Re: barefoot horses: wearing faster than they grow?

Laurel Red*** wrote:

I think you have to remember that the ideal barefoot hoof looks very
different than the traditional shod foot. I have read Yvonne's
stories through the years, and I think she lives in the dessert and
does put lots of miles on in the sand. I don't think what she has to
say is bull*** Sharon--she has always been a straight shooter. I
wish we had a sand arena versus hog fuel then I could provide
anecdotal info. Our problem is not enough abrasion with the hog fuel
to wear down the hooves--so we have lots of hoof growth versus natural
wear. Our now deceased trainer did have a sand arena, and she was a
person who rode hours and rode dressage. She had horses with rock
hard feet and she extolled the virtue of sand for barefoot horses.

My ring is sand. It's a very coarse, orangey local sand. I love that it stays put really well and doesn't wash away, but it does seem quite abrasive. Fatty Boomers is naked behind when mostly chillin' but shod all around when being ridden regularly. Her backs are down to nuttin' in no time when I'm riding allot.

I am also interested to hear the differences between what the "natural" folks consider a barefoot trim and the type of trim a good farrier would do. What are the major points of contention? Is there something hugely different in the two? If so, what? Tom? Cricket? John boy? Abby? Cindi? Auntie Em?

Anyway, I have a few horses that never wear shoes, in or out of work, and the same farrier that does my shod horses trims the barefoot kids. The barefooters have great feet and the shod horses have spiffy shoes.

He seems to be able to do both, but maybe I've just hooked up with the only dang guy in the universe that swings both ways :) I told him about this discussion when he stopped by the farm this morning and he just grunted. Wanted to know what all the ruckus was about...
--
Ruth B
.