Re: RC: Re: Barefoot, reply to Bob Morris

[CMKSAGEHIL@aol.com]

In a message dated Wed, 27 Jun 2001  6:16:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Abigail Aiyagari <abby1@itsa.ucsf.edu> writes:

<< It's not the contact with the ground that allows hoof mechanism, it's
the expansion and contraction of the hoof, particularly in the heel area.
The hoof expands when it hits the ground, allowing blood to enter, then 
contracts when it is lifted, pushing the blood out.  The presence of a
shoe not only prevents the expansion and contraction (try pulling the
ends of a horseshoe apart), it prevents blood from entering the hoof
capsule in the first place.  >>

Excuse me?  That is why most of us don't put a nail in behind the quarters!  We spread our shoes so that they are wider than the unweighted hoof from the quarters back, and every set I've ever pulled off in the last 25 or so years from any horse that's been used much has been worn shiny on the heels from the constant motion of the hoof expanding and contracting across it.  Can't remember where, as it's been ages ago, but I remember seeing slow motion films of this phenomenon, used to teach farriers why not to put nails in the back of the hoof.  Those of our Arabs with smaller feet only wear six nails--three on each side--for this very reason, unless there is some overriding pathological problem requiring the support.  If they wear a #1 or better, we can often put in the fourth one without a problem.  One of the problems we see associated with not shoeing "wide" in endurance horses is that due to the expansion of the hoof when it strikes the ground, the horses will get corns fr!
om the heels of the shoes.  They
 expand right off the sides if that "fudge factor" isn't there.  Pretty obvious in those horses that the expansion is occurring--they just aren't shod correctly to be able to have support when the maximum weight is on the hoof and the maximum expansion is taking place.

Heidi