John Stewart wrote:

These crushed heels occur in feet when the hoof wall and the bars are relatively weak.
If the bars are taken out too much, there is even less support for the heel so it would collapse more.

I'm inclined to disagree with you here John - I think the weak lateral cartilages AND digital cushion are the origin of the problem. I think that poor hoof mechanics (and racing/jumping are so hard on the mechanics of the heel region of the front feet that they are a major risk factor IMO) creates the weak/thin walled foot in the first place, and then the thin-walled foot just isn't sufficient to hold the horse up so it folds under.

-Abby

--
**************************
Abby Bloxsom
www.advantedgeconsulting.com

Hi Abby,

We will probably have to agree to disagree on this point.

With photographs of hundreds of horses and ponies, I thought I would try to divide them up into breeds, to identify different breed feet characteristics. This wasn't easy because I seemed to have large numbers of certain breeds but very few of others. There were also a lot of cross-breeds and some of unidentifiable origin.

What I was able to do was to identify those breeds at the two extremes - The Thoroughbred with the weak-walled collapsed feet and the Friesian or Lucitano at the very strong-walled upright end. In between there seemed to be breeds (or cross-breeds) which seemed to tend to distort in a consistent pattern, which seemed to depend on the strength of the hoof wall. This seemed to be the case regardless of what the horse was being asked to do or, for that matter, how early in their life they were being asked to do it.
Young Thoroughbred feet will generally collapse quickly after shoes are applied to them, either very early when they are shod for racing, or later if they are not.

I know that Dr Bowker talks quite a lot about the importance and the changes that occur in the lateral cartilages and the digital cushion, under different circumstances. They may well be of importance in how the foot functions and in the maintenance of shape, however, I don't think they are involved in the major distorting forces on the hoof and bars, of the horse's weight, via the hoof's attachment to the pedal bone, aginst the reactionary ground forces.

Cheers

John

Nothing wrong with agreeing to disagree!

You may be saying this anyway, just not all in one place, but certainly
there are factors other than breed-related (or not) hoof wall quality
in determining what happens to a foot. Trim factors, or lack of trim
factors as the case may be, that result in the hoof wall not being
properly oriented around the center of weight-bearing are a major
factor here, and definitely the internal structures, not to mention the
frog. The major effect of a shoe is to limit hoof expansion and
depending on how the foot is trimmed and shoe set, to transfer weight
off the entire ground surface of the foot, including the sole, frog and
digital cushion, onto the walls. Whether this crushes the heels or not
may very well be related in part to hoof horn strength but I don't see
where that's the only factor.

Eleanor

John Stewart wrote:

We will probably have to agree to disagree on this point.

In the grand scheme of things it's probably a minor point - I do know that I use hindfoot support and stimulation (in general I say "hindfoot" to mean the rearward portion of the hoof capsule) to restore good function and growth patterns in the heels/heel quarter walls, bars, and heel soles.

Curious that today I should have been back shoeing a little mare I used to work on. She has one "up foot" and one "down foot". Thermal images on her feet showed that the heels of her crushed-heel foot were drastically colder than the heels of her clubby foot. It took me two years of shoeing to get them growing consistently (and warm on thermography), but I did it, and she stayed balanced for well over a year after that. The owner leased her out for 8 months, and the mare changed farriers. The new farrier let her feet get too long, and ALL her former problems returned (there were angle issues in her hinds too). Now she's back. I corrected her trim today, and fully expect her feet to return to good form within a couple cycles, but I think this is a perfect example of what you & I are both saying. She has a conformational flaw, and with the right shoeing approach she is manageable. Without careful attention & too-long feet, she started to fall into the bad growth patterns again.

What I was able to do was to identify those breeds at the two extremes - The
Thoroughbred with the weak-walled collapsed feet and the Friesian or
Lucitano at the very strong-walled upright end.

In my part of the US that upright foot would be the Morgan.


In between there seemed to

be breeds (or cross-breeds) which seemed to tend to distort in a consistent
pattern, which seemed to depend on the strength of the hoof wall. This
seemed to be the case regardless of what the horse was being asked to do or,
for that matter, how early in their life they were being asked to do it.

I absolutely agree that there are breed characteristics in hoof type. There are breed characteristics in just about anything, so why not feet?

Young Thoroughbred feet will generally collapse quickly after shoes are
applied to them, either very early when they are shod for racing, or later
if they are not.

I have seen plenty of shod TBs, however, with nice thick walls, dense
frogs, functional heels and bars, in short - very, very good function,
even after a decent racing career. It's a matter of trimming to develop
those things, whether or not shoes are applied. I've also seen TB feet
brought to good function, even after showing crushed heels. There is definitely a conformational predisposition, whatever the breed of horse, but it can be shod/trimmed to counteract it.

I know that Dr Bowker talks quite a lot about the importance and the changes
that occur in the lateral cartilages and the digital cushion, under
different circumstances. They may well be of importance in how the foot
functions and in the maintenance of shape, however, I don't think they are
involved in the major distorting forces on the hoof and bars, of the horse's
weight, via the hoof's attachment to the pedal bone, aginst the reactionary
ground forces.

But they have to be, don't they? If the frog shares in weightbearing, then don't the internal structures that connect the frog to the bony column have to take a role? Take a look at the heel bulbs on those TBs with crushed heels. They are generally flat and weak (not always, but usually).

Cheers,
-Abby

--
**************************
Abby Bloxsom
www.advantedgeconsulting.com