I know this topic has been beaten to death, but I am frustrated by the lack of respect afforded to the farrier industry.

from the other thread:

Do you realize how little horseshoeing education vets receive in school? And yet they are supposed to prescribe the appropriate shoe for a lameness to us?
Heck, most vet schools do not even employ a farrier (MRIs are essential, though).

Some states do not offer CE credits to vets for attending farrier lectures. Apparantly we offer nothing worth learning (which might be fair enough since anyone can buy some toos and call themselves a farrier).

Does anyone know of a "State Farrier"? Does anyone know of a state without a "State Veterinarian"? Aren't all of the rules about practicing decided at this level?

We have nobody to blame but ourselves for the current state of things, but there are a lot of things I would like to see changed. I have done a 180 on the issue of lisencing (but I am still unsure of certification). I would like for the farrier profession to have more respect, although with it comes more accountability.


I was unaware of this, but apparently licensing was required in Illinois up until the 1980's. Did anyone (Rick?) have any first hand recollection of how this worked? What was required for a license?

Also, I am not suggesting certification. That is a whole other ballgame as far as I am concerned. I am wondering specifically about requiring a formal education in a farrier school and a yearly fee. This money would pay for the salary of a state farrier board and enforcement. The farrier board would certify the schools (loosley, I might add- just to ensure no mail in diplomas). Keep in mind that many states do not have a practical portion of the test administered to vets for licensing, but there is a written exam. I have no interest in determining what is the correct method of balancing or shoeing a horse.

Would be be held more accountable in legal issues? Yup, almost certainly. Would we be held in higher regard? I think so. Consider the following post from another site before answering:

Have a horse that went lame and started toe flipping, . Had the vet herself trim her, she wasn't 100% happy with any of the ferriers I tried. Got her to stop toe flipping but is now trying to get to the bottom of it.
She says worse case senario its a digital flexor issue that caused it in the first place. Could be that she injured it, could be a year of neglect on her feet. Got her from some one who just had her parked in a field for a year. No such thing as a free horse, huh?

I think farriers deserve more respect than I think we receive as an industry. Here is the question: Would licensing help us to receive that?

Another question: Do we want to be responsible for hoofcare, and would we be willing to put ourselves in a position to be held more accountable in exchange for that responsibility?

I don't know about the respect thing. I respect you Pat. Feel better now? LOL

Lots of horses don't get much foot care and it isn't because of bad farriers. It's because the owners don't call any farrier. ok, that's one issue but there are others.

hmmm, a written test and an anual fee without care as to how to balance a foot. How might that make it better. We regurgitate some anatomical facts and pay for the privilege?

reillyshoe wrote:
"Deserve" is an interesting word. Why do you think farriers deserve anything other than being paid for what they do?

You might be able to buy initials or credentials but not respect. Those s*** suckin lawyers sure get a lot of respect don't they? LOL hey did you hear they're starting to use lawyers instead of rats in medical experiments now? There are some things that even the rats won't do and the scientists don't get as attatched to the lawyers.

Well......

All I can say is I do wish you guys would come out of the woodwork next time this issue gets hot. When one decides to take a stand for something and turns around and sees nobody behind him it can be quite discouraging.

I asked Rick about the Illinois test on the testing for other organizations thread. He either did not see it or chose not to talk about it. He is the only Illinois licensed horseshoer on these boards to my knowledge anyway but it is for some reason one of the only things he doesn't like to talk much about.

Here's what little I know about Illinois. At the place I went to horseshoeing school, they advertised somewhat disingenuously that graduating them would make you eligible for licensure in any state requiring licensing. At the time Illinois was the only such state. As a result, we had a lot of Illinois guys going through many of them experienced horseshoers in order to get licensed. From talking to those guys I found in those days Illinois horseshoers were averaging at least 20% better pay. Price cutters were not a problem there.

Guys who I knew that worked big shows who saw the whole gamut of different types of shoeing from best to worst in transient horses had never seen a bad job come out of Illinois.

That law lasted for I believe 99years? until it expired with a sunset clause. Guys who were licensed got a nice certificate that all of them were and are very proud of.

It is I think important to note that during all the turmoil about this issue as it was being demagogued by people majority of which were NOT working horseshoers saying licensing would do this and licensing would do that, it is demonstrably clear that none of those things ever happened in Illinois.

Those who said those things for their own selfish interests were nothing more than liars.

Now,
at IHCS I met a guy who was Illinois licensed. He told me that the test was held twice a year at different fairgrounds in various parts of the state. From what this man told me the test consisted of merely shoeing 1 foot! They would split a horse amongst 4 guys. The thing that got everybody angry supposedly was that during the last couple years of it they quit having the test. It just became a revenue raising deal in which you paid a fee and were granted a license.

They began handing them out like Christmas candy to anybody that wanted one much like some undesireable racing jurisdictions do today. This is why they let the law die because without the testing it became a farce.

There you go Rick, is that how it was or have I been misinformed?
George

I only know one other farrier who had one of those licenses and that was the guy who taught me. It was before my time.

I don't know a lot of details about the test but I do know that he trailored his own horse there to shoe and hauled a coal forge because there was some forging.

If having had that license is something that he takes much pride in, he has kept it secret from me and I never got the impression that he cares to have licensing back.

I'll say this about him though, in my judgement he's a very good farrier. He isn't certified or a member of any farrier organization that I know of. He is well respected, in huge demand and financially very successful.
There might be price cutters out there but he gets up around $200 to slap on 4 kegs and everything else goes up from there. I want to say, he's up to about $55 for a trim. I don't personally know anyone else who is charging what he charges. He gets too busy and just keeps raising his price trying to keep the work load to a reasonable level....and make more for working less.

I think any farrier who feels he doesn't get enough respect or can't make enough money for lack of respect or because of price cutting should get to know this guy and just do like he does.

I haven't been able to do as well but I don't think a license or a certification will help. If I did think a certification would help, I'd go get a couple. I don't believe there is anything keeping any of us from the same level of success except our own ability AND appeal to the right clients.

Imagine the following scenario:

Mrs Smith has a horse with a history of lameness. In the past, it has been diagnoses with pain arising from a quarter crack on one occasion, and laminitis on another. The horse has returned to soundness after each problem, but according to Mrs. Smith, is currently "not quite right on that foot".

First possibility: Mrs. Smith calls the vet, who comes out and looks at the horse. The vet blocks the horse to the foot and takes radiographs. "Here", he says, "give this to your farrier the next time he/she is out". The vet hands the owner a note with the following instructions:
"Shorten the toe using a Natural Balance shoe, and put on a full pad with support material".[/B]

Now imagine a second possibility:
Mrs Smith mentions the possibility of a developing problem to the farrier at the regular visit. The farrier then writes out a note and says "Here, call your vet to come out and give him this".
On the note is the following:
"Please block the inside heel to differentiate between the crack and the laminitis as possible sources of the pain. Please also take lateral and DP radiographs as a baseline, in the event the laminitis is recurring. Also, please make sure that only one branch of the shoe is visible on the films so that we might appropriately compare films later if nesessary."


The first possibility is common place, and is accepted as normal appropriate behavior on the part of the veterinarian. The precribed shoeing has worked on countless horses with both quarter cracks and laminitis. It is a very defendable place to start, and might help the horse.


What about the second possibility? The farrier is also correct. He has diagnosed nothing. He has not performed veterinary medicine. The suggestions for the blocks are well within current thoughts and the protocol for the radiographs accepted by some as required information in dealing with laminitis.

Why is it OK for a veterinarian to tell us how to do our job, but it is not considered OK the other way around? Lameness treatment is definitely a cooperative effort between vets and farriers, but too often it appears to be an uneven distribution of responsibilities. They dictate-we follow directions.
When I ask a vet for a specific block or radiograph, I am very conscience that I am in their territory and I do it with respect. In my experience, many vets prescribe shoes without the same caution.

reillyshoe in gray

I know this topic has been beaten to death, but I am frustrated by the lack of respect afforded to the farrier industry.

Remember what Pogo said? "We have met the enemy and he is us."

Also, I am not suggesting certification. That is a whole other ballgame as far as I am concerned. I am wondering specifically about requiring a formal education in a farrier school and a yearly fee.

What farrier school? Private? Public? Who determines the curriculum? The syllabus?

This money would pay for the salary of a state farrier board and enforcement. The farrier board would certify the schools (loosley, I might add- just to ensure no mail in diplomas).

Who comprises the farrier board? Who watches the watchers?

Keep in mind that many states do not have a practical portion of the test administered to vets for licensing, but there is a written exam. I have no interest in determining what is the correct method of balancing or shoeing a horse.

To paraphrase Mr. Gump, "Whatever works, works."

Would be be held more accountable in legal issues? Yup, almost certainly. Would we be held in higher regard? I think so.

Here in Texas, farriers are already legally accountable, under both civil and criminal statutes.

As far as being held in "higher regard" by the public, you're talking image. If you want to improve the image of farriers, advertise the benefits of AFA certification to the masses. Emphasize the difficulty of the AFA's testing to a rigid standard, what certification entails, and let'em know there's a bigass difference between hands and hacks. In short, let'em know they are no longer hostage to the feed store bulletin board. Let'em, know they have a choice between somebody who has voluntariliy demonstrated to his peers that he can shoe a horse and somebody who, for whatever reason, either hasn't taken the test or took the test and failed it. I think that if you want to improve the image of farriers, you have to begin by improving the public's perception of the product by educating owners, not farriers.

Pushing AFA certification to the masses will create a demand for better farriery; if the industry can meet that demand, the image of farriery will be enhanced - to what degree remains to be seen, but we need to start someplace.

[soapbox]

Relative to licensing, it may be inevetiable, but I don't think anyone's concern for the horse will be the cause of it, I think it'll come when some cash-strapped state legislature figures out that farriers making six-figure incomes are more-or-less the norm and that farriers are a cash cow that needs milking. As the leading farrier organization in the industry, I think the AFA should formulate a contingency plan and have it in readiness, but it won't happen. Heaven forfend that we prepare for the worst and hope for the best, we'll just sit back and let nature take its course, then wonder what'n hell hit us when it happens. As an aside, it'll be easy to determine whether a legislature is motivated by concern for horses' well being or fresh meat for the state treasurey if there's any testing involved: just take note on whether or not testing is mandatory, or if any kind of "grandfathering in" of possible incompetents is involved.

[/soapbox]

Tom,
Some vet schools are public, some are private. It seems to work for them. I believe they are reviewed periodically, although I do not know by whom or to what standard.
Who appoints the State vet Board of Veterinary Medicine in Texas? Have you heard any complaints regarding how they operate? It seems only the most aggregious of offenses will cause a vet to loose their license. Why couldn't the same processes apply to farriers?
As far as farrier certification, understand vets are not certified by most states in terms of practical exams, there is a written test and completion of schooling at a certified school. Again, why can we not learn from them?

Educating owners to search for a CF has not worked, for whatever reason. He**, we can't even get the farriers to agree! Why do you think that is the path to respectability? Remember, nobody is checking to see if a young vet can block a coffin joint correctly, even before being handed a diplomma from their institution. They are tested on understanding the book version of how and why to block a coffin joint. Smart? The process seems to work for them.

By becoming part of the governmental process, vets decide the rules. Therefore, they can look out for their own interests by advocating laws in their interest. I think we should do the same instead of waiting for another state to decide that putting a two degree pad on a lame horse constitutes the practice of veterinary medicine.
Who do you think is looking out for our interests?

That's an interesting point Pat which is probably a lot more relevant to you than me. You shoe in a clinic. I do a few show horses and some pleasure horses. By far, the majority of the horses I shoe are perceived as "sound" with only a tiny fraction of my work being lameness issues.

I'll give an example of the kinds of things that really happen. An old school horse may have been diagnosed as being navicular at some point. the owner might tell me and might not. They may or may not have me put a pad on. The pad is an extra $20. When the horse can't work anymore, they may be sold, given away or even put down and replaced.

A client might call me first when a horse goes lame. I certainly might suggest a vet and recommend specific questions to the vet. Lets say the vet suspects laminitis. The norm is no blood work, no radiographs and probably a recommendation to take some toe off. There are a few other common scenarios here but, you get the idea.

Maybe the vet suspects, "navicular". How much exploratory work do you think the owner is going to pay for? Odds are the best that horse is ever going to get is to have me experiment a little with support and angle to try to see what makes them the most comfortable.

Given my experience with lameness cases or the lack of it, I couldn't even claim to be qualified to be giving instructions to the vet. Sure, I read a lot but the fact is that the vast majority of the work I do is on horses who are sound or treated as though they were.

Around here we (red necks you know) shoe sound and working horses. The cripples aint gettin no expensive shoes.

You or Jay probably see more radiographs in a week than I've seen in my whole life. Taking a test on anatomy isn't going to change what we have experience in.

Mike Ferrara wrote:
Mike,
Who is more qualified to determine how much toe to take off? You, with years of experience staring at feet all day, or a vet who had a two hour lecture of shoeing in vet school and has no official reason to attend continuing education presented by a farrier?

reillyshoe wrote:
I think that's a valid question. I'm qualified enough to know there have been times that I was instructed to nail on a reverse shoe when I would have prefered to have the horse standing on foam or a clog until things settled down. I'm also qualified enough to know that without knowing and addressing the cause we aren't going to get anywhere and that lopping off some toe does not constitute a comprehensive treatment for laminitis. But...to my knowledge there isn't currently a curriculum or credential that teaches or verifies such knowledge in regard to treatment.

I think that if we want to be generally recognized as being qualified for that, we need a real farrier school. A degree program that includes courses and tests in related topics. I don't see that any of the existing certification tests are going to do that. Clinics and seminars are ok for CE but it doesn't count as an education. I don't think any licensing will do it either unless there is a significant educational requirement. A test that tests our ability to trim a foot, forge a shoe, fit it and nail it on is evidence that we are indeed the mechanics (maybe with a little horsemen thrown in) that people think we are.

Maybe the time is right for a university to offer such a program. We could be vets for the lower leg. My fear is that you would first have to be a vet and then specialize in equine lameness. I might jump on going for another AAS or something but I'm too old and tired to mess with vet school. I wouldn't live long enough to finish paying off the tuition. LOL

reillyshoe in gray

Who appoints the State vet Board of Veterinary Medicine in Texas?

The vets who are members of the State Board are political apointees, as are the vets on the State Racing Commission.

Have you heard any complaints regarding how they operate? It seems only the most aggregious of offenses will cause a vet to loose their license. Why couldn't the same processes apply to farriers?

If licensing were mandated and enforced, a few of the hacks would be out of business, the price of farriery would increase greatly when the demand for licensed farriers quickly exceeded supply, the same owners who complained about not being able to find a decent farrier would be caterwaulling about the cost of farriery, and a market for black market farriery would be created, thereby insuring that any hack willing to break the law would still be in business. Realistically, about the only place licensing could be enforced would be in urban areas, shows, and race tracks. Licensing farriers won't change human nature: it didn't in the UK and it won't here.

As far as farrier certification, understand vets are not certified by most states in terms of practical exams, there is a written test and completion of schooling at a certified school. Again, why can we not learn from them?

Apples and oranges. Every vet student has lab practicals during the course of their education and a degree is a prerequesite for taking the state boards.

Educating owners to search for a CF has not worked, for whatever reason.

To my knowledge, educating owners on the AFA's certification program has never been attempted, much less "not worked."

He**, we can't even get the farriers to agree! Why do you think that is the path to respectability?

"Respectability" is your word, not mine. I believe the public yearns for competency and I think the public would be quite content to know a farrier's competence has been tested and not found wanting when they choose a farrier. It's a start - and a helluva lot better place for a horse owner to start than the feed store bulletin board or it's online equivalent, COTH.

Remember, nobody is checking to see if a young vet can block a coffin joint correctly, even before being handed a diplomma from their institution. They are tested on understanding the book version of how and why to block a coffin joint. Smart? The process seems to work for them.

Perhaps at UPenn and Cornell, this may be true, but at Texas A&M and LSU, I'm told that blocking joints is part of a lab practical - and if a student doesn't pass the lab, they don't graduate. Harsh? Perhaps, but the process seems to work for them.

I could be wrong but I think that if licensing becomes mandatory the test requirements will be incredibly easy and/or they will grandfather people in. It'll be like the chicago cab drivers test, especially in a state like Il that's world famous world for its political corruption. Not to long ago the x-gov stood trial. What was it? selling truck licenses? That actually got people killed before anyone did anything about it. If the current batch of investigations continue it might not be long before the mayor of chicago is on trial.

All the hacks would have a license like everybody else.