ridecamp@endurance.net: Re: black hooves v. white hooves

Re: black hooves v. white hooves

Glenda R. Snodgrass (grs@consider.theneteffect.com)
Wed, 29 Oct 1997 19:20:22 -0600 (CST)

> Does anyone have the answer to this white hoof/black hoof controversy
> for me?

I doubt that you'll find an "answer" anywhere, because I don't think
there is one <g> -- though I'd love to hear other's opinions on this,
too. However, there are a few truths:

As Carl has said many times, your horse's hooves reflect the ground
they walk on. Dry soil breeds dry hooves, and those hooves may benefit
from conditioning with pine tar, for example. Wet soil breeds soft
hooves, and those hooves can use drying out (here in the swamplands on
the Gulf Coast we use rubbing alcohol and venice turpentine).

Lakota has three white feet ("deny him" according to the rhyme posted
earlier :), and they do exhibit chipping problems without shoes, and are
prone to black fungus in damp conditions. However, his one black hoof
also chips without shoes (though not as badly, but then it's it in the
front and the front don't chip as badly as the back), and gets the fungus in
the damp, so who can say?

I am convinced, however, that the white socks pose a problem. He has had
lots of dermatitis -- fungi, etc. -- on the white socks but not on the
one black sock. I firmly believe the pink skin is more vulnerable then
the black skin.

Glenda & Lakota

Home Events Groups Rider Directory Market RideCamp Stuff