Barefoot or Shoes – the Truth is Out There

No shoes.  Ever.  Not even for working horses on tough, rocky terrain.  Stalls should be paved with cobblestones the size of a horse’s hoof.  One-pound pebbles should be tossed about on the ground in the horse’s grooming area to toughen its hooves

What kind of new-wave, extreme, 21st Century barefoot religion is this?  Actually, it’s from the 2400-year-old treatise On Horsemanship by Xenophon, a soldier, historian and pupil of Socrates.

“A stable with a damp and smooth floor will spoil the best hoof which nature can give,” said Xenophon.

The Greeks didn’t shoe their war horses, yet rode them over some of the harshest terrain imaginable.  Horses just don’t need shoes.  Right?

Well-respected Natural Horse Care advocates like Jamie Jackson, executive director of the Association for the Advancement of Natural Horse Care Practices seem to make that case.

“It is only through human ignorance of the horse’s natural state that led us to the incorrect, and harmful, conclusion that shoes are necessary — or useful.  They aren’t, and, moreover, contribute significantly to the lameness we see everywhere around the world,”Jacksonsaid in a message on the home page of the AANHCP website.

If you want to see an old-school farrier bend a horseshoe with his teeth, toss that quote at him.

In 2009 my wife and I tookN.C.State’s two-day Equine Hoof Care and Shoeing Short Course.  One of our instructors was a gnarly old farrier with a keen sense of humor and a quick trigger.  Someone asked about the Barefoot Trim (a.k.a. Wild Horse Trim or Natural Trim, etc.) and this old steel-pounder turned red and started spitting.

He sputtered things like “Mustang Roll” and “foot butchers” while telling stories of city folk who’d been to weekend Barefoot Trim workshops and had the audacity to tell him, a professional with 20-plus years of farrier experience, that he was hurting horses by putting shoes on them.

That night I researched the Mustang Roll, a trim that bevels the bottom edge of the hoof wall to facilitate breakover.  To my horror, some poorly trained trimmers were basically removing several INCHES of hoof wall at the toe and doing considerable damage to the horse.

Gee.  I didn’t want Barefoot Trim foot butchers coming near my horses.  But the next day, when I watched this “professional” hit a scared horse in the face with farrier’s rasp, I had to rethink the veracity of anything he told me.  To be fair, I know many farriers, and they’re all wonderful pros.  This guy was the exception and his view on barefoot trimming had lost all credibility with me.

But when I researched Natural Horse Care Practices, I noticed that the Barefoot Trim acolytes were often just as extreme, albeit in a more organic, 60’s hippy kind of way.  These zealots blame shoes for almost every equestrian problem or illness.  To read the musings of some barefoot prophets, freeing the horse from its steel bonds of human ignorance would cure any disease, correct all poor conformation and heal all lameness. In fact, if all horse owners drank the barefoot Kool-Aid, we could retire the national debt, cure cancer and bring about world peace.  OK, I made that last part up.

My horses have been barefoot for years and they are doing just fine.  I have friends with lots of horses, most of which are shod, and they are all doing great too.  Honestly, until I began researching this article, I had never really tried to find the truth.  I’m still looking, but here are some things I’ve discovered.

First and foremost, Natural Horse Care Practices are about much more than going barefoot and working to mimic the wear patterns of wild horse feet.  It’s about providing a more natural environment with 24/7 turnout, a better diet and using riding methods that work with a horse’s natural gait and don’t cause harm.  You can find out more about Natural Horse Care Practices at websites like AANHCP.net or ISNHCP.net.

But, using “natural” as the mantra of horse care dogma is bullheaded.  Saying there’s never a good time to shoe a horse is like saying broken limbs never need casts or kids should walk to school without shoes.  There’s also nothing “natural” about vet care, medicine, bits, saddles or even riders.

It’s a myth that farriers don’t believe in barefoot horses.  The Farrier andHoofcareResourceCenter(horseshoes.com) is filled with positive comments on the topic.  Among the most articulate is Rick Shepherd of Western Hill Forge, who says many horses do fine barefoot.

“Yes, horses get on fine without human intervention, and have for thousands of years.  The ones with poor genetics, conformation, environment, or heavy work load (like running from lions) become part of the food chain, and don’t get to create any more like them.  A domestic horse’s life and a wild horse’s life are totally different, so they have different needs,” said Shepherd.

Stall boarding, poor conformation, breeding for characteristics other than hoof quality, working a horse in unnatural surfaces (concrete, asphalt, etc.) can all require a farrier or veterinarian’s intervention.  Shod healthy trumps barefoot lame.

It’s a myth that farriers are against barefoot horses because barefoot trims bring in less money.  Shepherd writes that he makes a “much higher hourly wage trimming than shoeing.”  Without the expense of shoes, nails, forge, gas, large truck and extra tools, trimming is often more profitable.

I’m a horse owner, goat farmer, former paramedic and journalist.  I have a finely tuned BS detector and I always knew both extremes in the barefoot controversy were, at the very least, over-stated.

Nobody recommends that you take a two-day course and then fire your farrier, but it’s also a myth that smart laypeople can’t soundly trim a healthy horse’s hoof.  My wife has trimmed our horses’ hooves since 2009.  It’s back-breaking, detail-oriented work that is far, far harder to do well than it first appears.  That’s why I leave it to her.

Our horses also have 24/7 turnout and daily exposure to varied terrain, including gravel, so when we finally splurged to have farrier and friend Rick Gentry trim our horses, he did very little, saying my wife had been doing a great job.

As with almost all social controversy – political, economic and religious – the truth is somewhere in the middle.

And that’s where I found Gentry.  Gentry is a Natural Horse Care Certified Practitioner, and all he does is trim hooves.  But he’s no butcher.  In fact, he said that 15-20-percent of his business is fixing the over-trims of other farriers.  He doesn’t look down on shod horses or farriers who pound steel, he simply sees the advantage of going barefoot when it makes sense.

“There’s a big misunderstanding,” he said.  “If the only thing you’re going to do is pull your horse’s shoes, you’re not going to be successful.”

Gentry is an advocate of helping the whole horse be as natural as possible, focusing more on diet, turnout and good riding habits than style of trim.  He recognizes the need for boots or even shoes when horses are ridden over terrain harder and rockier than what they’re used to.  In fact, he’s blunt about owners who take unshod horses to rocky areas they’re not accustomed to.

“It’s animal cruelty,” he said.  “You can’t take a horse to a rougher terrain and expect them to do fine.  You’ve got to be judicious.”

Even Xenophon knew that a sound horse had to be gradually conditioned to work/ride in hard, rocky terrain.

Gentry’s vet is Dr. Kirsten Tillotson of Tillotson Equine (tillotsonequine.com) inRoxboro,NC, just a few miles south of theVirginiaborder.  She’s also my vet, and is very well respected in SouthsideVirginia.  Her view of the barefoot/shoeing controversy is that both have their place.

“For many clients, barefoot trimming is perfect and they often have the healthiest feet.  For upper level performance horses that are competing on many different types of footing, hard, soft, uneven, etc, barefoot is often not sufficient support.

“Take an upper level dressage horse.  These horses typically perform on very good footing and as long as the horse is managed appropriately (this is very important) and it does not have any underlying hoof defects or diseases, then this type of horse can and does well barefoot.

“Take a jumping horse that jumps sometimes on uneven terrain or in rings that vary from soft to hard.  I don’t believe it is in this horse’s best interest to ask that much without rigid support on their feet.

“Take a horse that works on asphalt for a living, my guess is that if barefoot, too much of the foot would be worn off with the exercise that it does,” said Tillotson.

Gentry and Tillotson are beacons of reason and commonsense in a debate that’s often dominated by dogma.  In the end, you have to make rational decisions about the very specific needs or your horse, using all the resources available to you.

It’s about your horse, not your ideology.

Alan Keck

As always, comments and suggestions are welcome at akeck@hotmail.com.

###

Passing the Reins

In March, the Virginia Horse Council held it’s annual meeting and educational seminar.  The keynote speaker was Rick Potts, Chief of the Conservation and Outdoor Recreation Division of the National Park Service.

Potts’s lecture, titled Passing the Reins – Engaging Young Adults as Emerging Leaders in the Equestrian Community is presented here for your listening pleasure.

###

Good Intentions; Static Arguments

Rhetoric over reason seems to be guiding the horse slaughter debate.  While both sides ramp-up their efforts to influence the future of horse slaughter, neither is addressing the primary concerns of the other.

North Dakota’s state legislature passed H.B. 1496 last month authorizing $50,000 to the state department of commerce to conduct an equine processing facility feasibility study.

Last month, leaders from five Native American tribes sent a letter to the Bureau of Indian Affairs expressing concern for the growing population of wild horses in their territories.  According to the letter, horse herds have a significant, negative impact on crops, medicinal plants, forage plants and other natural resources.  As a result, tribal leaders are discussing the possibility of opening processing facilities for horses and other livestock.

Yet, despite all the pro-slaughter arguments, no one seems willing to address the anti-slaughter forces’ primary concern: the inhumane treatment of horses sent to slaughter.

Horses, whether wild or captive bred, lead a lifestyle completely different from cattle, sheep and goats.  As long as pro-slaughter forces ignore the way horses are rounded up, transported and slaughtered, anti-slaughter forces will fight them relentlessly.

And there ARE alternatives to current slaughtering methods.  One woman, Temple Grandin, has a successful business advising processing facilities how to be humane in their methods.  Grandin is, by many standards, a fringe character to be sure, but if you listen to her interview on National Public Radio, you will find that she makes a lot of good points about humane slaughter.

Like the pro-slaughter activists, anti-slaughter forces are no more willing to take a step back from some of their entrenched positions.  No matter how many times they say there are no unwanted horses, there really are.  Sticking your head in the sand isn’t an argument.

Anti-slaughter forces also refuse to accept the economics of horse ownership for many in rural areas of the country.  In rural Virginia, one vet charges $310 to euthanize and dispose of a horse.  If the vet comes to you, it’s $230 for a farm call and euthanasia, provided you have the heavy equipment and land to bury the horse yourself.

Either option is a lot of money for someone having trouble making their mortgage payments.  Anti-slaughter forces aren’t addressing this issue; they just say it’s not a problem.  But it is.

Watching horses being slaughtered is very hard, and virtually intolerable if they’re being killed in Mexico.  It’s worth wondering if the 98,363 horses hauled out of this country for slaughter last year would actually face less trauma and torture if they were slaughtered in the U.S. under strict humane standards.

Eventually, one side in the horse slaughter battle will win.  Let’s hope the two sides will work for a compromise so the winner will actually be the horses.

###

Vegans Driving Horse Slaughter Ban?

Are radical vegans behind proposed federal legislation to outlaw horse slaughter, as part of a conspiracy to eventually outlaw all meat?

To read one journalist’s story, you might think so.

Sarah Murihead, reporting for Stock & Land on 4-15-09, writes: “At the core of the current horse harvesting debate in the United States is animal agriculture’s concern that the criminalisation of one animal-based protein source – horse meat – could be a stepping stone toward making all meat consumption illegal.”

But, she offers no proof that any official agricultural organizations are actually concerned about this as a “core” of the anti-slaughter forces, nor does she offer any evidence of vegans being the driving force behind proposed anti-slaughter legislation.

In fact, the headline of the story borders on sheer fantasy: “US fears horse harvest ban a step to veganism.”  Wow.  No evidence, just scare tactics.

Murihead refers to a recent meeting of the National Institute for Animal Agriculture and quotes Essie Rogers, director of education for the Kentucky Horse Council on the issue of horse slaughter.  She then lists three bullet points, unattributed and without context, one of which says, “precedent being set for all meat.”

She then quotes, at length, Sue Wallis from the Wyoming state legislature.  Wallis’s points are broad, varied and fundamentally valid.  Wallis makes a good case against outlawing horse slaughter.  But, among her many points countering the anti-slaughter arguments is the implication that any federal anti-horse-slaughter legislation might put us on a slippery slope to eventually outlawing all meat.

The quotes indicate that these are Wallis’s opinions; what she thinks might happen, not an observation about anything that actually is happening.  For Murihead to suggest otherwise, is specious journalism. There is no evidence to support the article’s headline or its opening paragraph.

Sure, there are plenty of PETA supporters and vegans who oppose slaughtering horses just like they oppose slaughtering any animal for food.  But, there is no evidence they are the subversive power manipulating Congress to outlaw horse slaughter.

In the U.S. House of Representatives, H.R. 503 proposes to effectively outlaw horse slaughter.  The bill’s sponsor is John Conyers (D-MI), a 21-term Congressman.  I doubt Michigan would elect, 21 times, a tree-hugging, radical vegan Hell-bent on outlawing hamburgers and steaks.

In the U.S. Senate, S. 727, which also proposes to outlaw horse slaughter, is sponsored by Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Louisiana’s senior senator and among the most moderate in the Senate.  In Louisiana, if it walks, crawls, slithers, swims or flies, it’s dinner, so I doubt Senator Landrieu is a clandestine, radical vegan operative.

Anti-horse-slaughter forces are guided largely by emotion, not dietary philosophy.  I’m sure most are meat eaters.  The ones I know are.  They simply oppose the cruel methods used to capture, transport and slaughter what they consider to be companion animals.

It’s my opinion that Congress has as much chance of outlawing all meat as it does outlawing the Bible.  Ain’t gonna happen.  Setting up vegans as a strawman in the argument against horse slaughter would be political demagoguery.  Let’s stick to the facts and leave fantasy to the fiction writers.

###

The Reality of Unwanted Horses

“No unwanted horses.”  It’s the mantra of the anti-horse-slaughter forces.  They’re good people who care about great animals, but they’re wrong.

Last week, the New York Times reported that law enforcement officers throughout the country, and especially in Kentucky, were reporting significant increases in the number of neglected and abandoned horses.

While 98,363 horses were sent to Canada and Mexico for slaughter last year according to the U.S. Humane Society, prices for these unwanted equines have dropped dramatically.  With some auctions paying as little as $50 per animal, it isn’t practical for some owners to even haul the horses to the auction.

Nevada reports an almost six-fold increase in horses abandoned on state land last year.  Abandoned horses were virtually unheard of in Wyoming before 2008, but officials recovered 20 last year.  Texas rescued 170 neglected horses in the largest seizure of its kind in state history.

The Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals has been “overwhelmed” with reports of neglected horses, and by giving their emergency hay to rescue facilities, exhausted an entire year’s supply in two months.

With the closing of U.S. horse slaughter facilities and the declining economy, horse abandonment is often the only economically feasible alternative for many horse owners.  In response, several states, including Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Illinois and Montana are looking at ways to bring back horse slaughter.

Montana, where horse slaughter is currently legal, tried to pass a bill that would shield horse slaughter plant investors from many types of lawsuits.  In Illinois, where horse slaughter was made illegal in 2007, the state legislature is trying to pass HB 0583, a bill to repeal the prohibition of horse slaughter (the bill has been stopped for now, but may face a vote in the future).

In February, Nick Rahall (D-WV) introduced HR 1018 to Congress which would, among other things, prohibit the killing of wild horses and burros unless terminally ill.  Yet, the Bureau of Land Management has roughly 30,000 wild horses in holding facilities and another 33,000 on ranges that can only effectively hold 27,000.  Costs are skyrocketing and adoption isn’t working.

In the United States there have always been unwanted horses.   When slaughter was legal in Illinois and Texas, the overseas market for horse meat provided a profitable alternative for horse owners unable or unwilling to care for their horse.  Now, with the economy faltering and the cost and hassle of shipping unwanted horses to Mexico and Canada going up, abandonment is becoming the only cost-free alternative for many owners.

I would cut off an arm before I’d send one of my horses to slaughter.  If I couldn’t sell them to a good home, couldn’t give them to a good home and couldn’t afford to have them humanely destroyed, I’d shoot them myself before allowing them to wind up on some European’s dinner plate.

But, until the anti-slaughter forces come up with viable, no-cost options for the thousands and thousands of unwanted horses in this country, their efforts will have the unintended consequence of putting countless horses out into the wild to starve, wander in pain and ultimately die a more horrific death than at any slaughtering facility.

###