Natural Horsemanship. Is it just a circus act?

P

PuddingandPie

Well-Known Member
Joined
13 May 2010
Messages
78
Visit site
I am sure most people have been here before on this subject but the more I see the more I believe the "trainers" that put on displays/training clinics are more into money, circus tricks and dominance than really helping people to respect and work "with" horses. I know that if I use a certain method to get my horse onto a trailer I will have success, rather than because there is a mutual trust that has developed between us. But strangely I would rather have my horse load because he will do it for me rather than because I have dominated him. Am I strange? I don't want a horse that jumps rubber balls, or stands on a platform only suitable for a performing sea lions (which I don't approve of either!). I want a horse that understands what I want and responds through a good relationship rather than carrot sticks, poking and generally agitating the horse. I suppose I like "personality" and don't want a puppet. Happy to discuss, but could I also say that these "natural" methods, in inexperienced hands are incredibly dangerous because you need to have a real understanding of horses to know what might go wrong! Not here to offend, just, over the years, have come to dislike these "guru" methods more and more.
 
Most horsemanship is common sense which some people have in abundance, others have none. I would never knock all the trainers who hold demos or clinics as some of them are very good and have helped a lot of horses and owners. The problem comes when people slavishly follow methods without thinking if it is right for them and their horse and will not deviate from that path regardless. There is good and bad in most areas, the key is trawling through all that to go with what works best for each individual horse.
 
I have to agree that the circus tricks type of 'natural horsemanship' does not turn me on. I haven't watched much of the demonstrations, but those I have seen seem to have reluctant horses performing because they must. They do not seem to enjoy themselves in the way the trainers (who perhaps shall remain nameless but I'm sure most of you can supply names yourselves) say they are. I know said trainers achieve amazing results, with co-operative horses in all disciplines, but as you say, they need to be used by experienced people who can read their horses well. And I've seen these people misread their horses mood dreadfully. (someone's going to shoot me down here, I know it!) ;)

On the other hand, I use Monty Roberts training methods as far as I am able and have had the most excellent results. This is a very different type of training and does involve getting the horse truly on side, which, it has to be said does include being dominant. In the herd, the dominant horse gets the underdog (underhorse?) to do as she orders and excuse me if I prefer to be the dominant partner when I'm dealing with half a ton of stroppy 'I want to do it my way' beastie. I prefer to keep my neck whole. I'm talking here about initial training of wild ponies and of re-training of horses who have discovered they hold all the cards in their relationship with their human. In their book it is definitely 'their' human: the horse calls the shots and Monty's methods are a good way for a novice to change that and get back in control.

For example: the other day my horse decided, out of the blue, to refuse to box. Never happened before. He found that rearing up and off the side of the ramp seemed to work, so after a few times of that, I put a Dually halter on him and he discovered that hopping off the ramp suddenly wasn't possible and in he walked ahead of me as usual in about 20 seconds. We got to the ride on time! :)

I am hoping to do the courses that Kelly Marks runs and become an Accredited Monty Roberts trainer, then hopefully I won't keep making the mistakes that I now still make.
 
What I hate is the cruel training methods used by a certain "natural horsemanship" trainer to achieve these tricks (Parelli).

If people want to train their horses to stand on things it is up to them but what I abhor is how most of the horses are trained not to be horses at all, they are trained not to think.

Parelli is based entirely on negative horsemanship, so much so that they even said in one of their videos that horses don't understand praise. Parelli's basis is do as I say or I will make you uncomfortable, the videos of Barney, Catwalk, the little Arabian all prove this as does any training video/book they have produced.

I don't agree with hitting horses full stop. Parelli followers on the other hand disagree with hitting horses unless you are using a carrot stick in which case it is a perfectly acceptable training method, in fact it can't be beaten.
 
the only one i like is monty roberts and kelly marks. monty had a bad child hood and was beaten by his father before he was 10 years old he had numerous breaks and fractures. he is not violent and his methods really do work. i have tried alot of it at home and found it has really worked well with me and my horse. obviously it works more for some people and less for others but i am a great believer. i can also understand if people don't understand it or believe in it. each to their own
 
lexiedhb said:
Popcorn and coffee anyone? :)
Click to expand...

e025.gif
c050.gif


I don't think the two taste that great together!
 
Good horsemanship is good horsemanship, there are good and bad points in both NH and 'traditional'.

Personally I use a hybrid between the two, ie, I take the bits I like and discard the ones I don't agree with - from both methods.

However, I really dislike Parelli.
 
horsey mad matt said:
the only one i like is monty roberts and kelly marks. monty had a bad child hood and was beaten by his father before he was 10 years old he had numerous breaks and fractures. he is not violent and his methods really do work. i have tried alot of it at home and found it has really worked well with me and my horse. obviously it works more for some people and less for others but i am a great believer. i can also understand if people don't understand it or believe in it. each to their own
Click to expand...

mmmmmm trouble is Monty's family, including his siblings dispute the fact that he had a hard childhood and was beaten so there are question marks over his portrayal tbh.
 
Yes Andy the family book, ridicule will not make it go away, whatever you say - there is a big question mark there.
 
Amaranta said:
Good horsemanship is good horsemanship, there are good and bad points in both NH and 'traditional'.

Personally I use a hybrid between the two, ie, I take the bits I like and discard the ones I don't agree with - from both methods.

However, I really dislike Parelli.
Click to expand...

^^^this for me too^^^^^
 
Whether he's lying about it or not it does it change your view on his methods? I think he's a good horseman and has good methods despite his family history.
 
Some of the psychology that Pat Pirelli uses for groundwork, I can understand and I agree with but then they take it too far by doing the circus tricks.
The Monty Roberts aspect I do agree with. None of this carrot stick waving etc.
I use bits and pieces of these methods, mainly the body language and understanding why my mare reacts the way she does.
But the circus training is just a no go. My horse in the wild would not stand on a podium and pick up each leg when a big orange stick was waved at it..
 
Yes, I am afraid it did alter my view a little, it cast doubts, for me anyway. This, coupled with two or three things that happened behind the scenes at a couple of demos, changed my initial view of him. Prior to this, I thought he had single handedly changed the way the US broke horses tbh. I do still think he has done some good, but I also think he is a bit of a paper God.

What I do believe though is that he did make people think more about the horse and the way it thinks which can only be a good thing.
 
eahotson said:
Well in all fiarness horses in the wild don't have saddles on their backs and don't go hacking,jumping etc. do they?
Click to expand...

Very good point.
Saddles, bridles and hacking is one thing but circus training I just don't agree with in the slightest, especially since their target audience is the average horse owner..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top