Jean Francois Pignon...

I really don't see why a circus is any different from other uses of domesticated animals, other than a problem with their care, e.g. if horses in a circus do not get time in a paddock in a herd (which they might do for all I know).

Why is teaching my horse to stand still at the mounting block, any different from LFP teaching his horse to lie down, or a circus horse putting its front legs on a tub?
 
One of my ponies does a "circus trick" - I taught his to stand with his front legs on a big block of wood. It took no more than 5 minutes and two attempts to get him to do it and now if he goes anywhere near the block of wood, he goes and stands on it looking very pleased with himself! I've tried to get a couple of the others to do it but they really cannot see the point . . . . !
 
Thank you BooBoos! We clearly saw the same performance to the others!!

The whip wasn't being used as a punishment, more an extension of his hand/body.... This was illustrated by when he cracked the whip when the ponies were laying down and they didn't bat an eyelid.

I wish I knew more about Parelli/Joinup as I believe that his roots are there...

....and as I understand it, the reason those horses may be lame/he has this incredible bond with them...is that they are rescued horses.... so get your facts straight before jumping on the 'neglect' bandwagon....
smile.gif
 
As I commented on the previous post I do not agree at all that the horses look unhappy - a horse having its ears back can mean numerous things. I think we all could do with learning more about horse body language and expressions seeing as we all spend so much time with them.

I thought the horses looked healthy and happy (maybe a bit too well covered even!) and do not see how his methods of training can be considered any more 'cruel' than showjumping or dressage or other equestrian sports/leisure activities.

He isn't riding the horses, he's not kicking them in the ribs, he's not hauling their mouths anf not once did I see him HIT the horses with that whip at all. The use of it was similar in my mind to the use of a driving whip or one use when lungeing. i've seen much worse whip use in other disciplines!!

The horses in his display see him as herd leader, the fact he also has them do 'tricks' just shows their respect and trust in him.

As of circus act - how is it different to the whole dancing with your dog displays that seem to be soo popular?!
 
A girl on another forum was stabled near him at Olympia. She was interested to watch how he handled his horses, and was impressed when he let go and they walked into their stables unaided. While he faffed around inside he left there doors open, she said that they seemed really well trained to be standin so patiently inside. However one went to put its nose out of the door and apparently it received a lash across the face with Jean's lunge whip. You can see why they respect his whip so much. It's only natural that a horse is curious to see out of a door, if you want to repremand it I'm sure you'd get better results in not whipping them across the face. However having said that I was not there in person.
 
I think the horses do love/respect him therefore could he really be accused of beating them??
When he mucks out he opens the doors and the horses walk outside and eat breakfast while he mucks out then when he has finished they walk back in. Also when he goes from the stables to the arenas he does not use whips etc they all follow him in a happy crowd but do still scowl at each other like any bunch of loose horses would? e
 
this is not only aimed at you atall but the comment about the ears being back, i thought and you may disagree but many people, trainers and horse phycologists say that having the ears back means the horse is concentrating on you and forward ears means they are concentrating on the surroundings. I personally really respect jean francois, very few people can say they have enough trust, ability and talent in their horses that they can ride them as he does and have them follow. I also think that if he was making the horses suffer they would follow their natural instict and flee or fight but when he works in open areas such as beaches where there is a perfect opertunity to flee, they stay. Just what i think :-)
 
Booboos said:
I am totally astounded at what other people saw!

What I saw was normal horse communication for horses that were so close to each other. The ear flicking, tail swishing, etc is not one tenth of what mine do to each other what free in the field. I wouldn't for a moment think that these horses were unhappy.

Unhappy horses, frightened, subdued or cowered horses would take the first opportunity to either run away or kick him in the face...instead they all worked at liberty.

The whip was used as a targeting aid. This is a bog standard technique in operant conditioning (although clearly his results are not bog standard, but quite exceptional!). It has nothing to do with negative reinforcement either. Negative reinforcement is the punishment of unwanted behaviour through a negative punishment, e.g. if the horses broke ranks he would use the whip to hurt them so they would not do it again. He used the whip to touch them in different places, which is a cue for behaviours, and to indicate where the horses should place themselves, again a cue.
Click to expand...

Thank you! I was reading these posts and actually feeling very guilty for not spotting any of the negative points. Sure, they had their ears back some of the time, and he was handling a whip. My horses don't always have their ears forward and I carry a whip too - but I sure as heck don't harm them.

I just thought it was an incredible display of trust .......

Am I really that wrong?? :confused:
 
SJ_Superstars said:
Yes I agree - the little chestnut pony looked lame to me!

And Caribb ... negative reinforcement is ok to a certain extent, but for all anyone knows he could be thrashing those poor horses...
Click to expand...
For all you know he might never thrash those "poor horses" :confused: how the hell can you say things like that if you haven't seen anything first hand?
 
He was on a beach with these horses, with no fences and no barriers. He was not in an arena. If any of these horses had not been happy, they would have fled (and the flight reaction was spoken about several times during the program). When Martin Clunes ran down the beach and the horse turned around and followed him back, surely it wouldn't have done that if it hadn't wanted to.

Several years ago, I worked at the International Horse Show at Olympia and when arriving there one morning I was astounded to see JFP walking down a pavement in Hammersmith with three horses following him in a line - no headcollars, or lead ropes.....
 
I thought he was amazing and can't see what the difference is between that than making a horse do dressage, jumping, polo or anything else. These are far less natural and more demanding than what he was doing.
 
Booboos said:
I am totally astounded at what other people saw!

What I saw was normal horse communication for horses that were so close to each other. The ear flicking, tail swishing, etc is not one tenth of what mine do to each other what free in the field. I wouldn't for a moment think that these horses were unhappy.

Unhappy horses, frightened, subdued or cowered horses would take the first opportunity to either run away or kick him in the face...instead they all worked at liberty.
Click to expand...

Totally agree! If those horses were unhappy or scared there is no way on this earth they would have stood on that beach without headcollars and lead ropes!
 
Mithras said:
To me, it looked like they were putting their ears back at one another, to maintain the herd heirachy when moving around. At other times, when they were not close together, their ears were not back. The slightly smaller grey was clearly the herd leader of the horses. The horses were at least communicating and behaving actually quite normally for horses while doing some unusual manoevures.

As for the use of the lunge whips, its no different to holding one when you are lunging or loose schooling surely? So I guess its there to reinforce this during the act and as a training aid. After all, he's not riding them, he doesn't use leg aids.

When horses are together in a herd, they often don't look particularly happy either. Depending on the horses, they seem to do nothing but make sour faces at each other, have their ears back and threaten to kick. Horses don't speak so body language is how they communicate.
Click to expand...

Agreed with the ear thing.

I personally think he is fantastic.
 
I think what he can do with a number of horses in an open space is amazing. I do not know what his training methods are but as others have said he is almost certainly no worse than the average professional showjumper/eventer/dressage person.

However when I saw him at Olympia last Christmas the chestnut was most definitely lame, and one of the others looked suspect at times, and that has put me off him.
 
I saw his show a Lyon with the floodlighting and it was spectacular and I cannot believe that he gets that control by any forceful methods. Bareback riding standing up with no tack is wonderful.
 
I saw him at Olympia & hated every minute, I felt very uncomfortable with the whole thing & it made me feel sad, almost to the point of wanting to cry. I thought the horses looked really unhappy & a couple, including the chestnut, were lame. I wouldn't dream of taking a lame pony to a show & making it perform, so why is it acceptable for him to do it??
 
Maybe it was just me but i didnt notice that the horses were unsound.
But in my opinion all i saw was a man bonding with all his horse, the stick was there to direct, i mean if you saw me with a whip riding a horse, which was going nicely, does that mean that all of you must therefore persume that i have really beaten them up to get him to go nicely.
To me it sounds as if you are all jealous enough, to think of something he has done bad to them, do you not think there could be a chance that he actually bonded with them?
 
I have seen videos of him and been a bit in two minds as to whether the horses are happy or not.

However, watching that programme yesterday, unless it was a lot more cleverly edited than the previous videos I've seen, was a picture of all happy horses, as far as I am concerned. Amazing man to have horses work like that for him while loose (and not just him but martin too). I'd love to have lessons with him.
 
I watched the programme with him on yesterday I was in awe at what he had those horses doing.

The body language of the horses in question, when in close contact with each other, is just what I would expect (although I do admit I am no expert).

I myself do some ground work stuff with my mare and use my whip as a way to direct her but at no point do I hit her or threaten her with it. So much so that I can put the whip anywhere on her body, both from the ground or whilst riding her, and she does not react in any way. However should she need a quick smack for being naughty she does get one (not very often needed though)!

I am totally amazed yet again at just how intelligent horses are. I felt humbled after watching the program last night and can't wait to see my little mare tonight just to let her know how very much I love her :)
 
I can't imagine why anyone thinks he uses the whip to hit these horses, or why anyone would ever conclude that you can beat horses into working entirely free with you (it it was that easy, we would all do it, alfterall anyone can thrash a horse).

The whip is a targeting stick, a tool which is often used in dog training. Clearly he uses it to mean 'we are working now and you have to pay attention' because when he transferred it to Clunes, the horse came to work with him. It can also be used to give commands, the easiest is "I raise the whip, you rear" exactly like the Beduin guy in the desert and it can be used to target, as in "I point with the whip here, you come here".

The thought that whips are only used to hit is rather unimaginative.
 
I don't believe that those horses are 'thrashed' with a whip. A riding school where I worked had a couple of lazy horses, try handing a rider a stick and those horses would be off in anticipation of a smack! There was no fear shown by those horses who didn't even have a headcollar on.

Personally, I think if I was a horse I'd rather be trained loose like that than have a double bridle, spurs and tack as well as the rider to deal with. Those horses looked much less forced than lots of competetive horses that I've seen.

As for the lame one, there can be mechanical lamenesses as well as pain related ones, and look how many everyday horses are worked on bute.
 
Booboos said:
I am totally astounded at what other people saw!

What I saw was normal horse communication for horses that were so close to each other. The ear flicking, tail swishing, etc is not one tenth of what mine do to each other what free in the field. I wouldn't for a moment think that these horses were unhappy.

Unhappy horses, frightened, subdued or cowered horses would take the first opportunity to either run away or kick him in the face...instead they all worked at liberty.

The whip was used as a targeting aid. This is a bog standard technique in operant conditioning (although clearly his results are not bog standard, but quite exceptional!). It has nothing to do with negative reinforcement either. Negative reinforcement is the punishment of unwanted behaviour through a negative punishment, e.g. if the horses broke ranks he would use the whip to hurt them so they would not do it again. He used the whip to touch them in different places, which is a cue for behaviours, and to indicate where the horses should place themselves, again a cue.
Click to expand...

Totally agree with this Booboos
 
Booboos said:
I am totally astounded at what other people saw!

What I saw was normal horse communication for horses that were so close to each other. The ear flicking, tail swishing, etc is not one tenth of what mine do to each other what free in the field. I wouldn't for a moment think that these horses were unhappy.

Unhappy horses, frightened, subdued or cowered horses would take the first opportunity to either run away or kick him in the face...instead they all worked at liberty.

The whip was used as a targeting aid. This is a bog standard technique in operant conditioning (although clearly his results are not bog standard, but quite exceptional!). It has nothing to do with negative reinforcement either. Negative reinforcement is the punishment of unwanted behaviour through a negative punishment, e.g. if the horses broke ranks he would use the whip to hurt them so they would not do it again. He used the whip to touch them in different places, which is a cue for behaviours, and to indicate where the horses should place themselves, again a cue.
Click to expand...


Totally agree with this, the horses did not look unhappy at all, horses also put their ears back when concentrating and to me they were only right back when they were communicating with each other.

If he had thrashed the horses into submission, they would not behave the way they do towards him.

As for the whip thing - I use a whip inhand all the time, to direct not hit. God almighty what do people use when they lunge FGS!
 
I'm with Mithras, Booboos, simplyme and the others who see positives. Doesn't mean I haven't wavered towards 'dislike' but I have watched and studied him and reached the conclusion that whatever dominance he has over them is subtle and happily complied with. They MUST respect him and none look as though they fear him. We, for the most part, haven't got what he has or at least not developed it fully. He loves and trusts them (if his body language fools us, it won't fool them) and they likewise.
 
there are too many "experts" on here- who know what?? i thought he was brilliant and cant believe that cruelty took part in this at all. nothing to do with circuses, he was on a beach for gods sake!as others have said, you dont lunge properly without a whip, for guidance.the pony even followed Martin and i cant believe he would be part of behind the scenes cruelty!!!
 
Booboos said:
What I saw was normal horse communication for horses that were so close to each other. The ear flicking, tail swishing, etc is not one tenth of what mine do to each other what free in the field. I wouldn't for a moment think that these horses were unhappy.
Click to expand...
I think it's a pity that his horses should dislike, or be vying with, each other to the extent that it is clearly visible in their body language - assuming that's what it signifies. Obviously that's not something J-F P can control - how well horses get on with each other is up to the horses (although there are ways we can alter their management to make it worse or better). Nevertheless, despite him being able to do some impressive stuff with the horses, for me it does detract from the overall impression. I prefer to see horses that get on amicably with each other (and believe me they do exist!).

Unhappy horses, frightened, subdued or cowered horses would take the first opportunity to either run away or kick him in the face...instead they all worked at liberty.
Click to expand...
Quite so, p*ss*d off or frightened wouldn't be slow to retaliate or run off - though horses can become resigned to the necessity for compliance, if the way they are trained is too relentlessly insistent on obtaining compliance.

Negative reinforcement is the punishment of unwanted behaviour through a negative punishment, e.g. if the horses broke ranks he would use the whip to hurt them so they would not do it again.
Click to expand...
Sorry to be picky, but negative reinforcement isn't the same as punishment at all. It's a common and understandable assumption for people to make when they hear the word "negative". However, in this context, it simply refers to the fact that something more or less unpleasant, such as leg pressure or being tapped with a whip, is stopped or removed. At least, that's the way the term is defined in behavioural science - so if one is going to use a technical term at all, it's best to use it in the way it was intended otherwise it tends to create confusion and get in the way of communication.

(Btw, what you described - adding something unpleasant to stop or reduce a behaviour - is indeed punishment.)
 
he can look a bit whip happy but i would think that is just showmanship like a person conduting an orchestra not actually that he would use it to hit the horses and certainly not in an inccorect or harsh way
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top