Farriers Registration Council

especially for horse owners to ask advice, from farriers or from other owners, all welcome, also please post details of lost or stolen horses here
tara

Farriers Registration Council

Postby tara » Wed Apr 13, 2005 11:38 am

The Farriers Registration Council (FRC) are the body set up to govern the training of farriers since the 1970's. I believe the training that they offer to the people wishing to become farriers has altered very little in this time.

With all the developements that have occurred in the last thirty years in understanding more about 'Equine Biomechanics' and also that more is known about barefoot and alternative shoeing methods (unlike those still taught by the FRC) - is the FRC a still viable option in it's current form?

Should we be looking at dissolving the current form of the FRC and opening a new body that encompasses ALL forms of equine foot care with a modern understanding of the current culture?

Should a representative from all forms of foot care/shoeing systems sit on the board of this new elected body?

Should there also be an independant Ombudsman who can deal with complaints that the FRC or new equine foot care body have not dealt with effectively (such as in the Insurance and Banking world)?

Should there be a new licencing system (say in the form a photo ID badge - like the current driving licence) that would detail the skills that the person has.

For example:

A Category = Traditional Rim shoeing Trained Farrier.
B Category = Natural Balance/EDSS system Trained Farrier.
C Category = Cytek Shoeing System Trained Farrier
D Category = KC La Pierre Authorised Trimmer
E Category = Pete Ramsey Authorised Trimmer
F Category = Strasser Authorised Trimmer
G Category = Pasture Trim Trained Farrier

So someone with 'A+B' Categories has been fully trained to hot rim shoe a horse and also fully trained in the correct application of the EDSS shoe and Natural Balance shoe.

Someone who is showing 'C' Category has purely been trained to apply the cytek shoeing system and is not licenced to apply any other shoe.


Would this not be in every horse owners benefit at the end of the day?

Guest

Postby Guest » Wed Apr 13, 2005 12:15 pm

Shouldn't Cytek shoeing be at the top, after all it is the most modern and comprehensive approach to modern shoeing.

tara

Postby tara » Wed Apr 13, 2005 2:18 pm

EVERY system should be included into the licence system - to each horse owner who has whatever system for their horse, each will say that that system is the most important.

I also feel that if an authorised representative of each shoeing/trimming body was to take a seat on the board of the new entity, then a fair and unbiased opinion would be seen.

IMHO we need to see a new structure in the 21st Century and the FRC as it currently stands is not achieving this.

It's quite scary to read the 'Farriers discussion board' and to see that there are some farriers out there that feel in a similar vein!

J Bloggs

Postby J Bloggs » Wed Apr 13, 2005 4:26 pm

I fink the above idea is wunerful. Jus one improvement. The latest Idea should be top of the list.... thats the Joseph Bloggs mefod. Anyone who dont agree is stuck in the past.

Joe Bloggs (no relation)

malcolm tribe
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 4:43 pm

Postby malcolm tribe » Wed Apr 13, 2005 4:54 pm

perhaps you could explain what is so new about these systems after checking the books used for reference over the last 100 years

malcolm tribe
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 4:43 pm

Postby malcolm tribe » Wed Apr 13, 2005 5:04 pm

you can put whatever name you want to the way an equine is trimmed but at the end of the day it has to be done properly balanced and landing flat

tara

Postby tara » Wed Apr 13, 2005 5:19 pm

Mr Tribe, I see from your other postings that you are a farrier, so surely you do not need me to try to explain to someone such as yourself the difference in all these systems?

I think that you have missed tho whole point of my original posting and perhaps you may wish to re-read it again.

What I have written is what the majority of horse owners are now wanting - please do not take my work for it, you only have to look at the other equine forums!

With kind regards

Guest

Postby Guest » Wed Apr 13, 2005 6:56 pm

Ya Malcolm, come on get your act together.

Tara is right look at all the other forums, I still think Cytek should be at the top. Leads the way in every other aspect.

Guest

Cytex

Postby Guest » Wed Apr 13, 2005 8:52 pm

"perhaps you could explain what is so new about these systems after checking the books used for reference over the last 100 years" Quote.

Its simply really Malc today it is acceptable to cripple horses by using some unproven theory

Guest

Re: Cytex

Postby Guest » Thu Apr 14, 2005 5:12 am

Last hundred years ? So CPD is really working well for farriers then, when was the last CPD you did "1830".

And the next question is do you really think you can learn to shoe from reading a book then ?

guest

F.R.C.

Postby guest » Thu Apr 14, 2005 7:12 am

can anyone tell me the difference between strasser, cytec and our muckruck?? and I think that says it all.

tara

Postby tara » Thu Apr 14, 2005 7:23 am

To Guest @ 8.12am - I really dont understand your statement!

Are you stating that you dont know the difference between the Dr Strasser trim, the cytek shoeing system and the hot rim shoeing system (that was first introduced by J. Clark)?

I believe that all have websites should you wish to educate yourself further!

Kind Regards

john ford
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 7:20 pm
Location: Pucklechurch, Bristol.

Postby john ford » Fri Apr 15, 2005 4:58 am

Tara it seems to me by your postings that you yourself are a fully qualified knowledgeable person in all subjects of the horse’s anatomy which includes a degree in veterinary science. The first problem you have with your vast knowledge is your lack of knowledge about the FRC. It is the Worshipful Company of Farriers who set the syllabus of training and exams. And all different methods of trimming and shoeing are discussed. You attack the farriery trade, but I see no mention of the veterinary profession. Once a vet gets MRCVS after his/her name, they become god over every living creature on the planet, whether it is the heart, liver, legs, shoeing, etc. Yet the horse owner pays out a fortune, believing every word they utter. Farriers shoe horse’s every day of the week, and do nothing else. I think that I would put my trust in a farrier’s judgement and opinion way before anyone else, when it comes to the care of the horse's foot.

tara

Postby tara » Fri Apr 15, 2005 7:29 am

Not at all Mr Ford, I am merely an owner who has taken an interest in my horses hooves and because of this fact I have enrolled myself in The Open College of Equine Studies course in 'Equine Biomechanics'.

Something that perhaps all owners should do as then they would understand why their horses suffer things like navicular syndrome or mechanical laminitis!!

OK. So it's WCF who set the syllabus of training & exams (I stand corrected and thank you for this information), but could you confirm to me that the FRC are the ones who then govern the 'trained' farrier and take fees from these farriers and also are the body that supposedly deal with complaints made against farriers? Should you ever read the forum on the Kelly Marks website, this is an area of great concern to many a horse owner!!

Also, you state that the different methods of shoeing/barefoot trims are discussed, but should I take it that the teaching of these methods are not on the training syllabus?

Yes, I agree with you comment concerning lameness and Vets. I personally will call my farrier BEFORE ever calling my Vet now in lameness issues ~ not that I seem to have any anymore (unless its a gaping wound).


Kind Regards

malcolm tribe
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 4:43 pm

Postby malcolm tribe » Fri Apr 15, 2005 6:50 pm

perhaps once you have taking this course you will realise that the lower limb is a series of pulleys and levers and that in an ideal conformation is relatively trouble free but when the owners breed from conformational suspect animals because it has nice eyes and a sweet temperment but mechanically is duff you will maybe see that our job is tenfold more difficult so when the horse owner and breeders are more in line with the europian breeders where bad mares are not breed from then maybe you stance on being on our governing bodies will have more credability

john ford
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 7:20 pm
Location: Pucklechurch, Bristol.

Postby john ford » Fri Apr 15, 2005 9:11 pm

Tara, I am sorry if you beleive that I may sound as if I am putting you down, which I am not, but the people who are teaching you at The Open College of Equine Studies course in 'Equine Biomechanics'. are people who have very little or no hands on knowledge of farriery. They get most of their knowledge from reading books, written by persons who also have learnt by reading books, and so on. We farriers use books as a reference only, but have to put our hands on knowledge to get the correct result. If horse owners do have problems with poor farriery, it is not a direct fault with the system, but a fault with the individual farrier as a person, in the way he/she has a conscience about what they are doing, or just slapping shoes on as quickly as possible to make a fast buck. These type of people can be found in every profession in the land. And no authority can stop them without good solid proof. Remember Dr Shipman had all the qualifications, and look what he chose to do with them. You only get rid of the bad craftsman by not employing them. Not by telling the good top craftsmen and women how they should be doing their work, or by telling them that you as a layman know a far better way, due to a few months in a lecture room.

tara

Postby tara » Mon Apr 18, 2005 8:05 am

Mr Ford, the main book quoted in the course is 'No Foot, No Hoof' written by Martin Deacon (FWCF) - a book which I have owned well before I thought of signing up for this course! Also, my farrier is extremely willing & helpful with questions I have regarding the topic of horses hooves & lower limbs!!

You stated "fault with the individual farrier as a person, in the way he/she has a conscience about what they are doing, or just slapping shoes on as quickly as possible to make a fast buck. These type of people can be found in every profession in the land. And no authority can stop them without good solid proof". Then surely as I stated in my original posting "Should there also be an independant Ombudsman who can deal with complaints that the FRC or new equine foot care body have not dealt with effectively (such as in the Insurance and Banking world)? " would be a very good place to start?

With my thoughts in my original posting, would not all genuine & responsible "good top craftsmen and women" welcome such a move to rid the trade of the charlatans, who have trained as others have, yet as you stated are "just slapping shoes on as quickly as possible to make a fast buck" and dont care for the welfare of the horses and ponies that they are dealing with, or the reputation of the many good farriers that are out there??

Mr Tribe - How many times has it been said that although a horse passes a 5 star vetting, after a few years of bad farriery and the horse is crippled a the Farrier states "It's got bad confirmation Misses!". How can this be?
Mr Ford has stated the reason why in his posting. It's down to the few bad apples out there that don't care about their job (rather then horses being "mechanically duff" as you so eloquently put it.

My farrier thinks this concept is fantastic as it will make the industry transparent in getting rid of bad farriery practices and setting a new standard to the the UK horse owners and perhaps encouraging Europe to follow suit in having such a governing body to such high standards.

malcolm tribe
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 4:43 pm

Postby malcolm tribe » Mon Apr 18, 2005 6:50 pm

so are you saying every horse with bad conformation is caused by the farriery trade or will owners and breeders take some responsibility i work for a vets equine department and yes afew lame horses are due to bad farriery but the bulk are conformation and/or owner abuse due to lack of knowledge or care there are so few horseman left that are naturals and so many that read the book and know it all but know sod all. so would an apprenticeship in horse owning be a good idea and then farriers may not be employed on price and when i ask under this forum for comment on show ponies some well informed replies are placed check them out

john ford
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 7:20 pm
Location: Pucklechurch, Bristol.

Postby john ford » Mon Apr 18, 2005 7:56 pm

Tara, first the book you are learning from is No Foot No Horse. Not HOOF. This book was written by Gail Williams who again has learnt all she knows out of books, and had to travel along way to find a farrier willing to listen to her. Martin Deacon FWCF is a well respected farrier within the trade, but there are many others with different opinions to his. Suffice to say you don’t learn much just from reading books alone. I have learnt most of my skills from other working farriers in a practical manor, on horse’s with more than one person’s opinion to correct a problem.
I put an idea to the FRC five years ago, to set up a system to have our work checked, but after looking into it further, the cost would be too high, and because of the many variations and complex nature of the job, it would be impossible for it to work, because there are so many differing opinions of what constituents a good job. Today I went to put a shoe back on to a horse taken off by a vet for puss in the foot. The owner told me that she had FOUR vets before from the same practice that couldn’t find the lameness. Yet a piece of glass had penetrated the sole just forward of the point of frog. When she gets her bill, I think she will ask herself why she didn’t call the farrier first. So now Tara before you continue attacking a few farriers, why don’t you find a veterinary surgeons website and ask them, who, or why, thy are not checked on the work and service they provide. By the way, very few vets understand conformation, and it's effects.
Finally, well done for showing some interest in this wonderful art of farriery, but please don’t think for one second, you and others who get on these equine courses know anything about the effects of a horse’s conformation, or shoeing the individual horse. Because after my apprenticeship and a further 35 years of shoeing day in, day out, I am still learning how to shoe horse’s.

Guest

Postby Guest » Wed Apr 20, 2005 7:54 am

Mr Tribe - I have read your posting about show ponies & the replies (not sure you could say that they were well informed!). And no, I am not saying that every horse is perfect and that all farriers are bad at their job. What I am saying is that there is too many horses that have a good confirmation and then have problems due to some bad farriery practices.


Mr Ford - I am not attacking the farriers who do their job well, but those who do the most awful jobs. As I said in previous postings, I trust my farrier first & my Vet second in lameness issues. Now if I was attacking ALL farriers, wouldn't this statement be more than a little stupid to say the least!

As to your client who contacted her Vet before you, all I can hope is that she has learnt her lesson and will be contacting you first in future!!

My whole point about what I originally wrote was that the concept of trimming and nailing a piece of metal onto a horses hoof has changed immensely and it does seem from corresponding with other horse owners through discussion forums is that unfortnately this change is not being seen to be included in the training of farriers. People are also angry that when complaints are made to the FRC, that these seem to be ignored.

I'm not for one instance saying that after just one course that I would know more than someone of your experience Mr Ford, but would you not agree that the more owners unstand about the very complex structure of a horses hoof and above, the more the rogue farriers will be put out of business, and decent, hardworking farriers (who ARE top tradesmen) will be the only farriers available to us?

A question for you though - Do you think it would be a better practice that all the different versions of shoeing a horse and the different trimming options are available to training farriers under one roof (so to speak), for these farriers/trimmers to specialise in from the start if that is the specific area that they chose? So that every person who deals with a horses hoof has the same primary lessons in the hoof (and horse) function and then would go on to learn the HPT trim (if they believe that barefoot is the way), or learn to rim shoe (i.e. the art of heating metal to the correct temperature to be able to manipulate the shoe to the shape needed) or even to shoe cold, with the trim being the primary target (such with the cytek or EDSS shoeing systems)?

This way the FRC, WCF or who-ever would still retain the right to licence farriers in the UK - all of who would have the same basic understanding?

tara

FRC

Postby tara » Wed Apr 20, 2005 7:57 am

Opps that was me above!!

Sorry!!

john ford
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 7:20 pm
Location: Pucklechurch, Bristol.

Postby john ford » Wed Apr 20, 2005 8:15 pm

Tara, you are still missing the point. I couldn’t care less what name you give a shoe, or a particular type of trim. The basic principles of farriery have not changed for hundreds of years, and the basic principles are the main structures of which all farriers have to be taught, before they ever nail on a shoe. And the basic’s are sound perfect foot preparation. Without this basic knowledge, no matter what type of shoe one places on the foot, it will not be correct, if the basic foot dressing is not correct. Again it isn’t just the type of shoe that you put on, but the correct way the shoe is fitted, to a well balanced foot. You also seem to think that we are not taught anything apart from normal shoeing, again you could not be further from the point.
Funny how you still think we farriers have got many things wrong in our training, when all we do is attend to the horse’s lower limb. Yet you can get a cat and dog vet to vet a horse for you, and because he/she has MRCVS after the name, you hang on to every word they utter. I take it you wouldn't agree that there are alot of bad vets in this country, or is it just farriers?

tara

Postby tara » Thu Apr 21, 2005 7:32 am

I have had to deal with Vets who have failed my horses miserably, so yes I will agree that there are some Vets out there (as there are some farriers) that should not be dealing with equines.

You yourself quoted "I put an idea to the FRC five years ago, to set up a system to have our work checked, but after looking into it further, the cost would be too high, and because of the many variations and complex nature of the job, it would be impossible for it to work, because there are so many differing opinions of what constituents a good job".

Why did you try to do this? I think it's because you are a proud man and are proud of your skills, yet see the shoddy workmanship that some farriers leave people like yourself to clear up.

Maybe I'm wrong about this. Yes there are many varying examples of good work, but a badly shod hoof shows.

I can see that whatever ideas horse owners may conceive to try to keep that equine world up to date with the 21st Century, the 'Old School' will try to keep the doors closed to new ideas.

Mr Ford, with this I will bid you farewell.

With deepest regrets

tara

Jenny Mac

Postby Jenny Mac » Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:11 am

Well said Fordy!

Fred

Postby Fred » Thu Apr 28, 2005 10:18 am

Well Jenny - what a muppet youve shown your self to be to.

All the girls trying to do is put some confidense an respect back into a trade that is thought of as being run by a load of foul mouthed men that dont give a toss about the horses or owners that they deal with.

No wonder that so many people are going bare foot with there horses.

Jenny Mac

Postby Jenny Mac » Wed May 04, 2005 9:23 am

[quote]Well Jenny - what a muppet youve shown your self to be to.

.........being run by a load of foul mouthed men that dont give a toss .......quote]

Well Fred - you are hardly an example of reason and politeness are you! Pots and kettles !!!
I think that John Ford is putting forward the opinion of most farriers and his point is clear and straightforward. Who do you want taking a knife to your horse's feet - someone who has trained for 4+ years and is held to account for his actions and behaviour by a regulatory body (whatever your opinion of the FRC!), or someone who has done a few hours training (probably by someone who has no REAL qualifications themselves) and is evangelical about the latest fad - taking no account of the horse's history, job or conformation. I know what I think - however foul mouthed that person might be. I don't need to call you names - your words are proof enough of what you are!

csc

Postby csc » Thu May 12, 2005 6:11 am

tara this is getting into a slanging match , with regard to your original question of the 18 april although we have our differences with the f.r.c you must accept that farriers have a great deal of experience and all at some time look at other methods, especially the newly qualified, marketing plays on important part, and i see many owners being led, mostly detrimentally to the horse who is the one who's welfare is at stake we need registration tightened to stop cowboys with no experience not opened further to tom, dick and harry. IT IS TO PROTECT THE HORSE WHO SHOULD BE OUR CONCERN not company profits or egos.


Return to “horseowners discussion board”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest