The farrier–vet relationship

Our profession emerged from farriery in the later stages of the Age of Enlightenment, when an emphasis on reason replaced a reliance on tradition. In France, and progressively elsewhere in Europe, animal owners were keen to see best practice incorporated into a veterinary curriculum that led to standardised, higher quality treatments, particularly of horses [1]. From the start, there was a debate about ‘admissions policies’, with the Principal of the London Veterinary College in the early 19th century, following the lead of Claude Bourgelat, the founder of the profession, declaring that ‘the sons of farriers make the best practitioners; medical men the worst’ [2]. This tension between the traditional craft aspect and the scientific perspective has re-emerged in each generation up to the present day, and, of course, represents a false dichotomy: the ‘consummate professional’ is able to reason from a sound evidence base and act appropriately and competently in the management of animal wellbeing. Both ‘the Art and the Science‘ are important, and this needs to be recognised in the learning journey that lasts for the duration of a professional career. From the start, there was a tension between the farriers and the new breed of veterinarians. A series of 4 prints, thought to be sponsored by the farriers, was produced by Francis Jukes in 1792, purportedly describing lectures at the new London Veterinary College, but actually caricaturing and ridiculing the Principal and his pupils for their ineptness and lack of practical skills. In contrast, many veterinarians liked to see themselves as ‘farriersplus’ and throughout the 19th century used various styles, such as ‘veterinary surgeon and shoeing smith’ and ‘veterinary surgeon, farrier and cow leech’. This rivalry and, at times, open resentment, with representatives of each group criticising each other to their clients, continued for the best part of 200 years, and even persists in some quarters to the present day. However, although up until the 20th century it was recognised that the individual veterinarian could, at least at a basic level, master all the skills of the farrier (the exemption for veterinarians in the Farriers Registration Act 1975 is a reminder of the overlap), as in medicine, the highest quality care can only be delivered by a multidisciplinary clinical team, with each playing a different expert role [3]. The equine practitioner is increasingly skilled at the recognition and diagnosis of lameness, the bulk of which, as we all know, occurs in the foot, and the farrier has become more skilled at trimming to improve the functional shape of the foot, and remedial shoeing and hoof repair, using a variety of materials and methods for securing these. The main barrier to achieving the best result for each individual horse is deficient communication [4]. There is no substitute, particularly in complex cases, for a meeting involving the owner, farrier and veterinarian, all respecting each other and their roles, around the horse, to develop and execute an agreed and fully understood plan of action. Not only does this guarantee that the initial solution is optimal, it also ensures that subsequent management and any modifications of the treatment plan are soundly based and that all parties will follow through on their respective responsibilities. […]