Harness for working animal – Horse boots
Reexamination Certificate
2001-03-23
2003-02-11
Swiatek, Robert P. (Department: 3643)
Harness for working animal
Horse boots
Reexamination Certificate
active
06516594
ABSTRACT:
TECHNICAL FIELD
The present invention relates generally to hoof protection, and more particularly to shoes for hoofed animals such as horses, ponies, mules, cattle, and the like.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
Horses have been shod with metal shoes held in place by nails since the advent of the Iron Age. Horse shoeing was necessary to protect and support the hoof while horses engaged in activities beyond their natural ability due to the softness of their feet. Since horses hooves are uniquely shaped, iron offered several advantages. Iron is easily shaped, and may be affixed to the hoof with metal nails to accommodate a horse's individual needs. Also, iron protects the hoof from chipping and increases the sole's distance from the ground. In addition to these advantages, the shape of the horseshoe effectively increases the weight bearing surface area of the hoof, which, in turn, increases a horse's stability.
Today's domestic horse is faced with very different challenges than those encountered in nature, such as the presence of slippery road surfaces and the need to engage in high-performance sports. While steel shoes offer a horse a high degree of protection and support, they have many shortcomings. First, steel shoes generally lack traction on hard surfaces, and are poor shock absorbers. Second, steel shoes are too heavy for certain horses and may cause problems such as interference with limb motion. Third, steel shoes generally require installation by a person possessing specialized skills such as a professional farrier. Fourth, nails present an inherent risk of injury due to misplacement in the hoof. Fifth, horseshoes may be shaped incorrectly and may alter the horse's natural movement and cause damage over time. Sixth, use of the wrong size of shoe may lead to a host of hoof and leg ailments. Finally, all shoes affixed with nails run the risk of being thrown with devastating results if the shoe is ripped from the hoof, injuring both the hoof wall and the limb. Over time, attempts have been made to address these problems with varying degrees of success.
Aluminum horseshoes help to solve the issues of traction, shock absorption, weight, and, to a lesser extent, support. Aluminum shoes are made in three basic varieties, racehorse shoes, orthopedic shoes, and therapeutic shoes. However, aluminum shoes have several shortcomings, including short useful life and high cost.
Equine boots, such as those provided in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,692,569; 5,588,288; 5,528,885; 4,174,754; 3,732,929; and 3,703,209 provide various examples of alternative devices that address the issues of traction and shock absorption without the use of traditional horseshoes. Some of the general characteristics common to these devices are as follows. They are designed to provide for easy installation, and are primarily utilized to provide a temporary solution for a missing or thrown shoe. They fit over the hoof, and are generally made from solid rubber, or other synthetic material with treads on the sole portion. While useful temporarily, these devices are typically heavy and clumsy, and substantially detract from a horse's performance. In some cases, the added weight of these devices causes interference between the horse's limbs. Additionally, the typically awkward shape of these devices makes them difficult for riders to carry, despite the fact that carrying them as a field-based horseshoe replacement is one of principle reasons they are purchased. Equine boots also tighten around the hoof with closures that can be clogged, damaged or broken by rocks, debris, or rugged terrain. In addition to excessive weight and clumsy design, these devices also tend to rub the bulbs of the hoof heels. This may cause sensitivity, bleeding and lameness in the heel area, rendering the horse unusable. Equine boots come in a variety of sizes but in only one standard shape, making them extremely difficult to install and to properly conform to hooves that differ from the standard design. To address this flaw, silicone inserts and adhesives are used to keep some of these devices affixed to the hoof making them extremely difficult to remove. The materials typically used in equine boots make it difficult for horse owners to modify them.
To avoid the need for nails, glue-on shoes have also been developed, which attach to the hoof through the use of tabs that are affixed to the hoof wall. There are generally two varieties of glue-on shoes. The first variety includes shoes fabricated from plastic, polyurethane, or other synthetic material that cannot be shaped to accommodate the unique shape of a horse's hoof. Some glue-on shoes of this variety, however, are made from softer materials that bend against the wall of the hoof, but which fail to conform to the wall's shape. This design absorbs impact, provides some traction, and eliminates the issues surrounding nailed shoes. However, the tabs of these devices are easily scraped from the wall when the horse negotiates uneven terrain or encounters deep footing. Additionally, soft glue-on shoes typically lack adequate support, as they fail to conform properly to the hoof wall. Another drawback of glue-on shoes is that they must be installed by a person having special skills such as a farrier, and are thus costly and inconvenient to install. The second type of glue-on shoe is similar to the first, except that it contains a soft metal core, typically aluminum. This addition was intended to allow unique shaping on an anvil or other bending apparatus. This customization is difficult because the hammer tends to bounce off the outer material during the shaping process, with little or no change to the core. As a result, a shaper must strike harder, resulting in an increased chance of damaging the outer material during the shaping process. Because of the design, sharp bends are difficult, if not impossible, to accomplish.
Polyurethane or synthetic shoes are affixed to the hoof with nails. They address issues related to shock absorption, traction and support. These devices have a standard shape and cannot be adequately fashioned to accommodate unique hoof shapes. This results in shoe material extending beyond a horse's normal support surface, increasing the risk of horseshoe loss resulting from snagging. Polyurethane or synthetic shoe varieties sometimes include a metal core help to solve this problem by allowing for size alteration via grinding. However, if the metal core becomes exposed, the shoe's effective life decreases substantially. Synthetic shoes come in a variety of styles (including bar shoes, bar shoes with clips, open shoes, and open shoes with clips) and sizes, but are not easily adaptable to the unique shape and size of an individual horse's hoofs. These devices also have the disadvantages associated with nails such as lameness due to nail misplacement, tearing of the hoof wall when the shoe is thrown, and the necessity of professional installation.
Hard facing caulks were developed as further attempts to adapt steel shoes to situations where horses require traction. Hard facing is a method by which a farrier or skilled professional spreads expensive high carbon metal chips (typically borium or titanium) contained in an adhesive flux over a horseshoe's impact points. This extends the life of the shoe and increases traction on hard surfaces. The primary problem with hard facing is localized shock. Over time the areas hoof that are beneath the hard facing begin to delaminate. This increases the chance of abscesses, seedy toe, white line disease, and Laminitis. While this device, when functioning properly, is effective for achieving traction, it may cause injury to an animal's joints, tendons, and ligaments.
Horseshoe pads as exemplified in U.S. Pat. No. 5,199,498; rim pads as exemplified in U.S. Pat. No. 4,565,250; and therapeutic pads as exemplified in U.S. Pat. No. 4,775,011 are used to reduce shock, prevent bruising and address therapeutic issues such as ring bone, side bone, Laminitis, navicular disease, tendon and ligament
Clark James England
Hart William E.
Swiatek Robert P.
Tope-McKay & Associates
LandOfFree
Protective device for shod animals does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Protective device for shod animals, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Protective device for shod animals will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3173400