Two Year Old With Tiny Feet !

Two Year Old With Tiny Feet !

Post by Terri Gerge » Mon, 25 Mar 1996 04:00:00


     My two year old mare,( truthfully she won't be two until mid may )
currently stands at 15.1 h at the withers and 15.3 at the rump, (growth
spurt). She is a Zippo bred Quarter Horse that is bred for western pleas-
ure, but has the stride, and body of a hunter.
     My problem is thst right now, despite her size, she is currently in
a size 00 shoe. Will her feet grow to match her body? I would like her to
have a minimum of a 0 shoe, and would be thrilled if she reaches a 1.
     Currently she is in training for the summer and fall futurities, and
will be shown both western and english next year, on the QH circuit.
     If anyone could answer my questions, I would be very grateful.
Thanks!!

---

Public Access Internet
The University of Lethbridge

 
 
 

Two Year Old With Tiny Feet !

Post by Evalle » Mon, 25 Mar 1996 04:00:00

Not to criticize any one, but I sure wish society would get to the point
in this world that " you don't start riding that animal until it is
physicaly ready!!!"

 
 
 

Two Year Old With Tiny Feet !

Post by Corey Lee Bish » Tue, 26 Mar 1996 04:00:00

: Not to criticize any one, but I sure wish society would get to the point
: in this world that " you don't start riding that animal until it is
: physicaly ready!!!"

Oh, yes, I get very upset at these folks who think they MUST start their
two-year-old.  Then the horse is seven, has navicular, and they wonder
why!!!!

I don't care HOW big a two-year-old is, they are not a mature horse.

For example, go to your local junior high school.  Take a look at the
kids walking out the door.  You will see boys with heavy beards, others
that are half their size.  Girls that look like they are twenty, others
that look like small children.  Yet if you were to examine their bones
they would all display the same bone development, all the same bone 'age.'

It's the same for horses, they are NOT A PHYICALLY MATURE ANIMAL at
age two!!!

Yet we have folks out there riding those two year olds (and even younger)
jumping THREE year olds......  And I won't even get started on these two
year old race horses of which about 95% are crippled by age three.

Sue

--
"Inconceivable!"
"You keep using that word.  I don' think it means
what you think it means."    _The Princess Bride_
"Never underestimate the power of stupidity."  Robert Heinlein

 
 
 

Two Year Old With Tiny Feet !

Post by John Fish » Tue, 26 Mar 1996 04:00:00



Quote:

>Yet we have folks out there riding those two year olds (and even younger)
>jumping THREE year olds......  And I won't even get started on these two
>year old race horses of which about 95% are crippled by age three.

I don't like the idea of racing two year olds, either... but I thin
that 95% is way too high a cripple rate.  What study are you citing on this?

Thanks!

JOhn

Quote:
>Sue

>--
>"Inconceivable!"
>"You keep using that word.  I don' think it means
>what you think it means."    _The Princess Bride_
>"Never underestimate the power of stupidity."  Robert Heinlein

 
 
 

Two Year Old With Tiny Feet !

Post by Mary Heal » Wed, 27 Mar 1996 04:00:00



Quote:



>: >
>: >Yet we have folks out there riding those two year olds (and even younger)
>: >jumping THREE year olds......  And I won't even get started on these two
>: >year old race horses of which about 95% are crippled by age three.

>: >
>: I don't like the idea of racing two year olds, either... but I thin
>: that 95% is way too high a cripple rate.  What study are you citing on this?

>Sorry, I was just making a guess.  But I would say that it might well be
>in that ball park.  Is Tom Ivers out there?  Does he have any studies as
>to laming rate in two year old t-breds?

There's probably no objective data on "laming rate".  But you can
probably find numbers to get a "percent raced".  Assuming that
roughly 30,000 TBs are registered a year, a 5% "percent raced" would
be .05*30000 = 1,500 2-yr-olds raced.  Is this high?  Low?  Of
course, the 30,000 registered includes animals that were never bred
to race (pleasure horses, for example).

Probably a more accurate measure of "breakdown" would be 3-yr-olds
vs. 2-yr-olds from the previous year.  Some 3-yr-olds would not have
been raced as 2-yr-olds, though, so this number would not be
entirely accurate either.  You might, for example, have data that
shows more 3-yr olds racing than 2-yr olds the year before
(n3/n2>1.0).  And horses can be retired for reasons that are not
entirely health related (case of the 'slows', horse sold for
delinquent training fees, etc.).  OTOH, horses can have subclinical
health problems that contribute to "the slows" but aren't identified
as a specific lameness or injury.

Interesting question, but the data may be hard to get at.
--
Mary & the Ames (Iowa, USA) National Zoo:
 Raise a Fund ("Regis", 11 yo TB); ANZ Sam-I-Am ("Sam", 6 yo ACDx);
 ANZ Noah Doll, CGC, OFA Good ("Noah", 3 yo ACD); kitties from h*ll;

 
 
 

Two Year Old With Tiny Feet !

Post by Corey Lee Bish » Wed, 27 Mar 1996 04:00:00



: >
: >Yet we have folks out there riding those two year olds (and even younger)
: >jumping THREE year olds......  And I won't even get started on these two
: >year old race horses of which about 95% are crippled by age three.

: >
: I don't like the idea of racing two year olds, either... but I thin
: that 95% is way too high a cripple rate.  What study are you citing on this?

Sorry, I was just making a guess.  But I would say that it might well be
in that ball park.  Is Tom Ivers out there?  Does he have any studies as
to laming rate in two year old t-breds?  

I have a friend who used to ride and train, she told me the break-down rate
is high.

And, if anyone ever saw the movie Casey's Shadow.....  

: Thanks!

: JOhn

: >Sue
: >
: >--
: >"Inconceivable!"
: >"You keep using that word.  I don' think it means
: >what you think it means."    _The Princess Bride_
: >"Never underestimate the power of stupidity."  Robert Heinlein

Sue
--
"Inconceivable!"
"You keep using that word.  I don' think it means
what you think it means."    _The Princess Bride_
"Never underestimate the power of stupidity."  Robert Heinlein

 
 
 

Two Year Old With Tiny Feet !

Post by Martha Selle » Thu, 28 Mar 1996 04:00:00

Quote:

>Not to criticize any one, but I sure wish society would get to the point
>in this world that " you don't start riding that animal until it is
>physicaly ready!!!"

I would go further, given these horrible lunge line classes
for yearlings.  Work is inappropriate for growing horses.
Even 10 minutes a day on a lunge can put a ton of stress on
joints, and tell me there is a single lunge line futurity
winner who limits it to 10 minutes.  Ha!

If a 2 year old has hips above his withers, he is not done
growing and you are damaging him by riding or lunging him.  
Or, you should pray he isn't done growing. ;-)

If you were preparing a horse for optimal performance from
8-18 (my 17yo jumps 5'), would you get on them at less than
24 months?  Even on a moderately fast developing breed?

With my asbestos suit on, I await scientific anecdotes of
the one horse you knew who was started at 21 months and kept
going sound til he dropped at 30. ;-)a

Martha

--
Martha Sellers
Oakland, California

 
 
 

Two Year Old With Tiny Feet !

Post by EASTERB » Tue, 23 Apr 1996 04:00:00


Quote:
(Martha Sellers) writes:


>>Not to criticize any one, but I sure wish society would get to the point
>>in this world that " you don't start riding that animal until it is
>>physicaly ready!!!"

>I would go further, given these horrible lunge line classes
>for yearlings.  Work is inappropriate for growing horses.
>Even 10 minutes a day on a lunge can put a ton of stress on
>joints, and tell me there is a single lunge line futurity
>winner who limits it to 10 minutes.  Ha!

>If a 2 year old has hips above his withers, he is not done
>growing and you are damaging him by riding or lunging him.  
>Or, you should pray he isn't done growing. ;-)

>If you were preparing a horse for optimal performance from
>8-18 (my 17yo jumps 5'), would you get on them at less than
>24 months?  Even on a moderately fast developing breed?

>With my asbestos suit on, I await scientific anecdotes of
>the one horse you knew who was started at 21 months and kept
>going sound til he dropped at 30. ;-)a

>Martha

>--
>Martha Sellers
>Oakland, California


There is so much early training you can do, that it is irresponsible to
ride them before they are three.  Ground work, basic saddling, standing
while mounting, and other "good manners" can be taught while they are two.
 Pony them on the trail with an older horse.  Just don't stress those
highly-bred bones and ligaments until they are three.  Ride them lightly
until they are four and then alittle more often and longer until they are
five.  With good care, your slow starter will give you twenty more years
of solid and sound use.  Considering the time it takes to make a good
horse, the extra years will be a real dividend in the long run.

Easterbee

 
 
 

Two Year Old With Tiny Feet !

Post by Janet Ratzlof » Tue, 23 Apr 1996 04:00:00

Quote:


> (Martha Sellers) writes: >
> >If a 2 year old has hips above his withers, he is not done
> >growing and you are damaging him by riding or lunging him.
> >Or, you should pray he isn't done growing. ;-)

I'm wondering how to tell if a horse is done growing.  I looked at a 3-yr old AQHA filly
tonite that is 14.2 right now but still has a babyish look about her.  I like her pretty
well as she seems very willing and gentle.  My daughter really wants a bigger horse
though...  She seems a little higher in the back end, but not much.  They said her
mother was about 15.1 and much stockier than the filly and that the filly just started
filling out this winter.