Part 1

Essays On Horse Subjects

BY F. C. GRENSIDE, V. S.

[Illustration]

NEW YORK PRIVATELY PRINTED 1907

Copyright, 1907, by F. C. GRENSIDE

PREFACE

Having been requested to contribute from time to time, articles for papers devoted to the horse, I have an accumulation of these that I thought it might not be amiss to publish under the title of “Essays on Horse Subjects.”

Many of these subjects I have never seen any literature upon, and these Essays are largely the result of twenty-eight years’ experience as a practical horseman and veterinarian. Covering as they do the borderland between the provinces of the veterinarian and horseman, they relate to subjects which have been to a large extent neglected by both. This fact is my excuse for publishing them. F. C. G.

CONTENTS

PAGE

QUALITY IN HORSES 1

HEREDITARY UNSOUNDNESS IN HORSES 8

HITCHING IN HORSES 20

HORSESHOEING AND HORSES’ HOOFS 25

CORRECT ACTION IN HORSES 34

FORGING, OVER-REACHING AND CLICKING 41

INTERFERING, STRIKING, CUTTING OR BRUSHING IN HORSES 46

THE HORSE’S MOUTH 54

TURNING HORSES OUT 64

BITTING, SHOEING AND CONDITIONING FOR ACTION 69

EXERCISE FOR HORSES 90

THE HORSE’S COAT IN SPRING, SUMMER, AUTUMN AND WINTER 98

THE CAUSES OF DIGESTIVE DISORDERS 105

THE USE OF BURRS ON HORSES’ BITS 124

QUALITY IN HORSES

There is no subject upon which there seems to be more diversity of opinion amongst horsemen than as to what constitutes “quality” in a horse.

It is a term in very common use, but if you ask a number of horsemen what they mean by it you are sure to get a variety of answers. One will say it means breeding; another, conformation; another, finish; another, “class”; another, symmetry; another, individuality; another, an accentuation of all fine points; another, magnetism; another, refinement of lines or perhaps a combination of some or all of these attributes. Some say that quality is recognizable, but indefinable and unexplainable.

The term “quality” is an abstract one, indicating a special attribute in an individual, just as being well bred, well conformed and possessing finish are attributes of some individuals. When one says that a horse has “quality,” one means that he has a special attribute which may or may not be combined with any or all of the others mentioned. Of course there are varying degrees of “quality,” so that the term can only be used in a comparative sense. In the light classes of horses it is very often used synonymously with breeding. Certainly the more warm-blooded a horse is the higher the degree of quality he is apt to possess, but one may take two equally well bred thoroughbreds and find one showing evidence of the possession of a higher degree of quality than the other. So that breeding and quality do not mean the same thing. Neither does quality signify the possession of symmetry, good conformation, finish or “class.” A horse may be defective in any or all of these respects and still possess a high degree of “quality.” He may be fiddle-headed, lop-eared, ewe-necked, sway-backed, flat-sided, slack-loined, cow-hocked and calf-kneed, and yet show much “quality.”

Much confusion is caused by using the term “quality” synonymously with “class.” Horses are spoken of as high-class, medium-class and so on, indicating the degree of excellence which they possess for the purpose for which they are best suited. Two individuals can be taken as an example, showing equal “quality,” but one of them, on account of better conformation, more style and action, may be worth twice as much as the other. Consequently he is a higher-class individual, although the two are equal in “quality.” So that “quality” and “class” do not mean the same.

If, then, “quality” does not mean breeding or conformation or symmetry or finish or “class,” or a combination of any or all of these, what does it mean? It is an easier matter to explain what constitutes “quality” than it is to give a concise and at the same time comprehensive definition of what it is. It may not inaptly be defined as _fineness in contradistinction to coarseness_, or as _fineness of texture_. How frequently one hears a prospective purchaser say to a dealer: “He is a very nice horse, but very light in bone.” The dealer almost invariably replies: “Yes, but his bone is of good ‘quality,’” and still further endeavors to make the statement more emphatic by saying that the bone is so dense, so compact, so ivory-like, that a cubic inch of it will weigh more than a cubic inch of some other horse that has indisputably more bone. It is a fact that the bone of some horses is much more dense or compact, and is, as the dealer expresses it, of better “quality” than that of some others.

What causes this greater density in the bones of some individuals than in those of others? We have to look to the elements of which bone is composed for the determining cause. The animal tissues are made up of fluids and solids. The solids are composed of three simple elements, viz.: granules, fibres and cells that are only determinable by means of a microscope. This difference of quality is most easily determinable with regard to the element fibres. The fibres that form part of the tissues of an individual of high “quality” are more slender, more compact and tougher than those of one of less “quality.” One can appreciate this even with the naked eye, in examining the walls of horses’ hoofs. In a horse possessing a fairly high degree of “quality,” the fibres which run from the coronet down, in forming the basis of the wall, are most palpably finer than in those of the wall of a coarser individual. So with the bone; the elements that combine to form it in a horse of high “quality” are finer and more highly organized than in those of a coarser individual.

What you find in regard to quality in the bones of an individual, you find pervading all the tissues of his organism. You do not find a horse with coarse bone and fine skin, or coarse skin and fine bone. If the bone is fine or has “quality,” the muscles, tendons, ligaments, skin, hoofs, hair and all the other tissues which enter into his composition are equally fine or are of equal “quality.” The “quality” of a horse’s bone may be perfect, but undue or disproportionate length or other defective form, or faulty relationship of one bone to another, may make his conformation very imperfect indeed, so that it is difficult to understand why some horsemen think there is any relationship between “quality” and conformation.

A high degree of “quality” is apt to be associated with defects, so that one might almost state that a horse can have too much quality. Size, or more correctly, substance, is strength, other things being equal. A horse with a high degree of quality may be so lacking in substance as to impair his power for the performance of work or for severe tests of endurance or speed. He may be so light-limbed that he cannot stand the “wear and tear” of hard work and remain practically sound. We often find horses that are superfine with disproportionately small feet, and every experienced horseman knows that it is seldom that such horses do much work and remain sound. A horse, however, cannot have too much “quality,” providing it is combined with sufficient substance for the purpose for which he is required. A high degree of “quality” and sufficient substance are most important attributes in contributing to perfection in horseflesh.

There are many every-day evidences of the ill consequences of deficient quality in horseflesh. You hear a horseman say that a horse has soft legs, and he points out an individual inclined to fill about the skin of the fetlocks, to show windgalls which extend up the sheaths of his back tendons, and whose hocks are inclined to be puffy throughout. If he gets a bruise or injury of any kind to the skin of his legs, the consequent swelling is apt to extend and is inclined to remain. Abrasions, cuts, cracks and scratches heal rather tardily. Concussion and direct injury to bone are very much inclined to result in bony enlargement, such as splints, that spread out and have not well-defined limits. Standing in the stable too much readily produces stocking of the legs; there is a predisposition to greasy legs. The feet are inclined to be flat, large and easily bruised.

These tendencies show coarseness of tissue and low organization, a meagre blood supply and inactive nutrition. Horses with “quality” also develop windgalls and splints if subjected to sufficient cause, but their character differs from those of coarse horses in being clean-cut and well-defined and not having the tendency to spread out. A horse with “quality” may have a bog spavin, but it will show as a well-defined prominence and not as a round puffiness of the hock throughout.

Draft horsemen talk “quality” just as much or more than those who have to do with the light breeds. The difference in the “quality” of individuals of the draft breeds is just as well marked as in the light breeds. Take for instance a Clydesdale or Shire, both of which breeds have a considerable quantity of long hair on the back of the legs, which is often referred to as “feather.” If this hair is found to be fine and silky, not coarse and wiry, you will find that it is possessed by an individual that shows “quality” throughout. His skin will not be coarse and beefy, his legs will be fluted, his bone will have a tendency to flatness, showing density of structure. The hair of his mane and tail will be fine, like that at the back of his legs. The eminences and depressions formed by the bones of his head will be comparatively finely chiseled. He, in fact, shows “quality” when compared to other members of the same breed that are equally well bred as far as possessing the characteristics of the breed, and as far as the stud book is an indication of breeding. This is a further example of the fallacy of the view that “quality” and breeding are the same thing.

HEREDITARY UNSOUNDNESS IN HORSES

The question of hereditary unsoundness in all its aspects is by no means an open book to the horse-breeder, but it is one well worth studying by him, if as thorough a knowledge as is possible of this subject will tend to lessen the percentage of unsound stock produced. Of the various causes which tend to make horse-raising disappointing and unprofitable, this is one of the important ones, if not the most important. Literally speaking, it is not so much the inheritance of a disease itself that we fear, but it is the tendency to the development of this disease. Comparatively few foals are dropped with unsoundnesses, that impair their value ultimately, but there are many that are foaled with a predisposition to the development of unsoundness. The study of this subject, then, practically resolves itself into a consideration of what constitutes the predisposing causes of unsoundness.

They may be divided into several heads, viz: Defective formation, defective quality, and insufficient quantity of tissue and temperament. Within certain limits, the practised eye of the observant horseman can determine in sire or dam the existence of these defects that are transmissible to the offspring, and predispose it to the development of unsoundness.

It is claimed by some authorities that some horses and mares possess a peculiar habit of body, an indefinable something about them which predisposes them and also their progeny to the development of some unsoundness. Such cases are rare, however, and their supposed existence is very frequently the result of the inability of an observer to appreciate the existence of detectible predisposing causes. If this indefinable something is the determining cause of predisposition in some cases, then the only positive evidence of its existence is the developed unsoundness. This theory presupposes that none of the detectible predisposing causes already mentioned exist in sufficient degree in such cases, so that when subjects of them are subjected to more than ordinarily exciting ones they would develop unsoundness unless the peculiar habit of body exists. It is also an acknowledgment of the helplessness of breeders in a considerable degree to prevent breeding colts with an inherent tendency to unsoundness. No matter how capable and careful a breeder is he will produce a certain percentage of unsound stock, due to heredity, but with care it can be reduced to a small one. Many breeders use a sire from convenience or from some quality he possesses, such as speed, action, style or disposition, knowing they are taking a chance of perpetuating some tendency to unsoundness that he possesses. Favorite mares are also bred, with a disregard to the well-established principle that “like begets like,” even when they are the victims of hereditary unsoundness or a strong predisposition to it. The successful breeder must divest himself of all sentiment and be capable of appreciating all defects which constitute predisposition to unsoundness. Of the predisposing causes, defective formation is the most fertile one. The predisposition to navicular disease is hereditary. Horses with narrow, deep heels are predisposed to it. Some observers may say: “But look at the large number of horses one sees with narrow, deep heels that have not got navicular disease.” Of course, such an argument is fallacious, as there may be many compensating conditions that will tend to neutralize the tendency to this disease in some subjects. A horse with the formation of foot described, even although he is subjected to the exciting causes of hard, fast and steady work, and irrational and infrequent shoeing, may be endowed by nature with a very light step. Nothing tends to prevent “wear and tear” of the legs and feet like light stepping. Here, then, is an example of an influence which tends to counterbalance the ill effects of a defective formation, but renders complicated the study of formation as a predisposing cause of unsoundness. One, then, has to weigh the influence of compensating conditions in determining the ill-consequences likely to result from defective formations of feet when transmitted to offspring. That defective formation of feet is handed down to progeny there is no manner of doubt. The predisposition to ringbone is undoubtedly hereditary, and when the pastern is of good formation one seldom finds it unless it is the result of some extraordinarily exciting cause. The two extremes of long, light oblique pasterns, and the short, straight coarse ones, are both predisposed, the former from the tension to which the ligaments are subjected, and consequent tendency to sprain, and the latter from the increased tendency to concussion. As we proceed up the front leg we find defective formation in the neighborhood of the knee, predisposing to unsoundness. Many horses that are more or less knee-sprung are practically sound. Others become progressively weak and are decidedly unsound; so that we are not much amiss in characterizing the condition called knee-sprung as an hereditary unsoundness. A commission was appointed some years ago in England to make out a list of hereditary unsoundnesses. The list included navicular disease, ringbone, spavin, sidebone, periodic ophthalmia or moonblindness, and roaring. It will be observed that knee-sprung was not included. In order not to complicate matters they made the list as short as possible, and only included the most serious forms of unsoundness or those that are very obstinate in yielding to treatment or are incurable. Unsoundnesses such as knee-sprung, curb or splint, though the tendency to them is undoubtedly hereditary, were not included. This was because these conditions seldom permanently interfere with a horse’s practical soundness. A horse is what is called “tied in” below the knee when the leg immediately below that joint is narrower from before backwards, than it is just above the fetlock. In this condition the tendons behind the knee are not well developed, and are placed too close to the shank-bone at this point. This imperfect tendonous development in a front leg is not usually confined to the tendons behind the leg, called the flexor tendons, as an imperfect development of these tendons is usually associated with an impaired development of the tendons running down the front of the leg called the extensor tendons. Such a condition frequently results in shaky knees, and if the subject experiences hard work, he is likely to become progressively worse. In some cases the flexor tendons appear to be much better developed than the extensors, and in an individual so formed, particularly if he is inclined to stand with his forefeet well back under him, there is an inordinate strain on the extensors, leading to relaxation and a corresponding tendency to contraction of the flexors. Here we have a lack of balance between the extensors and flexors, and the result is a knee-sprung condition. Although shaky-kneed or knee-sprung horses are not frequently incapacitated for work, the breeder should not lose sight of the fact that this condition is apt to considerably depreciate a horse’s value in the market, particularly for some purposes, and he can seldom afford to ignore this fact. It is not intended to advise breeders never to breed to a sire that stands a little over in the knees, especially if sufficient cause can be assigned for it, but we should recommend them to be very wary about using sires and dams that show a congenital tendency to this defect. Purchasers of horses usually look with considerable disfavor on a horse that is at all knee-sprung. Personally, the writer would rather buy a horse for his own use that is a little forward in the knees than one that stands back in them or is what is called calf-kneed. A horse with the former defect is almost sure to be much more elastic in his step than one with the latter and, consequently, will not suffer to the same extent from the ill-effects of concussion. A calf-kneed horse is also much more likely to suffer from strains. Knee-sprung, unlike the other unsoundnesses given in the list of hereditary troubles, is not very infrequently congenital. Swan-necked horses and those with thick, coarse throttles are considered to be of the formations most liable to develop the defect of the wind called “roaring.” In Great Britain and Ireland and on the continent of Europe, breeders are usually very particular about avoiding roarers for breeding purposes. The climatic conditions there seem favorable to its development; but in this country it is not nearly so much to be feared, and one should not hold aloof from an otherwise desirable sire on account of his being a roarer, though it must be admitted that the predisposition to the trouble may be transmitted. The predisposition to periodic ophthalmia or moonblindness is handed down from parent to offspring, but it is not nearly so common in this country as it once was, when the sanitary conditions were not so good; and it may be that some care has been exercised in breeding, so as to avoid its propagation. The only appreciable evidence of a predisposition to this unsoundness, outside of the existence of the disease, is the small or what is called “pig eye.” The writer knew a sire well that had “pig eyes” but sound ones, and they remained sound throughout his long life, but certainly ten per cent. of his progeny developed moonblindness.

The tendency to string-halt is undoubtedly transmissible from parent to offspring. Horses with snappy hock action are most likely to develop it. Nowadays it is not feared nearly so much as it was formerly, for if it should develop, a very large percentage of cases are curable by a not very difficult and by no means dangerous operation, which consists in the cutting of a tendon. A change has taken place in the generally accepted view as to the nature of string-halt. It was considered a purely nervous malady until it was found that the cutting of a tendon would in many instances cure it.

Curb, although not, as I remember it, included in the list of hereditary unsoundnesses, is decidedly hereditary, as well as the predisposition to it. It is not an infrequent occurrence to find foals “dropped” with curbs which frequently disappear in a large measure. But there is always some trace of them remaining. It is the rarest possible occurrence to find a broad hock, and one with the tendon standing well out behind, with any sign of curb. Narrow hocks and those with the point dipped forward towards the body of the joint; a leg with small circumference immediately below the hock, or what is commonly called tied in; those with the back tendon not standing out posterior to the bone at the back and outer part of hock--in addition to these indications of weakness and tendency to curb, if the joint is crooked, or what is called sickle-shaped, the predisposition is much increased. Curb is not so very much feared by some breeders, as it seldom causes permanent lameness. It is, however, a great eyesore; it depreciates a horse’s value very considerably, and it is liable to cause recurring lameness.

Crooked hocks, unduly straight hocks, narrow hocks, small hocks, those bent inwards or outwards, are all of weak formation, and are consequently predisposed, amongst other unsoundnesses, to bone spavin. Even though a horse should happen to have a bone spavin, provided he has a strongly formed hock, it would be safer to take a chance of breeding to him than one with a sound hock but of weak formation. So far we have run over briefly most of the defective formations that predispose to serious hereditary unsoundness. We have divided the causes into four heads, the second one of which was “insufficient quantity.” The old saying, “Size is strength, others things being equal,” applies to a horse’s extremities. We frequently hear it said that such and such a horse has “plenty of timber under him.” By this is meant that the individual in question has sufficient substance in the various structures that make up his legs and feet to give them strength and ability to stand “wear and tear.”