Re: [RC] RE: PICS: Crushed Heels

[Abby Bloxsom <goneriding@snet.net>]

Karen Standefer wrote:

> Actually, I seek a 30 degree hairline. But, the result
> of that is a 45 degree hoof angle for front hooves. 

> The bottom photo has a hoof angle of about 48 degrees
> at that point.  We didn't have enough toe height,
> vertically, to push the angle back to 45 degrees.  So,
> the hairline was off a bit, too.  


I think this may explain in part why we all struggle to make sense of 
this whole geometry.  I think we're speaking in two different languages, 
and that unfortunately they have words in common that mean different 
things to each of us.

First: I think where you say "toe height" I (and most farriers I 
converse with) would say "toe length".  As far as I know, that's the 
accepted industry jargon.  I'm not exactly clear what you mean by "toe 
length".


> Currently, it's just
> where I want it on both hooves.  I have a program that
> reads the stats on the hoof.  This is what is says
> about that pic:
> 
> Hairline Angle = 27.11 degrees
> Hoof Angle 48.56 degrees
> Heel Angle 42.88 degrees 
> Heel Height 2.3 cm (too short!)
> 
> Here are the measurements on the clubby one from a pic
> taken the same day as the one above:
> 
> Hairline Angle = 20.65 degrees
> Hoof Angle 50.45 degrees
> Heel Angle 43.91 degrees 
> Heel Height 2.3 cm (as I mentioned, we trim the two
> front hooves to the same height)
> 
> 
> 
>>>Also, I do see that the pastern on the right foot is
>>>
> much more upright - did this settle as well the way
> you described?  Do you have pictures of
> that from more recently?<<
> 
> Yes, the pastern has settled as well as the hoof angle
> has come down to 45 degrees.  I'll get some recent
> pics this weekend and post them.  We're still doing
> some remedial work on the hooves, so you'll have to
> bear with a less than perfectly shaped hoof, but
> you'll be able to see the two front hooves have the
> same pastern angle as well as ventral hoof wall angle.
>  I have some pics from Jan, but they're not really
> good quality and I'd prefer to get pics with a bit
> more of his boney column showing so that you guys can
> see the difference a bit more clearly. 


You know what else would be nice, Karen, if you can get it, is pictures 
of the hoof landing.  I trim to static balance, in general, but more 
important to me is how the hoof flies and lands.  I seek a VERY slight 
heel-first landing in motion, on both fronts and hinds.

(Hinds ... now there's a subject we haven't even touched!)

 
> 
> I wonder if the fact that I was dubbing the toes back
> so far is scewing your opinion of the angle of the
> hooves.  I dubbed them back so far in order to get the
> heels under him.  We pulled the toes back to the
> whiteline (which was his breakover according to
> x-rays) weekly to keep the heels growing down instead
> of forward.
> 

No, the dubbed toe is normal for me, I do that. I think the fact that 
the 45 & 55 degree angles are both on the plexiglas and the hoof wall is 
not between the 2 slopes gave an optical illusion that it was closer to 
the 55.  I measured it on my screen and now I see that the two (hoof & 
55 line) are not parallel.

Okay, now speaking of breakover:  #1, what do you use as the benchmark 
for breakover point?  and #2, do you float the hoof wall at the toe &/or 
quarters?

-Ab



-- 
* * *
Abby Bloxsom
ARICP Certified Instructor
Level III Recreational and Distance Riding
Colebrook, CT USA
goneriding@snet.net