a question for Kelly Marks

[Queenbee]

I believe it was "Naturally" who cleared it with H and H admin that Kelly could post in response to questions. And, no, I have never reported Kelly to the FC.

These are new questions - I had no idea how often he used the buckstopper. Even I am shocked - and believe me, that is saying something.

I believe the amount that he used the buckstopper or join up is inconsequential, the fact remains as I have previously mentioned on another thread that the heart rates throughout the backing process were significantly lower throughout the backing process... this can only be seen as a positive can it not? Surely if the heart rate is lower this indicates that the horse is feeling less stress throughout this process. However, findings do show that during the riding on phase... the heart rates level out between both methods and show no significant differences long term. Regardless of this the results still demonstrate that the horses obviously remain calmer through his backing process

 

[Natch]

Efficacy over what time period? Unless a longitudinal study, where the animals are followed up at pre-arranged intervals, over years, is carried out, then I doubt the 'proof' of efficacy in producing a good riding horse.
This man claims that he does not use force and that his methods are 'kind', it therefore seems a little strange that he is using a method, which he claims is one of last resort, to demonstrate the efficacy of his tecnique, on none las resort horses. It does not sound as if it would pass any ethics committe to me. It is not demonstrating what it claims to demonstrate.

(Hi, long time no speak, must touch base soon )

I think the ethics of the buckstop are a particularly muddy issue. It seems that the official position is that the force that the buckstop elicits is "through the horse's own choice" and it is therefore not forcing the horse to comply. It is also claimed that it is less severe than a bit, and so I presume it could have been approved on that merit, although a chance to read the article in full would be helpful to us all. I doubt these claims, particularly that it is less severe than a bit, but that is perhaps a seperate study.

I do wish these road to the horse type competitions whereby taking a horse as far along in their eduation as possible in a few hours is considered to be a sign of great achievement would be abolished. It all seems very egocentric, and as Janetgeorge says, not structured with the horse's best interests at heart.

 

[Queenbee]

yes, me too! And I am guessing the reason that the buckstoppers got used in the study was because the horses were being pushed too fast and they got frightened/resisted. After all, the goal of the study was to have the horses complete a dressage test and an obstacle course after ten hours of training.

explain their lower heart rates then... sure all horses may have exhibited some level of stress at the unknown, but you can't dispute that the MR horses were exhibiting lower heart rates and then in all likelyhood lower stress levels than the other horses.

 

[tess1]

I believe the amount that he used the buckstopper or join up is inconsequential, the fact remains as I have previously mentioned on another thread that the heart rates throughout the backing process were significantly lower throughout the backing process... this can only be seen as a positive can it not? Surely if the heart rate is lower this indicates that the horse is feeling less stress throughout this process. However, findings do show that during the riding on phase... the heart rates level out between both methods and show no significant differences long term. Regardless of this the results still demonstrate that the horses obviously remain calmer through his backing process

It would appear that it is not quite as simple as that. Dr Andrew McLean challenged Veronica Fowler on the heart rate data at the EBF conference last year as lowered heart rate can actually indicate an increase in stress. Behavioural indicators and cortisol samples would give a clearer picture of what was happening. She didn't disagree with his points.

Further questioning of the heart rates comes from an acquaintence in cardiology ...

There are big problems in using heart rates for assessment of stress especially as they used the equivalent of a Polar heart rate monitor costing less than £400. It can be bad enough getting correct heart rates on humans during exercise using equipment costing thousands of pounds! From what I have read and been told there wasn't an ECG recording made so absolutely no way to verify the heart rates given by the monitor. A couple of points. 1) The base heart rate was double a normal resting heart rate. 2) The heart rate spiked on the first use of a Dually to levels which would only have been achieved with extreme exercise. 3) The heart rate can fall as well as rise during episodes of extreme stress. Even if the heart rate increases it will not be sustained at a high peak rate due to stress, it will always drop again as the initial 'adrenaline rush' subsides.

 

[Natch]

the fact remains as I have previously mentioned on another thread that the heart rates throughout the backing process were significantly lower throughout the backing process... this can only be seen as a positive can it not?

Have a look at YorksG's post on the subject, earlier in the thread

Interestingly, I know of another study (alas it wasn't published) which found the opposite, that salivary cortisol and heart rates were significantly higher during natural horsemanship backing (I don't know whose method it was). That study also found that the NH method achieved the target ridden behaviours faster than the traditional yard. It was a study over a number of weeks, such a shame I have no idea how to lay my hands on it now

 

[tess1]

Naturally, I've pm'd you.

 

[JanetGeorge]

explain their lower heart rates then... sure all horses may have exhibited some level of stress at the unknown, but you can't dispute that the MR horses were exhibiting lower heart rates and then in all likelyhood lower stress levels than the other horses.

Heart rates are funny old things! I've seen a horse in a horribly stressful situation (stuck by his legs in a river with water over his wither, his bladder not far from bursting as he'd been in the river for at least two days.) A vet checked him over before we started the rescue and was astounded that his heart rate showed NO sign of stress (he'd 'switched off' and was prepared to die!)

My horses were used in an experiment to establish the effect of pheromes in reducing stress. Wearing heart monitors - and having - or not - a pherome impregnanted rag attached to the headcollar, they were held in the front corner of the stable by someone they didn't know - who wasn't allowed to pat or speak to them. Their heart rates went through the roof - and one of my quietest 2 year olds reared and plunged so much we had to withdraw him. Once they got the heart rate - the horses were approached with running clippers. ALL the heart rates - in horses who had been clipped before, even those who were not good to clip - dropped down very quickly! What they knew - even something they didn't like - was less stressful than anticipation of the unknown.

The fact that the MR horses had lower heart rates does NOT - to me - suggest his methods were not stressful - it may be that the horses switched off rather better than with the other trainer, or the other trainer might not have been that good at a speeded-up process!

 

[sarahann1]

Naturally if you have some more details, roughly when it was written etc, i might be able to find it for you. I'll be able to look later on tonight.

 

[sarahann1]

Oh and re getting articles, did you try via Berg, they might be helpful?

 

[Queenbee]

Hell, no I've never used a buckstopper. But I've seen one used.

To my mind, it is unethical that a trainer who has made a name for himself by "listening to horses" and "speaking the language of equus" has chosen to use a pain-inflicting device on young horses at the very start of their ridden career, in a study designed to "prove" how kind his methods are. The other trainer in the study did not feel the need to use this equipment, and untold numbers of horses are successfully backed in this country every year by professionals without recourse to this gadget. It is "unethical" because this person has made a name for himself for a particular, supposedly "kind" approach to horses, but has now chosen to do something which, it would appear, goes completely against his own, frequently stated "code of ethics" which proclaims "no violence" and that "horses should have a choice".

So, basically from what I am getting is it is unethical in your opinion for MR to use such a device because he has made his name from 'supposedly being "kind to horses'. From your statement one would assume that you suppose that it may not be unethical for someone who had not behaved/portrayed themselves as MR does? Or are you just badly expressing your views?

 

[ChesnutsRoasting]

I get rather uncomfortable when a thread about a trainer, or something a trainer has done, somehow turns around into a promotion of someone else.

Just to demonstrate how something might seem wrong if you don't know the background:
I would use a "line" around a young horses middle to prepare them for the back cinch on a western saddle. I wouldn't just weigh in and put a rope around their belly though, I'd make sure they were used to ropes around them first, and then hold the rope on their body so that I could drop it quickly if they got worried, finally progressing to a rope that could be easily removed at the first sign of worry and working them with that in place. I might also use a rope around the girth area with a horse that has started to have problems with girthing, for whatever reason, as a gentle way to reintroduce the feeling of something in that area. Personally I can't think of any reason why you might put a line around a horse's middle to stop it bucking.

Agree.

 

[Queenbee]

Heart rates are funny old things! I've seen a horse in a horribly stressful situation (stuck by his legs in a river with water over his wither, his bladder not far from bursting as he'd been in the river for at least two days.) A vet checked him over before we started the rescue and was astounded that his heart rate showed NO sign of stress (he'd 'switched off' and was prepared to die!)

My horses were used in an experiment to establish the effect of pheromes in reducing stress. Wearing heart monitors - and having - or not - a pherome impregnanted rag attached to the headcollar, they were held in the front corner of the stable by someone they didn't know - who wasn't allowed to pat or speak to them. Their heart rates went through the roof - and one of my quietest 2 year olds reared and plunged so much we had to withdraw him. Once they got the heart rate - the horses were approached with running clippers. ALL the heart rates - in horses who had been clipped before, even those who were not good to clip - dropped down very quickly! What they knew - even something they didn't like - was less stressful than anticipation of the unknown.

The fact that the MR horses had lower heart rates does NOT - to me - suggest his methods were not stressful - it may be that the horses switched off rather better than with the other trainer, or the other trainer might not have been that good at a speeded-up process!

JG, I did not say that the horses were not stressed, infact I believe that all horses do during the backing period experience some stress levels, no matter what the process or methodology, but it is interesting about your opinion regarding switching off. I personally, go with a more traditional method myself, but saying that I do not in my humble opinion believe that trained the MR way horses 'switch off', saying that, it would be very interesting to see the same experiment with a number of indicators as you, naturally and tess have described, perhaps this would provide a more conclusive result. I personally think that on both sides there will always be people who dispute the findings.

 

[tess1]

So, basically from what I am getting is it is unethical in your opinion for MR to use such a device because he has made his name from 'supposedly being "kind to horses'. From your statement one would assume that you suppose that it may not be unethical for someone who had not behaved/portrayed themselves as MR does? Or are you just badly expressing your views?

A definition of unethical:

not conforming to approved standards of social or professional behavior;

Monty Roberts is a professional horse trainer who has made a name for himself for supposedly being kind to horses. Therefore I believe that the term unethical can be used in this instance as he, as a professional, appears to be breaking his own stated ethical code - that he does not rely on pain to train. I would not say that a private horse owner was being unethical in using the buckstop, even though I might think that it was a misguided decision. However, they do not have a professional, ethical code to live up to, so I do not believe it would be appropriate to say they are behaving "unethically".

 

[Sugarplum Furry]

I'm a bit simple when it comes all this sort of talk but re the buckstop, I thought MR only used it on horses that use bucking as a learned behaviour. As in evading being ridden. Not as a backing a young horse tool? Sorry, I just got the impression here that people think he uses it as standard on unbacked horses...please sort me out if I'm wrong!

 

[tess1]

I'm a bit simple when it comes all this sort of talk but re the buckstop, I thought MR only used it on horses that use bucking as a learned behaviour. As in evading being ridden. Not as a backing a young horse tool? Sorry, I just got the impression here that people think he uses it as standard on unbacked horses...please sort me out if I'm wrong!

Yes, that's what he has told everyone in the past. And now he has used the buckstop on young, unbacked horses in his heart trials study. The buckstopper is listed under his equipment list in the study, and the graph shows how many times each piece of kit was used. The buckstopper was used either ten or eleven times. He had seven horses to train.

 

[Fellewell]

Efficacy over what time period? Unless a longitudinal study, where the animals are followed up at pre-arranged intervals, over years, is carried out, then I doubt the 'proof' of efficacy in producing a good riding horse.
This man claims that he does not use force and that his methods are 'kind', it therefore seems a little strange that he is using a method, which he claims is one of last resort, to demonstrate the efficacy of his tecnique, on none las resort horses. It does not sound as if it would pass any ethics committe to me. It is not demonstrating what it claims to demonstrate.

Why would they conduct a longitudinal study on comparative studies into techniques for 'initial' training? Twenty days was probably adequate. Your suggestion would be a bit costly I would have thought with more variables than you can shake a stick at. Unless you think they should have simply repeated the study with different horses until MR was hoisted by his own gum line.

As far as I'm aware MR's aim was to be kinder than his father. Not to teach the world to sing and furnish it with love.

 

[Fellewell]

Which bits do you think are guesswork?

Why would you use a "twitch" on horses within the first 10 hours of their training? I thought twitching was used to ensure horses stayed still for unpleasant procedures that they objected to such as clipping or treatment for an injury. Why would any of the horses in the experiment need that as part of their training to be ridden? Let alone why would it be used 10 or more times?

I actually tend to disagree that he has done rather well, as he has clearly had to resort to pain inflicting devices to get his results. It would appear that the conventional trainer did not. I don't think that horse training should be just about the end results - the process is equally important if not more so. Who cares if you can back and ride a horse in 10 hours if during that time the horse has had to wear pacifiers, dummy riders, pressure halters, buckstoppers and gone through numerous join ups to get the end result?

The study is heavily focussed on on displaying Monty's methods as kind and stress free - otherwise there would not be the focus on heart rates (problematic in their own right), and the heart rate monitors would not have played such a large part in his previous demo tours.

In 2009 I discovered he was using buckstoppers on horses in demos. Despite assurances that the particular horse I questioned about was not in pain, it later transpired the horse did have physical issues. I have questioned the use of buckstoppers on horses in demos since then, as I do not believe that it is appropriate to show the use of this kind of gadget to members of the public who are out for an evening's entertainment, and that the place to treat horses with severe behavioural problems is not in demos, but behind the scenes in a calm environment where decisions can be made that are appropriate for the horse without the "pressure to perform" on the trainers.

How were the gum lines employed in this study or are you just guessing is what I was asking.

 

[Tinypony]

I get rather uncomfortable when a thread about a trainer, or something a trainer has done, somehow turns around into a promotion of someone else.

Just to demonstrate how something might seem wrong if you don't know the background:
I would use a "line" around a young horses middle to prepare them for the back cinch on a western saddle. I wouldn't just weigh in and put a rope around their belly though, I'd make sure they were used to ropes around them first, and then hold the rope on their body so that I could drop it quickly if they got worried, finally progressing to a rope that could be easily removed at the first sign of worry and working them with that in place. I might also use a rope around the girth area with a horse that has started to have problems with girthing, for whatever reason, as a gentle way to reintroduce the feeling of something in that area. Personally I can't think of any reason why you might put a line around a horse's middle to stop it bucking.

I just re-read that and want to make it clear, that was meant to just explain misunderstanding of the rope around the horse's middle. I'm pretty much with Tess when it comes to buckstoppers (we actually agree sometimes!).

 

[tess1]

I just re-read that and want to make it clear, that was meant to just explain misunderstanding of the rope around the horse's middle. I'm pretty much with Tess when it comes to buckstoppers (we actually agree sometimes!).

Actually, I'd like to think we'd probably agree a lot more now than we used to

 

[YorksG]

Why would they conduct a longitudinal study on comparative studies into techniques for 'initial' training? Twenty days was probably adequate. Your suggestion would be a bit costly I would have thought with more variables than you can shake a stick at. Unless you think they should have simply repeated the study with different horses until MR was hoisted by his own gum line.

A longitudinal study would show the effectiveness of the process, for producing a riding horse, rather than a short impact. If the conditions of learning are optimum then the 'lessons' are more likely to remain intact, than if they are not.
I would just like to reiterate the information about heart rates and stress, there are three states which fear causes in most young animals and a large number of females of many species, flight, fight and freeze. During the freeze response heart rate drops, blood preassure drops and so do the resiration rate and carbon dioxide production. A dutch neuropsychobiologist Ellert Nijenhouise has done some fascinating work on this in people.

 

[tess1]

How were the gum lines employed in this study or are you just guessing is what I was asking.

Everytime I've seen or heard of Monty use a gumline it has been in the same way - attached to the saddle via the bridle and then the horse sent out around the pen. On a video I have seen him use it with a dummy rider attached as well. I should think if the buckstop was used as a twitch that would have been made clear in the study, by calling it a twitch rather than a buckstop. I believe that Monty describes in one of his books how to use a buckstop, so I would think it most likely, but cannot be sure, that he used it how he describes it. The study makes clear that they were used, but does not give the details of specific training sessions/circumstances of their use.


YorksG, that is very interesting. I will look up the person you mention. I would not be at all surprised if "freeze" was part of the picture seen in some training situations. There is also the fourth 'f' - fiddle about - aka displacement behaviours.

 

[1t34]

Which bits do you think are guesswork?

Why would you use a "twitch" on horses within the first 10 hours of their training? I thought twitching was used to ensure horses stayed still for unpleasant procedures that they objected to such as clipping or treatment for an injury. Why would any of the horses in the experiment need that as part of their training to be ridden? Let alone why would it be used 10 or more times?

Oddly stumbled on this and have been pondering this all the way through the thread. What is being described as a buckstop or gumline here used to be known 20- 30 years ago ( I am old!!) in the UK as an American twitch - It was used to twitch a horse just in the manner you describe for clipping a head or to give and injection if a traditional twitch couldn't be used. I assumed it worked as a twitch does and thus you would get a lowered heart rate etc as described. Mind you it was never ever used when ridden.

 

[YorksG]

The flight, fright and freeze responses have a valid evolutonary value (not sure that faff about does ) The work done on people supports the theory that if a group/herd/pack is attacked by a more dangerous/larger numbers/stronger group, the females and youngsters are safer if they are still, as they may not be spotted, or if they are seeen, then they are likely to be seen as none threatening and can be incorperated into the stronger group. In evolutionary terms this increases the genetc material available to both halves of the equation and increasing hybrid vigour.

 

[tess1]

Oddly stumbled on this and have been pondering this all the way through the thread. What is being described as a buckstop or gumline here used to be known 20- 30 years ago ( I am old!!) in the UK as an American twitch - It was used to twitch a horse just in the manner you describe for clipping a head or to give and injection if a traditional twitch couldn't be used. I assumed it worked as a twitch does and thus you would get a lowered heart rate etc as described. Mind you it was never ever used when ridden.

That's interesting ... but I have to say that I have not seen or known of Monty ever twitching a horse to get a saddle and rider on. My money is still on it being used in the way he has in the past, but it really would be interesting to know the circumstances in which it was used, and what behaviours prompted its use. However, I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for someone to pop over from the IH camp and fill us in on the details

Something that was recently pointed out to me (I'm a bit slow, sometimes ) was that Monty had to request a buckstopper before the study got underway, so it was suggested to me that he must have known, or at least had a very good idea that he was going to need it, as, let's face it, it is a controversial piece of equipment to use on youngsters and he must have known someone would pick up on it. So does this mean that Monty knows his methods are likely to cause horses to buck ...

 

[leogeorge]

Tess said....."My money is still on it being used in the way he has in the past, but it really would be interesting to know the circumstances in which it was used, and what behaviours prompted its use."

They do have video footage of the whole study. Apparently though, they haven't had the time or the resourses to analyse this footage, but Veronica Fowler stated at the EBF symposium last year when she presented the study, that the footage would be available to anyone who wished to see it. This was requested by my employer along with an offer to help with resources to analyse the footage, but sadly VF has failed to keep in touch, after a few initial emails, with my employer.