Archiv
Zurück
some questions
Hi, My name is Søren and I am from Denmark and are very interested in Hoofcare whit out shoes.
I have a couple of questions I hope you can answer for me.
1) Do you have any information about your education written in English?
2) Are The education recognised by the German government?
3) How dos the German society of Farriers react to your work?
4) Do you use some of the same principles as Strasser, or are it two different things?
5) The Natural Barefoot movement is very big in USA and there are a lot of research don on the subject. Do you use the information from over there?
I hope you can answer some of my questions.
Whit kind regards
Søren Høper
Denmark
I have a couple of questions I hope you can answer for me.
1) Do you have any information about your education written in English?
2) Are The education recognised by the German government?
3) How dos the German society of Farriers react to your work?
4) Do you use some of the same principles as Strasser, or are it two different things?
5) The Natural Barefoot movement is very big in USA and there are a lot of research don on the subject. Do you use the information from over there?
I hope you can answer some of my questions.
Whit kind regards
Søren Høper
Denmark
Re: some questions
Dear Søren,
our member Heike Braun is working in Denmark - maybe you can contact her - have a look on our member list.
1. We give some information about the principles of our work in English, but our educational papers exist at the moment only in German - if you find about 10 persons who are willing to learn hooforthopaedics two years long, we could try to find an "English solution".
2. In Germany we have an new law that allows from 2007 on only farriers to do hoofcare. We have instituted legal proceedings on high court against it. If we don't succeed, our education will further not be possible in Germany - but maybe in Denmark.
3. They (EDHV) make different work and hope that we will be finished by law... That does not mean, that all farriers are against us.
4. We know that the principles of Strasser hoofcare are in most cases very harmful for horses. She does not respect the individual design of hooves but strikes them to an so believed ideal form. That often results in an endless suffering for the animal.
5. We study the american results of research with interest. But generally we see two problems:
a) A big part of the worldwide barefoot movement is influenced by Strasser
b) Our horses are "civilised"; you have to find the right hoof individual for each horse. To build the hoof of a German horse like the hoof of a wild mustang is for sure not the right way.
Best regards
Gerd
our member Heike Braun is working in Denmark - maybe you can contact her - have a look on our member list.
1. We give some information about the principles of our work in English, but our educational papers exist at the moment only in German - if you find about 10 persons who are willing to learn hooforthopaedics two years long, we could try to find an "English solution".
2. In Germany we have an new law that allows from 2007 on only farriers to do hoofcare. We have instituted legal proceedings on high court against it. If we don't succeed, our education will further not be possible in Germany - but maybe in Denmark.
3. They (EDHV) make different work and hope that we will be finished by law... That does not mean, that all farriers are against us.
4. We know that the principles of Strasser hoofcare are in most cases very harmful for horses. She does not respect the individual design of hooves but strikes them to an so believed ideal form. That often results in an endless suffering for the animal.
5. We study the american results of research with interest. But generally we see two problems:
a) A big part of the worldwide barefoot movement is influenced by Strasser
b) Our horses are "civilised"; you have to find the right hoof individual for each horse. To build the hoof of a German horse like the hoof of a wild mustang is for sure not the right way.
Best regards
Gerd
Re: some questions
Hi all!
I'd like to disagree with Gerhard's statement about the worldwide barefoot movement. Of course the American barefoot movement is influenced PARTLY by Strasser, but no more than in Germany. Especially Natural Hoofcare Practicioners like Jaime Jackson definitely disagree with Dr. Strasser when it comes to trim hooves and resent it as being too invasive.
I really appreciate the Biernat approach and ideas, but to me Natural Hoofcare offers more effective possibilities when it comes to certain aspects. For example the way my former HO dealt with my horse's heels left me pretty unsatisfied. Of course there were a lot of good aspects about her work, but in my opinion leaving heels long is just wrong. I found much better ideas on dealing with heel hight in the approach of Natural Hoofcare.
As to taking the wild model into consideration, don't pretend that wild hooves are something completely different from what domestic horses have got at the end of their legs. Hooves are hooves, the big difference is that a Mustang doesn't suffer of navicular or other lameness problems because he's allowed to build the feet he needs for perfect performance and survival. These feet are the strongest feet there are, and why not take a look at those feet and see why they work so well?
No well trained NHC Practicioner would ever think of trimming hooves invasively by trying to make them look like mustang feet. I believe this is the reaction of people who really don't know much about it.
The goal is to enable the horse to move better than before, making them sore is a big no-no. NHC Practicioners do treat the individual foot in a way that works for the horse, only that makes sense. Anyone who cares to read the books by Jackson and Ramey would see that.
Last but not least: NHC doesn't limit itself to just enable horses to move around better, the goal ist the high performance barefoot horse that is able to move on "difficult" terrain without problems.
My own horse has small steep feet with contracted heels. Nonetheless he's on his way to becoming a gravel cruncher. I used to hear statements like "this hoof shape will always limit the horse in his abilities" ect. but I've seen examples that prove this wrong.
Everyone is entiteled to his or her knowledge-based opinions, but that requires really getting into the matter and try it for yourself.
Sincerely,
Ariane
I'd like to disagree with Gerhard's statement about the worldwide barefoot movement. Of course the American barefoot movement is influenced PARTLY by Strasser, but no more than in Germany. Especially Natural Hoofcare Practicioners like Jaime Jackson definitely disagree with Dr. Strasser when it comes to trim hooves and resent it as being too invasive.
I really appreciate the Biernat approach and ideas, but to me Natural Hoofcare offers more effective possibilities when it comes to certain aspects. For example the way my former HO dealt with my horse's heels left me pretty unsatisfied. Of course there were a lot of good aspects about her work, but in my opinion leaving heels long is just wrong. I found much better ideas on dealing with heel hight in the approach of Natural Hoofcare.
As to taking the wild model into consideration, don't pretend that wild hooves are something completely different from what domestic horses have got at the end of their legs. Hooves are hooves, the big difference is that a Mustang doesn't suffer of navicular or other lameness problems because he's allowed to build the feet he needs for perfect performance and survival. These feet are the strongest feet there are, and why not take a look at those feet and see why they work so well?
No well trained NHC Practicioner would ever think of trimming hooves invasively by trying to make them look like mustang feet. I believe this is the reaction of people who really don't know much about it.
The goal is to enable the horse to move better than before, making them sore is a big no-no. NHC Practicioners do treat the individual foot in a way that works for the horse, only that makes sense. Anyone who cares to read the books by Jackson and Ramey would see that.
Last but not least: NHC doesn't limit itself to just enable horses to move around better, the goal ist the high performance barefoot horse that is able to move on "difficult" terrain without problems.
My own horse has small steep feet with contracted heels. Nonetheless he's on his way to becoming a gravel cruncher. I used to hear statements like "this hoof shape will always limit the horse in his abilities" ect. but I've seen examples that prove this wrong.
Everyone is entiteled to his or her knowledge-based opinions, but that requires really getting into the matter and try it for yourself.
Sincerely,
Ariane
Re: some questions
Hallo,
natural hoofcare is more influenced by Strasser as Ariane presents. The main common mistake of her and for example Jaime Jackson is the idea of ground-parallel coffin bone. Why should this be more comfortable for the horse? The coffin bone don't stand on the ground - it is hanging in the hoof capsule. For this construction it has not to be ground-parallel.
The position of the coffin bone depends on the form of the hoof. And horses with steep proximal phalanx should normally not have a ground-parallel coffin bone. They need higher heels than horses with soft phalanx.
By the way: The problem with Strasser hoofcare is not only, that this method is to invasive. Strasser light, as it is often practised by her former student, has bad results too. The orientation on the ideal angle (45°,55°,30°) as natural allows to ignore all resulting hoof-problems as reaction of nature to become sane again. Strasser followers have no correcting system in their work: If a horse walks worse after their hoofcare, they interpret it as healing process, even if it takes some years...
Don't glorify the life of wild mustangs: If they become lame, the will die - that is the way of nature. Our domestic horses will be cured, if possible. And for sure it would be nice, to produce high performance hooves - but in the actual situation the main job hooforthopaedics is to cure unfit hooves.
With best regards
Gerd
natural hoofcare is more influenced by Strasser as Ariane presents. The main common mistake of her and for example Jaime Jackson is the idea of ground-parallel coffin bone. Why should this be more comfortable for the horse? The coffin bone don't stand on the ground - it is hanging in the hoof capsule. For this construction it has not to be ground-parallel.
The position of the coffin bone depends on the form of the hoof. And horses with steep proximal phalanx should normally not have a ground-parallel coffin bone. They need higher heels than horses with soft phalanx.
By the way: The problem with Strasser hoofcare is not only, that this method is to invasive. Strasser light, as it is often practised by her former student, has bad results too. The orientation on the ideal angle (45°,55°,30°) as natural allows to ignore all resulting hoof-problems as reaction of nature to become sane again. Strasser followers have no correcting system in their work: If a horse walks worse after their hoofcare, they interpret it as healing process, even if it takes some years...
Don't glorify the life of wild mustangs: If they become lame, the will die - that is the way of nature. Our domestic horses will be cured, if possible. And for sure it would be nice, to produce high performance hooves - but in the actual situation the main job hooforthopaedics is to cure unfit hooves.
With best regards
Gerd
Re: some questions
Gerhard,
let me just say this, and if you should ever care to read Jackson's books The Natural Horse or Horseowners Guide To Natural Hoofcare you'd see for yourself:
- Natural Hoofcare, as he (or AANHCP) promotes it, is NOT Strasser, although there might be other Hoofcare Ass. that might be. Please make a difference here.
- In Jackson's studies of mustang feet he found out that coffin bones don't necessarily have to be ground parallel, there is a range of degrees that are more or less common in those feet.
Of course most crippled wild horses die, and me saying that these wild feet are strong and functional doesn't mean I glorify anything. Domestic horses with crippeled "unfit" hooves (which in my opinion most of them feature) don't only live in Germany, America is swamped with them, too. AANHCP Practicioners deal with the same kind of deformed non-functioning feet like you or any other hoofcare person. I've never heard the same complaints about Jackson's approach like people for example have about Strasser.
Sorry to say that, but to me this whole thing still sounds like you haven't gotten enough information yet of what you talk about here, meaning the AANCHP part.
let me just say this, and if you should ever care to read Jackson's books The Natural Horse or Horseowners Guide To Natural Hoofcare you'd see for yourself:
- Natural Hoofcare, as he (or AANHCP) promotes it, is NOT Strasser, although there might be other Hoofcare Ass. that might be. Please make a difference here.
- In Jackson's studies of mustang feet he found out that coffin bones don't necessarily have to be ground parallel, there is a range of degrees that are more or less common in those feet.
Of course most crippled wild horses die, and me saying that these wild feet are strong and functional doesn't mean I glorify anything. Domestic horses with crippeled "unfit" hooves (which in my opinion most of them feature) don't only live in Germany, America is swamped with them, too. AANHCP Practicioners deal with the same kind of deformed non-functioning feet like you or any other hoofcare person. I've never heard the same complaints about Jackson's approach like people for example have about Strasser.
Sorry to say that, but to me this whole thing still sounds like you haven't gotten enough information yet of what you talk about here, meaning the AANCHP part.
Re: some questions
Hello,
I'm from germany and as i'm writing this, i'm in the US to work here for an experiment in physics. Just yesterday, i've visited a AANHCP practitioner and saw his work on several horses.
The 'natural hoofcare' approach does not have anything in common with the Strasser Method, the difference is as much as strasser and biernat.
In natural hoofcare, noone wants to force a coffin bone ground parelell or tries to archieve a "one fits all" hoof form for every horse.
Jamie Jackson was influenced by some strasser ideas during the beginning of his work. Who knows the Strasser books will find examples for that in his book. To my knowledge, he met Strasser and after that blamed the strasser way of trimming hooves. In the book 'horse owner guide to natural hoof care" you will find a number of trimming mistakes that is described. You will immediately recognise those examples as somehow typical for strasser work (removed bars, bleeding at seeds of corn, heels to short, sole thinning)
The hoof of a wild horse living on rocky terrain is a model. We want our domestic horses to be sound on any surface, including rocky trails. So it makes sense to look at hooves that perform on the most abrasive terrain without any problems. Wild horse feet on very soft, sandy and less abrasive terrain do not look the same. Those horses would probably not perform well on hard terrain without training. I is not the point to force a certain shape on the hoof of my horse at home, but I try to let his hooves match the general 'idea' (for example: straight, thick walls, thick concaved sole, strong callused frog...). And: When you look from a more general point of view, all domestic healthy hooves meet this "mustang feet" criteria inspite they might look different on the first glance. Each hoof is an individual and has its unique shape, but though it should meet some general idea of a healthy hoof. And the best model for a healthy hoof is a wild, sound hoof never altered by men.
As every hoof theory, natural hoofcare is steadily developing. There was some Strasser influence you will notice in the "background information" but in today practical work on the hoof, the both have nothing in common.
Horses in the US have the same hoof problems as back in germany. The goal is to have a sound rock crushing barefoot horse. The goal is to achive that in a reasonable amount of time even if you started with a really unfit hooves.
I know the Biernat, Strasser and Natural Hoofcare approach. My personal work is mainly influenced by the last one. I was not as successful "producing" hooves that perform on any terrain without soreness when following the Biernat approach. I appreciate the biernat approach but I think i neglects performance of the barefoot horse towards a perfect looking (for each individual) hoof.
Just yesterday one of the horses was a thouroghbred, that started with totally flat, flared hooves, paper thin walls and soles. Now this horse has really strong hooves and i trail ridden in the tennesee mountains every day without any problems. With few expeptions of permanent damage, the ability to grow a healty, strong hoof that is build to resist and perform is in any domestic horse. The easiest way to get there is to start with healty living conditions and proper hoof care in a foal, but you can return unfit hooves to their natural shapes too.
Regards, Tina
I'm from germany and as i'm writing this, i'm in the US to work here for an experiment in physics. Just yesterday, i've visited a AANHCP practitioner and saw his work on several horses.
The 'natural hoofcare' approach does not have anything in common with the Strasser Method, the difference is as much as strasser and biernat.
In natural hoofcare, noone wants to force a coffin bone ground parelell or tries to archieve a "one fits all" hoof form for every horse.
Jamie Jackson was influenced by some strasser ideas during the beginning of his work. Who knows the Strasser books will find examples for that in his book. To my knowledge, he met Strasser and after that blamed the strasser way of trimming hooves. In the book 'horse owner guide to natural hoof care" you will find a number of trimming mistakes that is described. You will immediately recognise those examples as somehow typical for strasser work (removed bars, bleeding at seeds of corn, heels to short, sole thinning)
The hoof of a wild horse living on rocky terrain is a model. We want our domestic horses to be sound on any surface, including rocky trails. So it makes sense to look at hooves that perform on the most abrasive terrain without any problems. Wild horse feet on very soft, sandy and less abrasive terrain do not look the same. Those horses would probably not perform well on hard terrain without training. I is not the point to force a certain shape on the hoof of my horse at home, but I try to let his hooves match the general 'idea' (for example: straight, thick walls, thick concaved sole, strong callused frog...). And: When you look from a more general point of view, all domestic healthy hooves meet this "mustang feet" criteria inspite they might look different on the first glance. Each hoof is an individual and has its unique shape, but though it should meet some general idea of a healthy hoof. And the best model for a healthy hoof is a wild, sound hoof never altered by men.
As every hoof theory, natural hoofcare is steadily developing. There was some Strasser influence you will notice in the "background information" but in today practical work on the hoof, the both have nothing in common.
Horses in the US have the same hoof problems as back in germany. The goal is to have a sound rock crushing barefoot horse. The goal is to achive that in a reasonable amount of time even if you started with a really unfit hooves.
I know the Biernat, Strasser and Natural Hoofcare approach. My personal work is mainly influenced by the last one. I was not as successful "producing" hooves that perform on any terrain without soreness when following the Biernat approach. I appreciate the biernat approach but I think i neglects performance of the barefoot horse towards a perfect looking (for each individual) hoof.
Just yesterday one of the horses was a thouroghbred, that started with totally flat, flared hooves, paper thin walls and soles. Now this horse has really strong hooves and i trail ridden in the tennesee mountains every day without any problems. With few expeptions of permanent damage, the ability to grow a healty, strong hoof that is build to resist and perform is in any domestic horse. The easiest way to get there is to start with healty living conditions and proper hoof care in a foal, but you can return unfit hooves to their natural shapes too.
Regards, Tina
Re: some questions
Hello Ariane & Tina,
once more for all: for sure the AANHC practioneers must have had a lot of worthful experience by working on hooves. It would be interesting to discus such experiences. But we talk about the method how it s described in the books of Jaime Jackson, Pete Ramey and in the text of Majorie Smith on the homepage of Ariane. And there we read central arguments, we don't agree.
1) "the mustang hoof is a model": if your work is oriented on a model for all hooves you are forced to make mistakes. You have another aime then to look on the traces on the individual hoof to show you, what is necessary
to be done to help this hoof to become sain and better. The real natural hoof is not made by a practioneer but by the horse on its way of living. Why don't you give the domestic hoof the same chance to find - with your help - his own perfect shape?
Horses who don't live the way a mustang does on his rocky grounds don't have mustang hooves. Why should they? If you train a horse the mustang way, it will get materiel and shape determined by this kind of work. This is a process you can't substitute by nipper and rasping.
2) We didn't read all books of our american collegues. But M.Smith shows it very drastically, what we always try to avoid: on the homepage she gives detailed instructions, how to trim the hooves of a horse - like in a cook book.
If some private horse owner will imitate, you have to fear the worst consequences.
By the way, for an analytic reader it's somewhat annoying to read those american writers. A big part of the books is psychological enforcement for the dear reader: "If you dare to go the right way, everything will become good ..."
3) Ariane: What are the "better ideas on dealing with heel hight"? Looking at the links on the homepage, you find always the same answer: Short them! In one or the other way. Shortening is the answer to all problems. The dealing of M. Smith with the hoof wall is cutting it off to produce a mustang roll.
Pardon me, but there are other ways to stabilise a hoof wall instead of cutting off.
Best wishes from holiday
Gerhard Jampert
once more for all: for sure the AANHC practioneers must have had a lot of worthful experience by working on hooves. It would be interesting to discus such experiences. But we talk about the method how it s described in the books of Jaime Jackson, Pete Ramey and in the text of Majorie Smith on the homepage of Ariane. And there we read central arguments, we don't agree.
1) "the mustang hoof is a model": if your work is oriented on a model for all hooves you are forced to make mistakes. You have another aime then to look on the traces on the individual hoof to show you, what is necessary
to be done to help this hoof to become sain and better. The real natural hoof is not made by a practioneer but by the horse on its way of living. Why don't you give the domestic hoof the same chance to find - with your help - his own perfect shape?
Horses who don't live the way a mustang does on his rocky grounds don't have mustang hooves. Why should they? If you train a horse the mustang way, it will get materiel and shape determined by this kind of work. This is a process you can't substitute by nipper and rasping.
2) We didn't read all books of our american collegues. But M.Smith shows it very drastically, what we always try to avoid: on the homepage she gives detailed instructions, how to trim the hooves of a horse - like in a cook book.
If some private horse owner will imitate, you have to fear the worst consequences.
By the way, for an analytic reader it's somewhat annoying to read those american writers. A big part of the books is psychological enforcement for the dear reader: "If you dare to go the right way, everything will become good ..."
3) Ariane: What are the "better ideas on dealing with heel hight"? Looking at the links on the homepage, you find always the same answer: Short them! In one or the other way. Shortening is the answer to all problems. The dealing of M. Smith with the hoof wall is cutting it off to produce a mustang roll.
Pardon me, but there are other ways to stabilise a hoof wall instead of cutting off.
Best wishes from holiday
Gerhard Jampert