Posted by Gregory Coates on April 23, 2000 at 21:32:14:
I can see it now, the first person to nail on some steel to a hoof ( ok, I know it was a lot more complicated than that, but bear with me) saw what is the basic outline of the hoof, not the wear pattern established WITHIN the hoof, ie. the parameters seen by the studiers of the natural hoof patterns(accepted compression of time?). I realized this with a shoe that a friend had nailed on his own horse. This fellow is very mechanically adept; has asked me some very pointed questions regarding shoeing and balance in the pursuit of being able to do it himself if the need arose, but he doesn't do it on a regular basis, and when I was looking at the shoe he had put on (I am using old shoes to make various things, yet another story), I could see that his information(visual) came from the basic outline of the hoof, even though he had a pretty good concept of the dynamic workings of a hoof in use. He seemed, from the shape of the shoe used, to have even thought that the manufacturers of said shoe had done a pretty damn good job of sizing and fit. And he was not entirely wrong in his aproach, but not entirely right, either. His horses weren't lame, or even uncomfortable (yet, as the subjective nature of preventative things work), just very due. That alone is bad enough in a shod horse, but most realize that as outside the parameters of the proper way to treat a horse. So, Here I am, looking at that shoe, and it seems as though that alot of folks look at the hoof the same way: To see the outline and disregard the wear pattern will make for long toes and consequently crushed heels. If you have been applying the (heretofore blanket mentioned as) 4-point method of shoeing and trimming, you are already seeing, to some degree, the dynamics, and not just looking at the outline. I know that this is an oversimplification, but do you see the concept of what creates a less than receptive look at the controlled shoeing in a balanced fashion?