The growing barefoot horse movement raises welfare questions about whether removing hoof protection benefits horses in competitive contexts or increases injury risk depending on individual foot quality.
The barefoot versus shod debate is genuinely complex with welfare implications on both sides. Poorly applied shoeing can cause problems. Conversely, competing barefoot horses on inappropriate surfaces causes pain and potential injury. The welfare-positive approach is individualized - assessing each horse's hoof quality, competition surface, and work intensity to determine whether barefoot, booted, or shod options best serve that individual. Neither blanket advocacy for barefoot nor reflexive shoeing of all horses represents optimal welfare-centered decision-making.