macarthur
Active Member
Hi Suzy
Yes yes yes!!! It was Andrew who alerted me to the Danish ban.
johanna
Yes yes yes!!! It was Andrew who alerted me to the Danish ban.
johanna
Ban use of horse whips?
- Thread starter Pilib
- Start date
Shilasdair
Patting her thylacine
I see that you don't attempt to answer my post, JoMacarthur, and can therefore only conclude that your confidence outweights both your scientific qualifications, and practical knowledge of horses.
Incidentally, the 'thousands of scientists agree with me' thing only works if you do it properly
If you are trying to write a scientific document to increase the public understanding of science, then you must describe all the findings of relevant studies to date, not just those which support your hypothesis. You also have to give references for your sources - so that I, and other readers can research further.
S
Incidentally, the 'thousands of scientists agree with me' thing only works if you do it properly
If you are trying to write a scientific document to increase the public understanding of science, then you must describe all the findings of relevant studies to date, not just those which support your hypothesis. You also have to give references for your sources - so that I, and other readers can research further.
S
Shilasdair
Patting her thylacine
[ QUOTE ]
Surely, all science is theory. Nothing is ever PROVEN. But when my horse is sick, my vet will prescribe whatever drug has been shown to be the most likely to cure the thing which ails her.... in the same way, if there are studies showing a correlation between - say - biting and motivational conflict issues relating to the bit or headcollar... then the ethical thing is to address the issue through re-training of the signal involved in the conflict... not to try and punish your way out of it when - so far - there is no evidence what so ever that this will resolve the basic issue. Punishing a horse for not performing or for showing conflict behaviour is like treating a bowed tendon with chants and scented candles. It might work, but it probably won't. Considering how widespread punishment is, you'd see far fewer behavioural problems if it actually worked.
In the same way, if a horse won't jump, it's either because it can't or because it hasn't been trained to do so. In either case, whose responsibility is it to make sure the horse can and will jump without coercion?
Even if horses did understand our need for them to hop, skip and jump their way around the competition scene, they STILL wouldn't be morally obliged to humour us. It would STILL be on us to make sure they were willing and able.
Suzy
[/ QUOTE ]
I have to disagree with you - the point of science is to take ideas, theories, hypotheses about the world, and try to prove them true or false by experiment.
Regarding your point about the vet prescribing drugs - these drugs will have been subject to tests called Randomised Control Trials, controlled in such a way as to reduce error, such as 'the placebo effect' perhaps by double blinds etc.
Therefore when the vet prescribes 'bute - he is reliant on the facts gleaned from RCTs. This is the problem that most scientists have with homeopathy, and the problem with a lot of learning theories - in humans and horses- there have been no RCTs undertaken. Largely then, learning theories remain the idea of a single person, for example Greenfields Neuronal Plasticity theory of human learning. You may agree, or disagree, but there is little evidence either way.
S
Surely, all science is theory. Nothing is ever PROVEN. But when my horse is sick, my vet will prescribe whatever drug has been shown to be the most likely to cure the thing which ails her.... in the same way, if there are studies showing a correlation between - say - biting and motivational conflict issues relating to the bit or headcollar... then the ethical thing is to address the issue through re-training of the signal involved in the conflict... not to try and punish your way out of it when - so far - there is no evidence what so ever that this will resolve the basic issue. Punishing a horse for not performing or for showing conflict behaviour is like treating a bowed tendon with chants and scented candles. It might work, but it probably won't. Considering how widespread punishment is, you'd see far fewer behavioural problems if it actually worked.
In the same way, if a horse won't jump, it's either because it can't or because it hasn't been trained to do so. In either case, whose responsibility is it to make sure the horse can and will jump without coercion?
Even if horses did understand our need for them to hop, skip and jump their way around the competition scene, they STILL wouldn't be morally obliged to humour us. It would STILL be on us to make sure they were willing and able.
Suzy
[/ QUOTE ]
I have to disagree with you - the point of science is to take ideas, theories, hypotheses about the world, and try to prove them true or false by experiment.
Regarding your point about the vet prescribing drugs - these drugs will have been subject to tests called Randomised Control Trials, controlled in such a way as to reduce error, such as 'the placebo effect' perhaps by double blinds etc.
Therefore when the vet prescribes 'bute - he is reliant on the facts gleaned from RCTs. This is the problem that most scientists have with homeopathy, and the problem with a lot of learning theories - in humans and horses- there have been no RCTs undertaken. Largely then, learning theories remain the idea of a single person, for example Greenfields Neuronal Plasticity theory of human learning. You may agree, or disagree, but there is little evidence either way.
S
Quadro
Well-Known Member
if we are going down the scientific line then i feel we should bring Pavlov's dogs into to equation, he proved that animals learn by association so there for if the whip is used sensibly and fairly then the horse will learn that the whip will be used if negative behaviour is displayed surely???
therefore is a good thing????
therefore is a good thing????
SuzyQ
Member
[ QUOTE ]
Maybe the horses you know are more noble and pure minded than those I've met but I've met and seen horses who very well knew what was expected of them but they still just wanted to know if they really had to jump, that particular obstacle with this rider (= older riding school pony, been there done that and I only jump/canter if you really know that you want us to jump/canter, otherwise we will stay on the ground/trot-attitude)...
[/ QUOTE ]
Hmmm... I don't think that my horses are particularly noble or pure minded. They are innocently selfish like all other horses, I guess. They do whatever they find is the thing to do to get on. The point is that however much we may think that a horse "knows what it's supposed to do", they don't. They simply have not got the cognitive abilities to understand our need for them to cross a fence or perform canter half pass. So if they do it, it's because they have been well trained. If they don't, it's because they have not been well trained. In either case, the credit is due to the rider, not the horse.
Someone asked how I would train a horse with a dangerous problem. I have already answered this. Using negative and positive reinforcement to re-train whatever basic aid is dysfunctional. As mentioned, I am just an amateur, but I have fixed a rearer, a couple of nippers and three farrier-slayers using the techniques of Andrew McLean and yes - polo mints can be used to de-train dangerous behaviour. Not by themselves (at least I wouldn't try it) but a lot of trainers use food rewards when working with problem horses, usually in conjunction with well applied negative reinforcement.
Wouldn't it be fun with a show of hands: Who thinks whips should be completely banned? I don't. I use one every day. My mare goes in a regular, double jointed snaffle and I even make use of iron horseshoes.
I am not a vegetarian and I don't remember the last time I hugged a tree (except the one in my saddle). I just think that riders should take responsibility for any signs of behavioural issues their horses might display instead of pretending that it's okay to blame an animal which is performing for their pleasure. If you can't train a horse to perform whatever behaviour on cue which you need it to perform in order to compete... don't compete. Maybe don't even ride. Or learn better training techniques or acquire more modest ambitions or buy an easier horse. There are many ways to solve the problem of equine "pissing about" - but in the 21st century, surely none of them involve beating a horse with a stick because it didn't understand what you asked for or didn't feel sufficiently motivated to do it. Whose fault is that?
Suzy
Maybe the horses you know are more noble and pure minded than those I've met but I've met and seen horses who very well knew what was expected of them but they still just wanted to know if they really had to jump, that particular obstacle with this rider (= older riding school pony, been there done that and I only jump/canter if you really know that you want us to jump/canter, otherwise we will stay on the ground/trot-attitude)...
[/ QUOTE ]
Hmmm... I don't think that my horses are particularly noble or pure minded. They are innocently selfish like all other horses, I guess. They do whatever they find is the thing to do to get on. The point is that however much we may think that a horse "knows what it's supposed to do", they don't. They simply have not got the cognitive abilities to understand our need for them to cross a fence or perform canter half pass. So if they do it, it's because they have been well trained. If they don't, it's because they have not been well trained. In either case, the credit is due to the rider, not the horse.
Someone asked how I would train a horse with a dangerous problem. I have already answered this. Using negative and positive reinforcement to re-train whatever basic aid is dysfunctional. As mentioned, I am just an amateur, but I have fixed a rearer, a couple of nippers and three farrier-slayers using the techniques of Andrew McLean and yes - polo mints can be used to de-train dangerous behaviour. Not by themselves (at least I wouldn't try it) but a lot of trainers use food rewards when working with problem horses, usually in conjunction with well applied negative reinforcement.
Wouldn't it be fun with a show of hands: Who thinks whips should be completely banned? I don't. I use one every day. My mare goes in a regular, double jointed snaffle and I even make use of iron horseshoes.
Suzy
macarthur
Active Member
Hello Shilisdair
I am sorry I have had to actually train horses and field questions to the press today - so I really, really, havent had a chance to answer everyone and that includes you - I havent the time.
I am sadly finding your responses increasingly aggressive and defensive, you have gone from a smack cures all, to challenging my 'hypothesis' and rants as to whom I can or should quote.
However if it pleases you - I quote all references in 'Equine Behaviour a guide for Veterinarians and Equine professionals' , Dr Paul McGreevy and all references as per Dr Andrew McLean - ref my earlier thread when I answered you at length.
I am not on trial here - I do not have to defend myself to you - this is not the debate - the debate is "should whips and spurs be banned in competition when they are used to punish non-performance"
Therefore I will not comment further - I am used to dealing with people that listen and analyse and have constructive enquiry.
You can google me and you can contact me by telephone and you can come and see my training and meet my clients and their horses - you really are more than welcome .
best wishes johanna
I am sorry I have had to actually train horses and field questions to the press today - so I really, really, havent had a chance to answer everyone and that includes you - I havent the time.
I am sadly finding your responses increasingly aggressive and defensive, you have gone from a smack cures all, to challenging my 'hypothesis' and rants as to whom I can or should quote.
However if it pleases you - I quote all references in 'Equine Behaviour a guide for Veterinarians and Equine professionals' , Dr Paul McGreevy and all references as per Dr Andrew McLean - ref my earlier thread when I answered you at length.
I am not on trial here - I do not have to defend myself to you - this is not the debate - the debate is "should whips and spurs be banned in competition when they are used to punish non-performance"
Therefore I will not comment further - I am used to dealing with people that listen and analyse and have constructive enquiry.
You can google me and you can contact me by telephone and you can come and see my training and meet my clients and their horses - you really are more than welcome .
best wishes johanna
SuzyQ
Member
quadro, there is one flaw in your argument, and that is that - as far as we know and as far as anyone has been able to document - horses do not know the difference between good and bad behaviour, so you can't classically condition the horse to know that if he is bad, he gets whipped, therefore he should be good. It's not possible. If it were, horse training would be very easy, and there would not be any problem horses out there.
Having said that, I use a whip, I have no problem with whips. I have a problem with using them for punishment or revenge when the horse is "bad", because as far as the horse is concerned, he wasn't "bad" - he doesn't know what "bad" is. That would require him to possess cognitive abilities even more advanced than the most intelligent primates.
Think for a moment what "manners" are. Even members of the same species - human beings from different parts of the world or even just different parts of Manchester - have different ideas about what is "respectful", "polite", "moral" etc. How on EARTH is an equidae to know that refusing to hop over some brigthly coloured sticks in a green field with a human being on his back is indicative of bad manners? Horses have not got a clue. We imagine they have, because human beings always imagine that their problems originate outside themselves. Since I learned that my horse can't be blamed, I find myself grabbing at straws to explain my own training errors rather than actually admit I messed up. If it's not the weather, it's my mare's cycle. If it's not that, it's the noisy children outside the arena ect. It's really hard to let go of all pretenses that we have anyone to blame for our problems but ourselves. But actually also quite liberating to know that everything that's wrong with your horse is something you can change by changing your own behaviour - excluding those very few horses which are really, seriously disturbed. But punishment won't cure those, anyway.
Suzy
Suzy
Having said that, I use a whip, I have no problem with whips. I have a problem with using them for punishment or revenge when the horse is "bad", because as far as the horse is concerned, he wasn't "bad" - he doesn't know what "bad" is. That would require him to possess cognitive abilities even more advanced than the most intelligent primates.
Think for a moment what "manners" are. Even members of the same species - human beings from different parts of the world or even just different parts of Manchester - have different ideas about what is "respectful", "polite", "moral" etc. How on EARTH is an equidae to know that refusing to hop over some brigthly coloured sticks in a green field with a human being on his back is indicative of bad manners? Horses have not got a clue. We imagine they have, because human beings always imagine that their problems originate outside themselves. Since I learned that my horse can't be blamed, I find myself grabbing at straws to explain my own training errors rather than actually admit I messed up. If it's not the weather, it's my mare's cycle. If it's not that, it's the noisy children outside the arena ect. It's really hard to let go of all pretenses that we have anyone to blame for our problems but ourselves. But actually also quite liberating to know that everything that's wrong with your horse is something you can change by changing your own behaviour - excluding those very few horses which are really, seriously disturbed. But punishment won't cure those, anyway.
Suzy
Suzy
Quadro
Well-Known Member
yes i understand that but a horse can still learn that a certain behaviour that it undertakes will be punished by the whip which it does not like so will refrain from that behaviour which can be put under a very very basic heading of "negative behaviour"
marble
Well-Known Member
hi vicky, I am have just finished reading your post re "brat", this is the problem, judge should have had her or him up to box, and sent home. Also Jo and the rest you can go on about whips and abuse as much as you want, BUT you will never stop abuse of animals at competition level, because you cannot see what goes on at home. I have no problem with sticks, have a problem with spurs as so many people who wear them, do not use legs properly, (watch riders little old legs going bumpty bump, spurs going tap tap tap on pony or horses side) If we are going to stop abuse, lets have open warfare on abuse at home. AT least if a rider misuses stick at competition we can see it, and stewards should deal with it there and then. But lets open up the whole sport to spot checks at home, as we are doing with drug abuse.
Starbucks
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
Hello Starbucks
Firstly ask the question why does he do this?
2) how can we retrain him
3) how do we test.
Firstly it is natural for horses to not want strange horses nr them - so a natural response,
2) He must understand the correct signal for stop and go - stop means all four feet planted and still relaxed body - in all circumstances he must stand. or go -means go forward in the appropriate gate.
Horses that obediantly understand and consistently offer stand and go are much less likely to kick out at other horses.
If he kicks out you should shout out a brisk No!" and immediatly ask him to back up, it is also acceptable 'if' you are able to immediatly reinforce him with a whip tap on the shoulder simultaneously as you shout NO!" - generally this is quite hard to do, as we are busy turning to avoid further clashes etc.
You need to test him in other environments with new horses with your new trained skills to test stop (we call this PARK - ITS LIKE A DOG BEING TOLD TO STAY)
I would also introduce clicker training to ask him to stand and drop his head as well as 'park' and then click and food reward him to a voice command - so that when hunting and a horse gets close to you, you can say "Down" and he will be more concerned with the click and immenent treat than the horse coming into his space - I promise you this is effective and can be done!!
All undesired behaviours if repeated constantly by the horse and/or rider over long periods of time are difficult to outtrain -they are referred to as 'learned behaviours' especially so if it is something learned in fear or pain.
good luck and I hope this has answered your point?
johanna
[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks Johanna. To be honest, that's pretty much what I do, (apart from the clcker training) he gets a slap and a shout and that's about it. It's not like I've just been letting him do this for years - he seems to have got grumpier in his old age!
He doesn't really move, just his neck, or in the one time his front leg but he stays stationary.
It's not really a problem now I know what he wants to do - I can stop him, but I'd rather he didn't want to be evil!!
Hello Starbucks
Firstly ask the question why does he do this?
2) how can we retrain him
3) how do we test.
Firstly it is natural for horses to not want strange horses nr them - so a natural response,
2) He must understand the correct signal for stop and go - stop means all four feet planted and still relaxed body - in all circumstances he must stand. or go -means go forward in the appropriate gate.
Horses that obediantly understand and consistently offer stand and go are much less likely to kick out at other horses.
If he kicks out you should shout out a brisk No!" and immediatly ask him to back up, it is also acceptable 'if' you are able to immediatly reinforce him with a whip tap on the shoulder simultaneously as you shout NO!" - generally this is quite hard to do, as we are busy turning to avoid further clashes etc.
You need to test him in other environments with new horses with your new trained skills to test stop (we call this PARK - ITS LIKE A DOG BEING TOLD TO STAY)
I would also introduce clicker training to ask him to stand and drop his head as well as 'park' and then click and food reward him to a voice command - so that when hunting and a horse gets close to you, you can say "Down" and he will be more concerned with the click and immenent treat than the horse coming into his space - I promise you this is effective and can be done!!
All undesired behaviours if repeated constantly by the horse and/or rider over long periods of time are difficult to outtrain -they are referred to as 'learned behaviours' especially so if it is something learned in fear or pain.
good luck and I hope this has answered your point?
johanna
[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks Johanna. To be honest, that's pretty much what I do, (apart from the clcker training) he gets a slap and a shout and that's about it. It's not like I've just been letting him do this for years - he seems to have got grumpier in his old age!
It's not really a problem now I know what he wants to do - I can stop him, but I'd rather he didn't want to be evil!!
Gonetofrance
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
Who said they were "against" the whip?
As for me, yes to your questions (apart from proffesionally!) I just think it looks bad to general members of the public, which is why it might be an idea to consider.. I don't think it would make much difference to SJ/Eventing if you couldn't wallop your horse after a refusal - do you?
[/ QUOTE ]
This is a concept of training, not just about whether or not your horse has a stop or not....
I appreciate the ban is for the ring, but those that would abuse the whip anyway will find other ways to punish. How often have you seen a rider sawing viciously at their horse's mouths after a mistake? That to me is more punishing and cruel that a smack.
If the concern is just how it looks to the public, then it's a pretty pointless exercise, as it won't make the slightest bit of difference to the horse that gets a hammering back at the lorry or at home.
Within training horses I believe there are circumstances when a whip should be used as a reprimand. If a youngster strikes out at me in front for example, I will use a smack to the leg to indicate that if he does that, I do this. And they very quickly understand.
Indeed, Johanna said herself here;
If he kicks out you should shout out a brisk No!" and immediatly ask him to back up, it is also acceptable 'if' you are able to immediatly reinforce him with a whip tap on the shoulder simultaneously as you shout NO!" - generally this is quite hard to do, as we are busy turning to avoid further clashes etc.
FWIW, I rarely carry a whip, and although I did in the ring, I can't remember the last time I recently used one. However, I did used to have difficult horses to retrain, and a whack as a horse started to nap towards the collecting ring/lorry park would change the focus back to me from the other horses.
Now possibly that was total incompetence on my part, but I wasn't abusing the whip, it was backing me up.
But that seen from the ground could be construed as abuse......or punishment. To me it was neither, it was the means that allowed me to get the horse back paying attention to me.
Horses can become different animals in the arena, you can have done all the groundwork at home, but the adrenaline from a competition can change what you are sitting on, and a problem horse will sometimes revert back to previous behaviour.
So, where do you draw the line?
In an ideal world, I wouldn't be against the idea, but in the real world, I think it unworkable and difficult, because of the grey areas.
Tarr Steps, I agree absolutely with what you wrote.
Who said they were "against" the whip?
As for me, yes to your questions (apart from proffesionally!) I just think it looks bad to general members of the public, which is why it might be an idea to consider.. I don't think it would make much difference to SJ/Eventing if you couldn't wallop your horse after a refusal - do you?
[/ QUOTE ]
This is a concept of training, not just about whether or not your horse has a stop or not....
I appreciate the ban is for the ring, but those that would abuse the whip anyway will find other ways to punish. How often have you seen a rider sawing viciously at their horse's mouths after a mistake? That to me is more punishing and cruel that a smack.
If the concern is just how it looks to the public, then it's a pretty pointless exercise, as it won't make the slightest bit of difference to the horse that gets a hammering back at the lorry or at home.
Within training horses I believe there are circumstances when a whip should be used as a reprimand. If a youngster strikes out at me in front for example, I will use a smack to the leg to indicate that if he does that, I do this. And they very quickly understand.
Indeed, Johanna said herself here;
If he kicks out you should shout out a brisk No!" and immediatly ask him to back up, it is also acceptable 'if' you are able to immediatly reinforce him with a whip tap on the shoulder simultaneously as you shout NO!" - generally this is quite hard to do, as we are busy turning to avoid further clashes etc.
FWIW, I rarely carry a whip, and although I did in the ring, I can't remember the last time I recently used one. However, I did used to have difficult horses to retrain, and a whack as a horse started to nap towards the collecting ring/lorry park would change the focus back to me from the other horses.
Now possibly that was total incompetence on my part, but I wasn't abusing the whip, it was backing me up.
But that seen from the ground could be construed as abuse......or punishment. To me it was neither, it was the means that allowed me to get the horse back paying attention to me.
Horses can become different animals in the arena, you can have done all the groundwork at home, but the adrenaline from a competition can change what you are sitting on, and a problem horse will sometimes revert back to previous behaviour.
So, where do you draw the line?
In an ideal world, I wouldn't be against the idea, but in the real world, I think it unworkable and difficult, because of the grey areas.
Tarr Steps, I agree absolutely with what you wrote.
Cash
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think it would make much difference to SJ/Eventing if you couldn't wallop your horse after a refusal - do you?
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree in that i doubt it would make little/any difference to the general popularity of SJ/eventing as a spectator sport to the general public (in fact, many people may prefer to watch if they thought whips would not be used) but if i was unable to use my whip after a refusal XC i would not have much success getting round on one of mine- he is a seasoned 16.3 ISH who has evented professionally, so definitely has the capabilities and experience (he's 15 now) but also spent 3 years in a riding school- so he has learnt pretty much every trick in the book to avoid jumping a certain jump if he thinks he can. I am sure my position is not always (in fact very very rarely!) perfect on the approach, but he should be able to jump a 2'6, straightforward, non-scary XC jump without me having to put in more effort than him, and have an absolutely perfect approach. Hence i think i should be able to give him a smack when he does duck out last minute.
Sorry tunred into a bit of an essay!
i think thi is a v interesting topic and it is great hearing so many different opinions and views. All i have to offer to the debate is my own (pitiful) experience
I don't think it would make much difference to SJ/Eventing if you couldn't wallop your horse after a refusal - do you?
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree in that i doubt it would make little/any difference to the general popularity of SJ/eventing as a spectator sport to the general public (in fact, many people may prefer to watch if they thought whips would not be used) but if i was unable to use my whip after a refusal XC i would not have much success getting round on one of mine- he is a seasoned 16.3 ISH who has evented professionally, so definitely has the capabilities and experience (he's 15 now) but also spent 3 years in a riding school- so he has learnt pretty much every trick in the book to avoid jumping a certain jump if he thinks he can. I am sure my position is not always (in fact very very rarely!) perfect on the approach, but he should be able to jump a 2'6, straightforward, non-scary XC jump without me having to put in more effort than him, and have an absolutely perfect approach. Hence i think i should be able to give him a smack when he does duck out last minute.
Sorry tunred into a bit of an essay!
the watcher
Well-Known Member
I live in Norfolk and I welcome you to come and see the training that I advocate - I have nothing to hide and I am very open to other views and ideas for training if it involves ethical principles.
I might just do that - because I am open to the belief that we never stop learning and I do have an open mind. I would certainly need to see it to understand it as I don't do psycho babble.
I might just do that - because I am open to the belief that we never stop learning and I do have an open mind. I would certainly need to see it to understand it as I don't do psycho babble.
Shilasdair
Patting her thylacine
[ QUOTE ]
Hello Shilisdair
I am sorry I have had to actually train horses and field questions to the press today - so I really, really, havent had a chance to answer everyone and that includes you - I havent the time.
I am sadly finding your responses increasingly aggressive and defensive, you have gone from a smack cures all, to challenging my 'hypothesis' and rants as to whom I can or should quote.
However if it pleases you - I quote all references in 'Equine Behaviour a guide for Veterinarians and Equine professionals' , Dr Paul McGreevy and all references as per Dr Andrew McLean - ref my earlier thread when I answered you at length.
I am not on trial here - I do not have to defend myself to you - this is not the debate - the debate is "should whips and spurs be banned in competition when they are used to punish non-performance"
Therefore I will not comment further - I am used to dealing with people that listen and analyse and have constructive enquiry.
You can google me and you can contact me by telephone and you can come and see my training and meet my clients and their horses - you really are more than welcome .
best wishes johanna
[/ QUOTE ]
Hi Johanna
A few points if I may, although it seems you are not used to having your statements questioned - but we are a feisty and inquisitive lot on HHO!
1. Scientifically speaking, hypotheses are put forward to be challenged, experimented upon, and hopefully one day proven true or false (not always as easy as it sounds).
So as soon as you put forward a statement such as
<font color="blue">
'The global scientific evidence for banning PUNISHMENT is overwhelming and is as a result of hundreds of scientists (including as far back as PAVLOV in the 1920's) around the world with hundreds of thousands of studied horses to come to verified conclusions on reactions for learning, including, observation statistics, measures of stress levels, adrenalin, diamorphine etc.,, increased heart rate , in the trained horse.'
</font>
then of course, you will be expected to first clarify, and secondly back up these claims with references to the hundreds of scientists etc (and one book reference isn't quite the same
).
2. No, of course you don't have to defend yourself, but if you put yourself forward as an expert dispelling 'dogma' then you are expected to prove your expertise, before we will accept your statements as valid. People evaluate the information they are given according to the source, the content, the evidence, etc - surely you understand that?
3. I understand perfectly why you will not discuss your claims further - you are clearly used to people who merely listen, and accept without question. HHOers are not quite that passive, unfortunately, and question everything.
I find it a shame that you are too closed-minded to debate the issue further, as true science is about questioning everything in order to find out about the world.
Too many people think science is about shouting your theory, sticking your fingers in your ears and singing 'la la la la' so you can't hear any arguments/evidence to the contrary.
S
PS I appreciated the joke about the deficit model, though!
Hello Shilisdair
I am sorry I have had to actually train horses and field questions to the press today - so I really, really, havent had a chance to answer everyone and that includes you - I havent the time.
I am sadly finding your responses increasingly aggressive and defensive, you have gone from a smack cures all, to challenging my 'hypothesis' and rants as to whom I can or should quote.
However if it pleases you - I quote all references in 'Equine Behaviour a guide for Veterinarians and Equine professionals' , Dr Paul McGreevy and all references as per Dr Andrew McLean - ref my earlier thread when I answered you at length.
I am not on trial here - I do not have to defend myself to you - this is not the debate - the debate is "should whips and spurs be banned in competition when they are used to punish non-performance"
Therefore I will not comment further - I am used to dealing with people that listen and analyse and have constructive enquiry.
You can google me and you can contact me by telephone and you can come and see my training and meet my clients and their horses - you really are more than welcome .
best wishes johanna
[/ QUOTE ]
Hi Johanna
A few points if I may, although it seems you are not used to having your statements questioned - but we are a feisty and inquisitive lot on HHO!
1. Scientifically speaking, hypotheses are put forward to be challenged, experimented upon, and hopefully one day proven true or false (not always as easy as it sounds).
So as soon as you put forward a statement such as
<font color="blue">
'The global scientific evidence for banning PUNISHMENT is overwhelming and is as a result of hundreds of scientists (including as far back as PAVLOV in the 1920's) around the world with hundreds of thousands of studied horses to come to verified conclusions on reactions for learning, including, observation statistics, measures of stress levels, adrenalin, diamorphine etc.,, increased heart rate , in the trained horse.'
</font>
then of course, you will be expected to first clarify, and secondly back up these claims with references to the hundreds of scientists etc (and one book reference isn't quite the same
2. No, of course you don't have to defend yourself, but if you put yourself forward as an expert dispelling 'dogma' then you are expected to prove your expertise, before we will accept your statements as valid. People evaluate the information they are given according to the source, the content, the evidence, etc - surely you understand that?
3. I understand perfectly why you will not discuss your claims further - you are clearly used to people who merely listen, and accept without question. HHOers are not quite that passive, unfortunately, and question everything.
I find it a shame that you are too closed-minded to debate the issue further, as true science is about questioning everything in order to find out about the world.
Too many people think science is about shouting your theory, sticking your fingers in your ears and singing 'la la la la' so you can't hear any arguments/evidence to the contrary.
S
PS I appreciated the joke about the deficit model, though!
Quadro
Well-Known Member
a harsh bit can be used as a punishment and can cause more dammage than a whip???? has that been taken into account???
Shilasdair
Patting her thylacine
[ QUOTE ]
a harsh bit can be used as a punishment and can cause more dammage than a whip???? has that been taken into account???
[/ QUOTE ]
Let's face it - if you want to abuse a horse, the means/tools to do so are endless, hence why banning whips in competition is pointless.
If anyone sees someone riding/training abusively, the best thing to do is report it to the appropriate authorities, and perhaps video it (if you can) as evidence.
S
a harsh bit can be used as a punishment and can cause more dammage than a whip???? has that been taken into account???
[/ QUOTE ]
Let's face it - if you want to abuse a horse, the means/tools to do so are endless, hence why banning whips in competition is pointless.
If anyone sees someone riding/training abusively, the best thing to do is report it to the appropriate authorities, and perhaps video it (if you can) as evidence.
S
Starbucks
Well-Known Member
It's such a shame that we even have to talk about this. Why should anyone abuse their horse in any way? I'm not a soft horse person at all, and agree with you all about why using the whip shouldn't be banned. But some people are cruel about it. Losers.
In fact why do some people even ride??
In fact why do some people even ride??
weevil
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
Too many people think science is about shouting your theory, sticking your fingers in your ears and singing 'la la la la' so you can't hear any arguments/evidence to the contrary.
[/ QUOTE ]
You mean it's not
I wish someone had told me that before my viva
Too many people think science is about shouting your theory, sticking your fingers in your ears and singing 'la la la la' so you can't hear any arguments/evidence to the contrary.
[/ QUOTE ]
You mean it's not
Shilasdair
Patting her thylacine
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Too many people think science is about shouting your theory, sticking your fingers in your ears and singing 'la la la la' so you can't hear any arguments/evidence to the contrary.
[/ QUOTE ]
You mean it's not
I wish someone had told me that before my viva
[/ QUOTE ]
And tell me, were you supported by hundreds of scientists with thousands of studies before or after you started singing?
S
[ QUOTE ]
Too many people think science is about shouting your theory, sticking your fingers in your ears and singing 'la la la la' so you can't hear any arguments/evidence to the contrary.
[/ QUOTE ]
You mean it's not
[/ QUOTE ]
And tell me, were you supported by hundreds of scientists with thousands of studies before or after you started singing?
S
Starbucks
Well-Known Member
You may as well have not bothered Dr Weev, Scientific evidence?? I mean, what does that mean when you have people opinions on their individual horses?
Just to put a spanner in the works (as a maths person), when people talk about scientific evidence, they often mean statistical evidence?
Just to put a spanner in the works (as a maths person), when people talk about scientific evidence, they often mean statistical evidence?
SuzyQ
Member
My personal opinion on my individual horse is that any failure of ours to reach Grand Prix is entirely down to that stroppy mare and if I do give her a hiding for it, it's only fair since she eats up my savings and lives like a queen.
Yes. Feeding and caring for animals by the book entitles you to beat them when their behaviour doesn't meet with your expectations.
Suzy
Yes. Feeding and caring for animals by the book entitles you to beat them when their behaviour doesn't meet with your expectations.
Suzy
martlin
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
My personal opinion on my individual horse is that any failure of ours to reach Grand Prix is entirely down to that stroppy mare and if I do give her a hiding for it, it's only fair since she eats up my savings and lives like a queen.
Yes. Feeding and caring for animals by the book entitles you to beat them when their behaviour doesn't meet with your expectations.
Suzy
[/ QUOTE ]
???
My personal opinion on my individual horse is that any failure of ours to reach Grand Prix is entirely down to that stroppy mare and if I do give her a hiding for it, it's only fair since she eats up my savings and lives like a queen.
Yes. Feeding and caring for animals by the book entitles you to beat them when their behaviour doesn't meet with your expectations.
Suzy
[/ QUOTE ]
???
TarrSteps
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
tarrsteps
I could weep with joy at your pearls of wisdom - this is exactly what we are saying
johanna
[/ QUOTE ]
Please don't.
The irony is that I think most people on here actually agree, whether or not they want to admit it.
Everyone agrees use of a whip has its place under certain circumstance, both as a subtly used tool (the conductor's baton) and as a form of defence/extreme negative reinforcement (obviously used with sense and timing) in situations which might lead to danger or are otherwise unacceptable.
Everyone agrees hitting a horse out of anger or after the fact is bad horsemanship and socially suspect.
Perhaps the sticking point is when in their training horses should be competing? Is it valid to ask people to refrain from competition until they are as sure as possible there will be no need of a whip for training purposes?
Or do people just not like being told what to do with their possessions? After all, the same debate has been had over hitting kids.
tarrsteps
I could weep with joy at your pearls of wisdom - this is exactly what we are saying
johanna
[/ QUOTE ]
Please don't.
The irony is that I think most people on here actually agree, whether or not they want to admit it.
Everyone agrees use of a whip has its place under certain circumstance, both as a subtly used tool (the conductor's baton) and as a form of defence/extreme negative reinforcement (obviously used with sense and timing) in situations which might lead to danger or are otherwise unacceptable.
Everyone agrees hitting a horse out of anger or after the fact is bad horsemanship and socially suspect.
Perhaps the sticking point is when in their training horses should be competing? Is it valid to ask people to refrain from competition until they are as sure as possible there will be no need of a whip for training purposes?
Or do people just not like being told what to do with their possessions? After all, the same debate has been had over hitting kids.
SuzyQ
Member
Martlin, does my last post somehow shock or baffle you?
Suzy
Suzy
Bellagate
Member
This isn't about a smack with your hand, this forum is about excessive use of the whip in competitions!!!
martlin
Well-Known Member
It does indeed, baffle rather than shock - not many things shock me nowadays
SuzyQ
Member
Why would it baffle you? I am keen to know
Suzy
Suzy
martlin
Well-Known Member
I was just baffled why you felt the need to post it? And what was it supposed to prove?
macarthur
Active Member
Please do!
if you google me you can find all the links both to me and Norfolk Horse Training and Equitation Club when we have training days etc., - you are all welcome. very much so and it will be 'practical' rather than psyco babble! - I promise!
and I will throw in tea and home made cakes!
Very best wishes Johanna
if you google me you can find all the links both to me and Norfolk Horse Training and Equitation Club when we have training days etc., - you are all welcome. very much so and it will be 'practical' rather than psyco babble! - I promise!
and I will throw in tea and home made cakes!
Very best wishes Johanna
SuzyQ
Member
Martlin, it wasn't supposed to prove anything. Just maybe hone in on what we are actually discussing here. Does caring for an animal entitle a person to punish that animal for performing behaviours unwelcomed by the person?
What do you think?
I may get myself a goldfish and I may wish to train it to do tricks. Would you say it's okay for me to punish the fish whenever it fails to jump through hoops? Surely, as goldfish are far less sentient than horses, I can take much greater liberties in depriving and/or abusing my fish than I ever could when training my horse, don't you think?
Of course, I would have to tailor my punishments to the small body of the fish, but let's assume I came up with a way of causing it considerable fear and animating it to display violent avoidance behaviours.... would that be okay? If I did it to a fish? For fun?
Suzy
What do you think?
I may get myself a goldfish and I may wish to train it to do tricks. Would you say it's okay for me to punish the fish whenever it fails to jump through hoops? Surely, as goldfish are far less sentient than horses, I can take much greater liberties in depriving and/or abusing my fish than I ever could when training my horse, don't you think?
Of course, I would have to tailor my punishments to the small body of the fish, but let's assume I came up with a way of causing it considerable fear and animating it to display violent avoidance behaviours.... would that be okay? If I did it to a fish? For fun?
Suzy