|
|
This entire document is copyrighted © 2008 by
Martin D. Kenny and The Hoof Redevelopment Center
All rights reserved.
Copies may not be made without specific written permission.
The key to reversing distortion of the hoof capsule is understanding physics. For too long, our industry has looked at cadavers for answers to alignments of structures (or lack there of) with little regard to how they interact in the live horse. As Newton’s 3rd law of motion states, “For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.” That being the case, it is hard to understand much of what we profess happens in the hoof capsule.
To give an example. We profess that a long toe creates a short low heel by the following process. The toe (ground surface) migrates forward, and the heel (ground surface) is pulled forward with it producing the classic “long toe low heel” in the horse.
My research proves that this is not the case, and using Newton’s 3rd law, you can readily understand why the process is not as we profess.
I have provided two photos below that will assist in understanding that as the toe migrates forward (at ground surface), the heel (at hairline) migrates rearward providing us with an appearance of the ground surface of the heel pushing forward. The foot does not have a “run under heel” but a “over run heel.” It is crucial to understand this if we are to ever produce consistent results in reversing feet of this type.
|
PLATE #1
The photo above is May 11th pre shoeing .
Foot wearing a #2 St. Croix Eventer shoe
|
Let’s analyze the numbers on these two photos.
Perp 3 on each is the vertical toe measurement
Plate #2 is 100% of Plate #1
Perp 4 on each is horizontal distance from vertical at toe to the dorsal end of base
Plate #2 is 115% of Plate #1
Perp on each is vertical measurement at the palmer end of base
Plate #2 is 97% of Plate #1
Perp 2 on each is horizontal distance from Perp line to palmer aspect of hoof capsule
Plate #2 is 86% of Plate #1
Analyzing further (by adding up horizontal measurements) we see that the total horizontal base of Plate #1 is 4.70 in. and Plate #2 is 4.89 in.. When looking at the horizontal length of the actual hoof capsule from base at Dorsal extreme of the toe to the Palmer extreme of the hoof capsule (heel bulb region). We see that this comes to an AP measurement of 5.64 in on Plate #1 and 5.72 in on Plate #2. This would indicate that Plate #1 had only 83% of the base of Plate #2.
This being fact, would negate the Theory that the heel of the hoof capsule follows the toe as the toe is forced forward.
The facts clearly show that while the toe migrated forward horizontally by 0.24 inches, the heel in relation to the limb above, increased horizontally the opposite direction in reference to the toe by 0.05 inches.
At the same time, if you compare PERP 5 measurements in both plates you will see that the distance actually increased by 0.05 inches giving further indication that the heel does not follow the toe in migration. If it did so, this distance would not increase. In fact, by comparing the heel location of the shoe in relation to the limb above, we can readily see that the posterior portion of the base is actually moving rearward.
The combination of the toe moving forward and the base of the heels moving rearward, provides the need for increasingly larger shoes. (from size #2 to Size #4 in this case in only 16 weeks).
One final note on this foot. I produced the Plate #2 foot by ONE very specific alteration to my “Symmetrical Hoofcare Protocol”. I have done this to 80 horses and have produced the same results (in various degrees) to all hooves where the protocol was altered. In fact, Plate #1 was taken after one month of that alteration and the resulting toe deviation that has started on that plate is the result of that alteration of protocol. I would be happy to discuss the results of that overall study with you if you desire.
|
PLATE #2
This photo is August 31st pre shoeing
Foot wearing #4 St. Croix Eventer®
|
|
|
|
 |
