Not your horse, so you don't get the final say. If you want to experiment on letting a horse go barefoot, buy one of your own.
You have a free lease, and think you have the right to tell the horse's owner what should or shouldn't be done with the animal? No, you do not.
If you don't agree with shoes, then why did you take on a horse whose owner wants him shod all the way around?
You're showing a marked lack of respect for the horse's owner, and your arrogance quite simply astounds me.
According to original post "I pay full board and all other costs on the horse"
. In my area full board is at least
the same (often much more) than just a lease to ride. That's besides other costs (like dewormers etc.). That's in NO WAY could be called a FREE LEASE.
Also "the only cost that is still on the owner is half of the cost of farrier"
. So OP
is paying the other half
of the cost of the farrier. Keeping shoes on where I live ranges from $120 to $200 (depending on whether just fronts or all 4) vs just $40 for the trim. So personally I don't see any problem with 1) getting 2nd opinion from the different farrier if shoes are needed, and 2) talking to the owner asking nicely why she's against going barefoot (may be there are good reasons, but may be just rip-off on farrier side).
Some comments in this thread are simply rude. The way the situation sounds to me the owner
of the horse got a very good deal
on owning/keeping the horse practically for free
while going through tough times. How many people on this forum were looking into similar opportunity while going through financial hardship? Quite a number I have to say. And if someone is paying pretty much everything for my horse such a minor thing as asking if the horse can go barefoot is nothing
compared to the money saved.