Mr. Stovall compared trimming the hoof to a natural wear pattern to
rasping the rubber of your car tire. I find no resemblance or
comparison to hoof wear with wear on a tire, and find that comparison
of the two is strongly like comparing apples and spaceships...

We can agree that attempting to apply data obtained from an observation
of the feet of feral horses in an arid, abrasive environment to domestic horses
in varied environments is certainly reminiscent of a comparison of apples to spaceships.

Regular trimming is advocated by most farriers, veterinarians and
equine professionals. The fact is that if the hoof wall is left long,
as a tread on a tire, hoof imbalance and distortion are likely to
occur...

My essay did not question the advisability of maintaining a short toe
because physical law dictates that a short phalangeal lever is intrinsic
to efficient movement when "efficiency" is defined as "calories expended
in getting from here to there."  My essay questioned the validity of
using a feral foot in a dry abrasive environment as a model for a
domestic foot in varied environments.

The performance and soundness of the horse is then in jeopardy. (In
short, it is good to trim horse's feet)...

We can agree on this point.

For the quarters to break away is normal in many environments. Domestic
horses fit well in that category as they are seldom used on hard
surfaces barefooted. That is the way all feet wear in most
environments, feral or domestic...

In reality, both feral and domestic horses' feet in moist, soft
environments wear quite differently than those in dry, abrasive
environments.

The author made a statement about a 'cone' working better at load
bearing. Without the scientific information and common sense to support
isolating the caudal region for optimal function, it would be easy to
make a statement saying that purposely 'whacking' away the quarters to
mimic natural wear is counterproductive. It is only in the laboratory
where a "cone" works better...

All other things being equal, any cone is with an intact base is
better able to support a load than one of the same size with portions of
its base missing.

Again the comparison of apples and spaceships should be considered.
Look at what science has offered as to how the back part of the foot
functions to accept forces which are directed into the foot under all
phases of the stride...

I'm certainly willing to learn.  Please cite any applicable published,
double blind study (not observation) that supports your contention that
the load bearing ability of a horse's foot or any cone-shaped object of
whatever elasticity is somehow enhanced by having a portion of its
weight bearing base removed.

Phalangeal alignment has always been important for as long as horse
feet have been trimmed and shod. That concept is still at the top of
the agenda for most farriers and I believe that is good. Hoof
distortions are often created by trimming the toe and leaving heel in
the process of aligning the pastern with the dorsal hoof wall...

So far, so good...

It has been discovered that when the sole at the toe is thinned
repeatedly to raise the hoof angle, P3 descends within the hoof
capsule, the dorsal hoof wall at the distal border loses some of its
ability to remain attached to P3 and therefore the dorsal wall migrates
forward, stretching the thinned sole and frog apex with it...

Your premise presumes the conclusion to be demonstrated:  It is not
always necessary to "thin the sole repeatedly" to raise the effective
phalangeal angle.

At the same time, to assist in pastern and dorsal hoof wall alignment,
the heels are left with some length or height above the live sole. In
cases where pastern alignment is an issue, low angled forward heels are
usually involved. When that type of heel is left untrimmed to try to
improve the pastern alignment, the heels are forced even more forward
and to a flatter angle. The heels turn inward as the bars become curled
or bent to a similar configuration as the outer wall of the heel
buttress. The most available literature for farrier reference is the
book used by most farrier schools. It clearly states that to align the
pastern with the dorsal hoof wall, trim the toe and leave the heel...

Please cite your source.

This is with no regard for the resulting distal displacement of P3 from
sole thinning , or the dorsal wall migration from compromising the
attachment of the wall at the distal border, and is in fact promoting
under run and contracted heels by leaving them grossly extending beyond
the sole.

We can certainly agree that a run out toe is a common occurrence when
every foot is shod full to the toe - but that's not exactly breaking
news.

The latest scientific information demonstrates that caudal frog
contact, with breakover placed close to the tip of P3 improves distal
phalanges alignment. This is accomplished by including all caudal
components of the foot. These include the frog, the digital cushion,
lateral cartilages, bars, and heel buttress, all working together
through frog contact...

I fear you've lost me.  Please delineate the exact mechanism by which
the alignment of the "distal phalanges" is "improved", assuming they
were aligned to begin with.  I think of one phalanx as being most
distal, P3, but you used the plural.  Please be specific:  Are you
referring only to the alignment of P3 and P2?  If so, why don't you think
the alignment of P1 and P2 - or all three - are equally important in
terms of efficiency of movement?

When treating Navicular syndrome, experienced veterinarians and
farriers who keep up with current technologies have found that raising
the hoof angle by keeping the heels high occasionally helps for a very
short time, until the heels later contract and the bars curl, thus
increasing the heel pain and discouraging the horse from landing heel
first.

Again, your premise presumes the conclusion to be demonstrated.  Current
technologies differentiate between the various pathologies lumped into
the catch-all term, "navicular syndrome."  In my experience, the
therapeutic measures used to treat or palliate the symptoms of those
pathologies vary considerably with the individual horse and the specific
diagnosis.

The most recent helpful information that addresses Navicular syndrome
comes from the research directed by the wild horse hoof patterns and
Natural Balance trimming protocol, as it clearly addresses the needs of
that syndrome...

I'm always willing to learn.  Where are the double blind studies
confirming your hypotheses published for peer review?  Since the phrase
"navicular syndrome" can mean anything from a bruised navicular bursa to
a fractured navicular bone and all the pathological points in between,
I'm most anxious to read the protocols you used in testing your hypotheses.

When the principles are applied correctly, the Navicular bone is
positioned in a more vertical relationship with the coffin
joint. The distal end of P2 is placed properly in the coffin joint,
which reduces unreasonable strain on the impar ligament and proximal
suspensory ligament to the Navicular bone. This is in light of Bowker's
findings on how stress to the impar ligament causes poor blood flow to
the Navicular bone combined with trauma to the coffin joint from
loading toe first and poor support through the back of the foot
from hoof distortion related to leaving heels high or under-run, and
trimming the toe short to align the pastern with the dorsal hoof wall.

This appears to be conjecture; however, I'll reserve judgment until
I've read the results of the published studies that confirm your
hypothesis.  Please furnish a reference.

Mr. Stovall's refers to tenets from O.R Adams' "Lameness in Horses".
That text has been revised numerous times to keep up with current
technology changes. I believe that periodic revision is important for a
text which is frequently referenced by hoof care professionals whether
they are veterinarians or farriers. The most recent "Lameness in
Horses" (Fifth Edition) contains a section on Natural Balance
principles as well as other respected reference journals.

While technologies change, anatomy does not.  Is it your position that
the hoof wall is not a weight bearing structure as you imply in your
observation of feral horses; i.e., "The paint showed consistently on the
white zone of the hoof and on the sole inside of the lamina, rarely on
the outer wall..."

Bowker has commented based on his histological studies indicating that
all horses are born with the same quality of hoof components. They then
become either durable, optimal, or deficient based on their environment
and lifestyle...

If the volumetric capacity of the hoof is considered to be a component
of the hoof, then all horses are not born with the same quality of hoof
components because all horses of the same size do not have the same
ratio of hoof volume to body weight.

As to the article's referenced book "Horseshoeing Theory and Hoofcare"
(Emery, Van Hoosen), it was an important introduction to the need for
change in the hoof care industry. It challenged some traditional views
and supported others. This publication was without a doubt a catalyst
for a deeper look at the horse's foot, hence the search goes on...

It is interesting to note that the authors of Horseshoeing... came to quite
different conclusions than you did in your observation of feral horses
in similar environments.

Those "jumpers on the feral bandwagon" are drawn this direction
primarily because of the commonsense approach with scientific backing...

To my knowledge, the "jumpers on of the feral bandwagon" are operating
on observations and anecdotes, not scientific studies that adhere strictly
to the protocols of  the scientific method.

The view is certainly not clear in the forest of information as we have
to sort through antiquated doctrine and old, previously learned ideas
that have now been proven different. This is progress. This is "not
being stuck". Yet for many it is scary...

Exactly which portions of that "antiquated doctrine" do you feel have been
"proven different", presumably by your observation of feral horses?

Since the introduction of the feral horse hoof information, there has
been heated discussion about it's usefulness for under saddle
performing disciplines consistent with domestic horses...

We can certainly agree on this aspect.

It is apparent that those with doubt about the success of the feral
horse performing sound when placed in a domestic arena have not visited
with those who do this...

I haven't found any feral horses at the race track, jumping in the
show ring, running barrels in the rodeo arena, or in any other disciplines in
which performance can be objectively quantified.  Without objective
quantification and comparison, any claims relating to the performance and
soundness of feral horses are obviously a matter of conjecture, not science.

Keeping in mind that the most successful results are those with the
animals left barefooted and trimmed regularly in a manner consistent
with the way they were raised...

"Most successful results?"  In reality, feral horses, as a group, have never
demonstrated superiority to domestic horses in any objectively quantified
activity.

We can agree that horses are best left barefoot with a short toe and a
natural (note lower case "n") foot; but many horses in use need to be
shod for protection, traction, or to effect a therapeutic change in way
of going - even domesticated, formerly feral horses.

The others perform very well and stay extremely sound until they are
shod in a manner which allows more ground surface of the foot to
migrate forward of the widest part of the foot. This is the same
criteria domestic horses are confronted with when they become lame...

Please cite your source; your statement appears to be unsupported
conjecture.

The wild horse study published and presented at AAEP in 1995
showed clearly and consistently that the bottom of all feet had
more ground surface behind the widest part of the foot than in front of
it...

One hates to labor the obvious, but so what?  Given the obvious differences
between the two classes of horses,  wild (feral) horse observations are
directly relevant only to feral horses.

Farriers and veterinarians who treat lame horses find that hoof
preparation combined with shoe placement which maximizes the length and
width of the ground surface in the back of the foot, while shortening
the leverage arm in front (breakover) are generally more successful...

Unimpeded turnover in fronts is intrinsic to efficient movement, but that's
axiomatic and not unique to feral horses.

This same principle is also practiced by many farriers as a means to
prevent lameness, improve performance, overcome gait faults, and avoid
weak hooves that are easily distorted...

Axiomatically, efficiency of movement is the best prophylaxis.  Again, this
is not unique to feral horses.

I ask you to look at a horse standing and in motion. You will see the
importance of the feral horse hoof design, shaped by the environment
for thousands of years for good reason...

Not necessarily.  Exactly which feral foot did you wish to use as a model?

In regard to the bold print statement quoted in the article concerning
extra weight of rider, tack and work "Since these factors are not
considered, observations on the foot wear of feral horses without
regard for the relationship of anatomical form to efficient function
become meaningless because they can not be logically applied to
domestic horses". With this statement I find it difficult to be
diplomatic when information was readily available at the time the
article was written which supports the biomechanical efficiency
of the wild horse foot...

Your diplomatic restraint notwithstanding, what you call "information,"
I call "conjecture"; or, as you put it, a "comparison of apples to spaceships."
Assuming a domestic horse trimmed in adherence to the physical laws governing
levers, you have failed to demonstrate that the foot of a feral horse in an arid,
abrasive environment is equal or superior in terms of biomechanical efficiency
to the foot of the domestic horse.

If the author disagrees with the fact that the foot is more efficient
with more foot mass behind the widest part of the foot than forward of
that point, with relatively straight heel buttresses and bars,
large frogs and no contracted heels, I honestly do not know what
to say...

You've described a normal front foot, not necessarily a feral foot.
However, you might mention that fronts and hinds are quite different in
form and function.  While a front foot, with support as its primary
function, is unquestionably more efficient in its normal state as you've described;
hinds in domestic horses are mainly propulsive in nature. You've described a front
foot, but I'm sure you're aware that such a foot is inefficient as an intermediary
in the transference of energy from muscle to ground because a hind foot is most
efficient when it remains on the ground until all of the energy in the extensors is
transferred to the ground.

The assumed parallel relationship of P3 to the dorsal hoof wall in
domestic horses is not reliable as a reference to phalangeal alignment
and this factor has been demonstrated many times and presented at many
venues in the U.S. and abroad at respectable veterinary functions. The
unreliability of the parallel relationship is the reason for increased
phalangeal leverage, as a result of increasing distance anterior to the
distal border of P3. Bowker shows that pathologies to the impar
ligament and coffin joint are directly related to delay in breakover
and a toe first landing due to an excessively long leverage arm.

No news here.  Gunnar Gatski had Hap Hanson's hunters moving like
silk scarves wafting in a light breeze back in the early 1980s and all
he did was set the front shoes under on his long and lows.  By 1983, a
hunter shod full to the toe at an "A" show here in Texas was probably an
import.

Equally important in this equation is the heel height when the time of
breakover is an issue, with regard to length of stride and the hoof
contacting the ground. Heels that are allowed to grow beyond the sole
more than 1/2" are directly related to a shortened stride...

I'm not much on one-size-fits-all absolutes when it comes to farriery.
Please cite the relevant published studies that confirm your hypothesis.

These parameters are all governed by tension in the deep flexor tendon
below the inferior check ligament. Efficiency of motion appears to be a
result of the equilibrium around the flexor and extensor tendons...

Assuming as short as short a toe as practicable, is it your contention that a
race horse can be made to run faster (i.e., more efficiently) by whacking
off its heels if they are growing more than 1/2" beyond the sole?  Surely not!

Mr. Stovall concludes his article with the following: "In my opinion,
one can learn a great deal from feral equids in abrasive environments,
but what one learns must be evaluated in accord with what one knows
about the anatomy and physiology of the equine foot, as well as the
physics of efficient motion". It would be difficult to disagree with
that statement.

A very productive five years have passed since that was written. during
that time, continuing scientific research has provided a lot of new
information about the biomechanics of the feral hoof and how the
environment shapes and develops it to provide pure efficient function,
perfect for survival...

Because today's feral horses have no significant natural predators, they
are more a testimony to survival on thin rations than to efficiency of motion.
Instead of attempting to extrapolate data obtained from feral feet to
domestic horses and making conjectural statements based on that
inherently flawed procedure, anyone with an interest in biomechanical
efficiency is better served by comparisons adhering to the scientific
method in which the feet of those horses that have demonstrated superior
biomechanical efficiency (in objectively quantified activities such as puissance,
major barrel races, G1 stakes, etc.) are compared to the feet of less
successful horses engaged in similar activities.  Apples to apples.

The domestic horse on the other hand is subjected to an incredibly
unnatural environment and isolated from the forces which shape the
efficient feral hoof...

Your premise again presumes the conclusion to be demonstrated.  A feral
horse's hooves may serve a feral horse efficiently, but it does not
necessarily follow that the same foot will serve a domestic horse in
use equally efficiently.

Through deeper research, especially in comparing the tissues and
structure of feral and domestic hooves, there are now more answers to
the questions about anatomy, physiology, physics of efficient motion,
and what forces affect those things...

The answers to questions of biomechanical efficiency in domestic horses
will be found in the application of the scientific method to studies of
domestic horses.  Comparing feral apples to domestic spaceships, as you
advocate, will not yield relevant answers.

Perhaps we should ask ourselves a couple of questions. Does a domestic
hoof need to be efficient?...

In pasture ornaments, the efficiency of the hoof is inconsequential to the
horse's connections.  With performance horses, especially those horses
with objectively quantified performances involving considerable money,
efficiency of the bony column, not just the hoof, is of utmost importance.

And how important is efficient function when considering the added
demands of rider weight, tack and discipline? And if  "form
to efficient function" is the goal, now that we have been provided with
more of the answers as to what forces help shape feral horse function
and efficiency, can we use some of that information to help
achieve efficient function in domestic hooves? Some food for thought...

Mr. Ovnicek, I appreciate your response; I respect your scholarship; I
welcome the opportunity for debate; and I certainly don't intend to
denigrate your work; however I remain steadfast in my belief that
observations of feral horses in arid, abrasive, environments, will
yield data primarily applicable to feral horses in arid, abrasive,
environments.  The fact that feral horses neither carry weight nor
engage in forced exercise renders any attempt to apply data obtained
from feral horses to domestic horses a scientifically slippery
slope at best.

I note that you question the importance of weight as it relates to
efficiency.  For your edification, the more-or-less standard model for
racing secretaries when assigning weight to horses in handicap races is
that one pound of weight is equal to one length at a mile.

More food for thought.