The 35th Random TPBM (Waiting for Spring) Chat Thread

short5 wrote in post #9785716
Well first off I imagine they had some know how as far as foot care. Also you are correct unshod horses will wear their feet down if they roam as horses naturally do or are ridden regularly. Their horses were tough guys and only the ones with good feet lived. Today we breed horses so much you get guys with not great feet. That is okay if they are shod but they would not make it as an Indian's horse. They also probably only jumped or ran hard if they needed too as well as did not go on paved roads. We use horses now as sport horses and are hard on what may not be ideal hooves. There are very valid arguments for not having shoes. If you can do it and your horses stay sound it is better for them as far as circulation and other factors.
I don't know much about "primitive" horsemanship but you got me interested.

^^^ That, too.

ewww Beeer sauce

Miniflash wrote in post #9785748
ewww Beeer sauce

Better than bear sauce.

dang. Now I'm HUNGRY. pfft.

We went to lunch today and it was a good for your lunch that tasted good. We decided to skip dinner. But after all this food talk, my tumbly is rumbly.

Edited, as not everyone likes to read the sad side.
And it was a tad long.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

puddlepirate44 wrote in post #9785711
A very good question, Wool. Allow me to answer that. The Native Americans discovered early on, both by experience and by looking it up on Wiki, that hoof maintenance was essential for the health of the horse. There were many ways by which they would maintain proper hoof care. One would be to use the terrain to wear them down, like Nature's own pedipaw for horses. Another way would be to train the horse to do its own nails. The indigenous tribes would work with the horse until it was able to hold and use its own Trim or Revlon hoof trimmer. Usually, however, the most common route the Native Americans would use would be to assign someone within their camps to deal with the issue. It was a talent that was handed down generation to generation. They were usually called "One Who Does Horse Nails On Fridays Noon To Three".

Looks good. I prefer the "Beer Sauce" instead. Only stipulation I have is that the sauce comes in a glass jar, not a can.

I shall now stab my brane repeatedly with my trusty spork.

short5 wrote in post #9785716
Well first off I imagine they had some know how as far as foot care. Also you are correct unshod horses will wear their feet down if they roam as horses naturally do or are ridden regularly. Their horses were tough guys and only the ones with good feet lived. Today we breed horses so much you get guys with not great feet. That is okay if they are shod but they would not make it as an Indian's horse. They also probably only jumped or ran hard if they needed too as well as did not go on paved roads. We use horses now as sport horses and are hard on what may not be ideal hooves. There are very valid arguments for not having shoes. If you can do it and your horses stay sound it is better for them as far as circulation and other factors.
I don't know much about "primitive" horsemanship but you got me interested.

All I know about horse hooves is what you have shared with us in your photo essays. Between chasing buffalo and the Duke, I was under the impression the indians rode their ponies pretty hard.

I like my Bear Sauced

Woolburr wrote in post #9785789
I shall now stab my brane repeatedly with my trusty spork.

My work here is done.

Sorry for the novel.

wow. That's really sad. I can't imagine how hard that is. But I understand. I can honestly say I would not want quantity of life, if my quality sucked.

I just wondered how it would go if something like that happened.

Also (if you aren't tired of me picking your brain) are you guys liable if someone adopts a dog thinking it's safe and it turns out to not be and does someone an injury? Just wondered.

cfpackerfan wrote in post #9785809
Sorry for the novel.

I appreciated it. I wanted to know. Sorry if it bored others. But really, we all know that there are two sides to everything sometimes 3 (good bad & ugly) that have to be addressed no matter what you are involved in. I just wondered how those things were dealt with. I appreciate your taking the time to answer.

puddlepirate44 wrote in post #9785808
My work here is done.

Why do I think you are just getting warmed up?

Permagrin wrote in post #9785816
wow. That's really sad. I can't imagine how hard that is. But I understand. I can honestly say I would not want quantity of life, if my quality sucked.

I just wondered how it would go if something like that happened.

Also (if you aren't tired of me picking your brain) are you guys liable if someone adopts a dog thinking it's safe and it turns out to not be and does someone an injury? Just wondered.

Well, in a perfect world, no. There is some legalese on our adoption form (and foster application as well) that states that we cannot be held responsible for a dog's temperament, or anything that it does after being adopted.

We haven't had any issues yet, and we do try to screen the dogs that we take in. We won't take in aggressive dogs, but sometimes we don't know they are until we've already got them, ya know?

short5 wrote in post #9785768
Better than bear sauce.

I concur!

cfpackerfan wrote in post #9785787
She'll be waiting for us over the Rainbow Bridge. And I would hope that she'd thank us for the decision that we made.

Cat, knowing you and your commitment, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that you made the right decision.

Miniflash wrote in post #9785790
I like my Bear Sauced

Watch it though, I can get frisky.

cfpackerfan wrote in post #9785832
Well, in a perfect world, no. There is some legalese on our adoption form (and foster application as well) that states that we cannot be held responsible for a dog's temperament, or anything that it does after being adopted.

We haven't had any issues yet, and we do try to screen the dogs that we take in. We won't take in aggressive dogs, but sometimes we don't know they are until we've already got them, ya know?

Yeah, I know. Plus (at least our dogs have) dogs personalities change as they grow older (whether it's calmer or more assertive or whatever) so I wondered how you could possibly know enough to make you "liable" for that sort of thing. But in this litigious age, I didn't know if it wouldn't matter anyway.