's worse is you didn't even use it correctly. Hope you find a better word to describe glue on shoes.

Phil,
Direct glued shoes DO suck...I,ve never pulled one (though I've never applied a sirect glue shoe) and not had abcessing all along the white line and/or sole bruising. Thats why the sigafoos were developed--they take into account the fundamental rules of horseshoeing by eliminating sole pressure. No one can direct glue a shoe and not create sole pressure. I've played over every possibility in my mind and have come up with nada. If somebody has an idea I might rethink it.
I toe clipped a horse today, came out pretty nice, sat flush, no flares axis lined up, and he has worn them for years. His hinds looked like an AFA cert fit with a bit of "hunter" safing
The next horse had a big rocker toe with some extra grinding in the lateral toe 1/4 of the shoe , side clips (they were fit in as well) and a deep seated light leather rim pad. (little sole depth and PO evidenced by deep vaginations along the margin of PIII) his whiteline from pillar to pillar is not tight and never will be... poor laminar attachment to a poor bone. His hind shoes started as #7 crothers 3/8x7/8 and ended up looking a lot like an NB hind with a sweetened medial heel and a wide lat support hind... toe knit shut... he quit torquing his hind feet and hocks after this.. and that was on concrete (the trim helped) on soft ground he'll be even better. I'll hazard a guess that both horses were shod correctly for there job, conformation and iherient (or lack of) issues. A thunder/hail storm killed my digital on our honeymoon or I'd have taken pictures of both horses.
These are all tools, and ANY tool that benefits the horse and respects the fundamentals of good farriery can not be said to suck. It just has its place.
JMO,
Jason