RE: [RC] Barefootin Historically - Brenda Jo Jones
Hoofarmor.com
Abrasive
resistant coating that dries within minutes and wears like iron…b.
-----Original
Message----- From:
ridecamp-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ridecamp-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of goearth Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2004
8:24 PM To: Ridecamp Subject: Fw: [RC] Barefootin
Historically
Hello Truman, i
don't think it goes back to the dawn of time but rather to the Iron Age as
before that Armies like the Asian Hordes used hide and woven material from
plants. The Romans fitted leather and metal coverage with leather
straps. The Indians used leather when they needed it. So it seems that
since the Iron Age there has essentially been no development in the process of
hoof protection other than easy boots. My theory would be to utilize a
liquid product that dries instantly and wears like steel but without the
nail holes. Science should be able to advance towards the future, rather
than stay in the past. tOMs
Back in a previous life I
spent 6 months in the Army War College. The US military doctrine is to use
technology to it's greatest advantage. That's why we can fight wars today
without a great loss of life compared to only 30 years ago when we lost 50,000
in Vietnam.
Anyway, one of the military history instructors had an interesting chart that
listed the technology that had significant military impact. That means it made
the difference in winning or losing a war. If you want to test something and
get rid of all the BS claims - test it in a war. You win or lose - it works or
you die. Can't get more black and white than that. Of course the usual
suspects we know today are on there, proximity fuses, radar and the atomic bomb
in WWII; later curse missiles, the jet airplane. In the Civil ( not
a good discription) War it was the repeating rifle.
But go back in history when the horse was an instrument of war you will find
the stirrup as a significant military technology that made the difference in
the Battle of Hastings in 1066 which set the course of Great Britain. One other
technology of military significance is the steel horseshoe. It allowed armies
to go faster and further with less down time and fewer spare stock and provided
them an advantage over their adversary.
So it seems that "barefoot vs. shod" has been a argument from the
dawn of time.
Truman
goearth wrote:
Brrr. its cold outside
and a snow storm called for. But i got to thinking about the 1716 trek in
Va. to open up the west and cross the Blue Ridge by the Knights of the Golden
Horseshoe and Lt. Gov. Alexander Spotswood. Living down near the ocean
and the tidewater area they didn't use shoes as they didn't need them in the
sand. It was only when they decided to cross the Mountains that they
needed them and applied them. Upon their return they called themselves
the KoTGH and supposedly gave out miniature golden jewel-encrusted horseshoes
as momentos of the trip. When i first came to Luray in 1974 and rode the
mountains, not knowing what endurance was but just riding for the
adventure i only had fronts and never shod in the rear or had a problem at
all on these notorious rocks,sometimes riding 30 miles over mountains. I
am not an opponent of barefootin and would welcome any knowledge about
alternative hoof care and practices. Sure, there are times when
shoeing is needed and should be done. But the horses feet Darolyn showed
me were some of the best balanced and trimmed feet i have ever seen.
And, that makes me a leaning proponent. tOMs
