Natural Horsemanship. Is it just a circus act?

All posts have been very insightful only, people seem to centre on two protagonists, namely Monty and Parelli. What worries me is the ever increasing number of people both in the UK and abroad who seem to be claiming to have "invented" their "own" methods. With respect to you all...you have sensible heads but what of the poor uneducated who are desperate to learn and get sucked in by this overgrown populus of "experts"?

One recent graduate from a college with "equine behaviour" in the title told me catagorically that mares are never leaders and if a horse bangs its door to be fed, in a large yeard, not to feed it until last to "make it learn".

How do we protect people who wouldn't know what was right or wrong and ensure that proper standards of welfare are adhered to and maybe even a body to check out these peoples' credentials?
 
Wish there was an easy answer to that, puddingpie. I guess its the same with anything though, the novices are more liable to be taken in by the not so good ones than those who are more knowledgeable. Catch 22.
 
PuddingandPie said:
All posts have been very insightful only, people seem to centre on two protagonists, namely Monty and Parelli. What worries me is the ever increasing number of people both in the UK and abroad who seem to be claiming to have "invented" their "own" methods. With respect to you all...you have sensible heads but what of the poor uneducated who are desperate to learn and get sucked in by this overgrown populus of "experts"?

One recent graduate from a college with "equine behaviour" in the title told me catagorically that mares are never leaders and if a horse bangs its door to be fed, in a large yeard, not to feed it until last to "make it learn".

How do we protect people who wouldn't know what was right or wrong and ensure that proper standards of welfare are adhered to and maybe even a body to check out these peoples' credentials?
Click to expand...

I think it is unsuprising that focus lands on Monty Roberts and Pat Parelli, as these are the two most widely advertized of all the Natural Horsemanship trainers in the UK at the moment. To call them protagonists is probably somewhat disingenuous, as I, for one, don't see them as in direct competition with each other. I do believe however, that Monty Roberts has upped his game somewhat since the early 90's having seen the rapid expansion of Parelli Natural Horsemanship here in the UK.

The two are very different, and recent controversy surrounding Monty Roberts has no doubt damaged his credibility somewhat. Roberts claims to have studied wild horses interacting as a youngster and from that developed the language of Equus, and the concept of 'join up.' Parelli on the other hand constantly talks of his mentors Troy Henry, Tom Dorrance et al. not claiming to have 'invented' anything, but passing on what he has been taught. Pat Parelli, has also been subject of some controversy only last year and that will have damaged him.

I agree that there has been a growth in the number of horse trainers who are in some way cashing in on the growing interest in these training methods. However, I feel it is somewhat condesending to speak of uneducated people, not knowing 'right' from 'wrong', and being sucked in. Sucked into what? Natural Horsemanship?

To talk of setting up some 'body' to check on 'credentials' is in my view a bit of a joke, particularly here in the UK. If we look at the high profile sports in the UK like racing, dressage and show jumping, the actual welfare of the majority of horses involved in the sport comes a poor second to the desire to win. Successful horses spend their lives in padded cells, albiet a few exceptions, the rest are the dross shed by the sports, relying on kind hearted horse owners or the knacker man for a future. Dubious training methods occasionally come to light such as Rollkur, how long did this obvious abuse take to be outlawed by the 'appropreate overseeing body'.

As far as keeping a watch on training riders and horses in the UK the BHS have been in poll position here since Noah was a lad, and a right pigs ear they have made of their responsibilities. BHS approval for a riding stables or livery yard means nothing. The standard of teaching is not good overall. The 'Uneducated people, not knowing right from wrong,' as you refer to them, are constantly being fleeced by approved establishments, not being taught how to 'ride' but being sent in circles for an hour with someone 'yelling sit up straight.'

As far as this example goes 'One recent graduate from a college with "equine behaviour" in the title told me catagorically that mares are never leaders and if a horse bangs its door to be fed, in a large yeard, not to feed it until last to "make it learn".' There will always be thick students and graduates.

We have some excellent riding establishments and excellent teachers here in the UK, where the welfare of the horse is paramount, but this is because of personal achievment by those involved, not because of some overseeing body.
 
COFFEE BREAK FOLKS! Point is ...has Monty had a face lift? He has that stretched look with his teeth sort of bared..just the same as Burt Reynolds and Kenny Rogers. Probably the same cosmetic surgeon. DISCUSS AND ENJOY BISCUITS.:D:D
 
Andy you are talking a lot of sense. I must correct myself when I say "uneducated". What I should say is people who have little knowledge of what is right or wrong...as I speak from experience having been one of those being yelled at to sit up straight, kick on and never dare drop a sixpence from my knee against the saddle!

I also agree that a "body" is a joke in principle because nobody seems to want to make a stand, follow through or have the courage of their convictions. It would be nice if all these "trainers" setting up in many nooks and crannies should have some kind of association to affiliate to so that you know you are getting someone with adequate training at the very least! I know I could put a programme together, hype it up and get takers but that isn't right! I also agree that the methods of teaching generally are not very good in that teachers don't seem to take a holistic approach. I am not referring to a vast proportion, but a big enough number to be able to find someone suitable for me in terms of horse welfare, ability to impart knowledge and someone who works on the whole picture and changes the rules to suit the horse.
Thank you for being so open. It is quite refreshing.
 
I agree great post.

AndySpooner said:
Dubious training methods occasionally come to light such as Rollkur, how long did this obvious abuse take to be outlawed by the 'appropreate overseeing body'.
Click to expand...
Just have to pick up on this because I don't believe the 'outlawing' of this is actually working in practice due to some wording and interpretation of the so called rules.

In the end it's down to individual horse owners/carers who have the reponsibility for their horses to take this responsibility seriously and make informed decisions and learn ways that they believe are right and fair to the horse. Just following any teacher blindly is fraught with problems, there has to be a level of understanding about what you are doing and the effects on the horses to truely make 'informed' decisions.
 
I tried Join Up with my lad when he went through his "teenage tantrum" phase after I bought him - he was crushing me against the wall in the stable, biting and kicking (or trying his damndest), and spooking at everything when I rode. I ignored the "sell him" advice that I was given, and opted to try Join Up. I went in to the indoor school fairly sceptical (having heard that the horses used in demos for NH are pre-trained) ... let horse off lead rope, stood well back, left him to wander for a minute, then walked towards him, head up, shoulders squared, looking him right in the eye - and he ran for his life!

He tore around the arena, changing direction everytime I got too far behind him, then when he started to slow down and lower his head I turned my back on him...

We didn't do the whole job 'properly' (he didn't walk towards me) but since then our relationship has been fantastic. I didn't go to see him (he's on full livery) for 3 weeks [because I'd hurt my back] a few days after our session (nothing to do with the horse) I went up again thinking that I might have to sell him - not because of his behaviour, but because my bad had been bad and I was feeling very miserable. I stopped to talk to one of the yard people, and heard a "crashing" sound, I looked down the passage and could see my horse practically climbing out over his stable door!

When I went into the stable he was all over me nuzzling me and lipping my hands...I started crying

That was about 20 months ago and things have been going great for us since, despite my continual absences due to my Bad Back (and more lately because of my mother's sudden onset Dementia), when I go get up to see him he greets me enthusiastically and when I do ride him he's much much calmer.

He's got a home for life
d226e672.gif
 
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...
Well said! I do, however, like John Lyons. (did I just out myself as a NHperson?! :eek::rolleyes:)

lexiedhb said:
Popcorn and coffee anyone? :)
Click to expand...
Coffee please! :D

IHK said:
I met a 19 year old young lady socially recently and 'Your Horse Live' came up in conversation because I said how I enjoyed watching the Fredericks and that I wished I could have spent more time watching some of the demonstrations. She said "There would be nothing there to interest me - I guess because I'm already really experienced with horses". It would have been too embarrassing to admit that there are some of us who have been at this a while who feel we're still learning ...
Click to expand...
:eek: I've been involved with horses (personally & professionally) for about 15 years now, and can honestly say I've never stopped learning.



As for the whole NH debate, there are good & bad in all training. Pick what works for you AND YOUR HORSE and chuck the rest.
 
Unfortunately "natural horsemanship" often carries with it a "tag" of being weird and wonderful, and very modern - it unfortunately has this image of being rather Hippie and trendy, which isn't always a helpful image.

IMO there's nothing new or trendy about getting the best out of one's horse; and what's happened over the years is that good old-fashioned horse-sense has been lost. It used to be that if your family had horses, you'd have probably have been sent out with the ostler or the groom to learn about how to handle often difficult horses, and that knowledge would have been taught to you as a child and you would have then had it for life.

Now we have a lot of people coming into horses as adults who frankly haven't got a clue; and will soak up any so-called "wisdom" - and don't have the experience or background to be able to discern whether its good or not.

Going back a long long time; the Red Indians of native America knew how to handle their horses; of course they did, they were reliant on them for not just travelling but also very probably for food as well, plus warfare. Similarly many of the nomadic tribes throughout history - they didn't need to do a Parelli Level 2 course!!! There was a tribe in the East that Martin Clunes featured in his recent TV programme about horses, and it didn't look like they needed a Parelli course either !!!!

Then you have the old-fashioned grooms and ostlers in our British tradition; who lived, breathed, and existed for horses - and who passed that knowledge on to anyone who'd listen. Plus the discipline existing in the cavalry, with the very disciplined approach to horsemanship and riding.

All of these people were, in their own way and in their own time, using "natural horsemanship": so I don't feel that certain individiuals who are selling their "product" with a great deal of hype, expense, and regimentation about equipment and what "level" you are, are doing anything new or exciting!

To my simple brain, the correct approach with any horse is the one which achieves the result the rider/trainer wants: as Michael Peace says, "if you want the results you've always had then keep doing the thing you've always done" (or words to that effect). So the opposite is true, sometimes one might need to be open to different (not necessarily new) methods of horsemanship.

I like Michael's "think equus" approach: but surely this should be something those of us who've been around horses a while should be doing anyway? Yes, there are people out there that need to learn it - so, for them, its "new". But to be effective, it should be more than second nature, it should be instinctive.
 
I guess for me, natural horsemanship is just good horsemanship. There are good trainers in all aspects of horsemanship, whether traditional or NH. Bad ones too. Like others have said, you take the bits you like, and not the bits you dont.

As for it being a circus act or trick training, surely everything we teach the horse is some kind of trick? Being on a horse's back isnt natural for them, they have to learn it. Same with jumping big jumps, piaffe, half pass. although the horse can naturally do these movements, its really us who determines what has the most value. I guess most people think of dressage and jumping has the most value because its most popular, but to a horse, its just being taught something.
Maybe standing on a platform seems to trick like for some people, but then again, we ask the horse to load into a trailer, so what the difference.
At the end of the day, we train horses to perform different things to make it easier for us to work with them and ride them.
 
I like Michael's "think equus" approach: but surely this should be something those of us who've been around horses a while should be doing anyway? Yes, there are people out there that need to learn it - so, for them, its "new". But to be effective, it should be more than second nature, it should be instinctive.

I like this comment because it is very true that not all are blessed with instinct around horses. I know of people who have been on every course going, including BHS ones and still manage to get regularly trampled, knocked over, trodden on, bashed in the head by their horses' heads and break their legs before they even manage to get on the horse! Common sense, intuition, safety in a practical way are not really embedded into everyone when they go near a horse and what makes sense to one person is not necessarily easy to understand for another. When I attended the first NH demo it was frightening to see how these latter people could suffer some real damage because the couldn't recognise the possible consequences when they first "applied" it, especially when the response was dramatically negative. I saw the results of this and a couple of people went home with bruises on them in places they didn't expect and were more nervous of their horses than before the demo. BHS methods don't really take in the principles of "think equus" either because they difficult to explain in their manuals or because they were not aware/thought it might not always work/may even be dangerous.
Trainers from any background/methodology need to understand the body language of the horse and indeed their own....but here is the rub.....each one uses their own body language in a different way...some only confront, some turn away, some stamp their feet and march, others stand quietly.....not every horse responds in the same consistent manner ...so where do we go from here?
 
MiJodsR2BlinkinTite said:
Unfortunately "natural horsemanship" often carries with it a "tag" of being weird and wonderful, and very modern - it unfortunately has this image of being rather Hippie and trendy, which isn't always a helpful image.

IMO there's nothing new or trendy about getting the best out of one's horse; and what's happened over the years is that good old-fashioned horse-sense has been lost. It used to be that if your family had horses, you'd have probably have been sent out with the ostler or the groom to learn about how to handle often difficult horses, and that knowledge would have been taught to you as a child and you would have then had it for life.

Now we have a lot of people coming into horses as adults who frankly haven't got a clue; and will soak up any so-called "wisdom" - and don't have the experience or background to be able to discern whether its good or not.

Going back a long long time; the Red Indians of native America knew how to handle their horses; of course they did, they were reliant on them for not just travelling but also very probably for food as well, plus warfare. Similarly many of the nomadic tribes throughout history - they didn't need to do a Parelli Level 2 course!!! There was a tribe in the East that Martin Clunes featured in his recent TV programme about horses, and it didn't look like they needed a Parelli course either !!!!

Then you have the old-fashioned grooms and ostlers in our British tradition; who lived, breathed, and existed for horses - and who passed that knowledge on to anyone who'd listen. Plus the discipline existing in the cavalry, with the very disciplined approach to horsemanship and riding.

All of these people were, in their own way and in their own time, using "natural horsemanship": so I don't feel that certain individiuals who are selling their "product" with a great deal of hype, expense, and regimentation about equipment and what "level" you are, are doing anything new or exciting!

To my simple brain, the correct approach with any horse is the one which achieves the result the rider/trainer wants: as Michael Peace says, "if you want the results you've always had then keep doing the thing you've always done" (or words to that effect). So the opposite is true, sometimes one might need to be open to different (not necessarily new) methods of horsemanship.

I like Michael's "think equus" approach: but surely this should be something those of us who've been around horses a while should be doing anyway? Yes, there are people out there that need to learn it - so, for them, its "new". But to be effective, it should be more than second nature, it should be instinctive.
Click to expand...

Great Post.

I was having this self same conversation with my trainer yesterday. His opinion is that now we have so many leisure horses the old days of horse knowledge/sense being passed down from father to son are pretty much over. He has had calls from people who have bought a horse who have no idea about feeding "so shall I just open the bag of feed and leave it in the field" "what's it temperature? oh do horses have one" stunning really.

So this is when we have the danger of people soaking up any old wisdom, be that from the big name trainers or someone on the yard or thinking that watching a DVD makes them an expert. The problem with this is that not all horses will fit into the prescribed training patten, a good trainer will stop and think of another route, adapt their method to the horse, unfortunately many simply forge ahead and the horse gets pressured into doing it "their way" and following the formula.

His other comment was that "people now a days want perfection in 2 weeks, with no realisation that actually its a bit like losing weight, the slower you do it the better, the more you build the foundation, the more solid and confident your horse"

But his main mantra "consistency consistency consistency" in all things from leading, to riding complicated pattens.
 
Chavhorse said:
Great Post.

I was having this self same conversation with my trainer yesterday. His opinion is that now we have so many leisure horses the old days of horse knowledge/sense being passed down from father to son are pretty much over. He has had calls from people who have bought a horse who have no idea about feeding "so shall I just open the bag of feed and leave it in the field" "what's it temperature? oh do horses have one" stunning really.

So this is when we have the danger of people soaking up any old wisdom, be that from the big name trainers or someone on the yard or thinking that watching a DVD makes them an expert. The problem with this is that not all horses will fit into the prescribed training patten, a good trainer will stop and think of another route, adapt their method to the horse, unfortunately many simply forge ahead and the horse gets pressured into doing it "their way" and following the formula.

His other comment was that "people now a days want perfection in 2 weeks, with no realisation that actually its a bit like losing weight, the slower you do it the better, the more you build the foundation, the more solid and confident your horse"

But his main mantra "consistency consistency consistency" in all things from leading, to riding complicated pattens.
Click to expand...

I think that it is right to say that horsemanship as has been passed down through the generations since Xenaphon has indeed been lost. I very much agree with 'consistency' but also believe that 'education' is also vital.

As the role of the horse has changed through history the number of people dealing on a day to day basis with horses has become fewer, and expertise lost.

I also believe that to place too much credence on the military approach to horses is a mistake. As the 'one size fits all' attitude of the military has lead to some horrific developement of tack and practises, not widely known. Horses were used in battle and not expected to survive, wire bits or tongues cut out were common forms of restraint and control. Mechanization, though leading to the decline of horses in the wider society, is probably a benefit to horses on an individual basis. It has to be remembered that of the millions of horses and mules that left these shores for Europe during the First World War, non ever came back as if they survived the battles, the fear of disease meant that slaughter was the end for them.

The military influence on the traditional approach to horses in the UK can be seen in lots of spheres still, in UK equestrianism, indeed early BHS books on the care of horses placed great emphasis on proper attire worn by the horse owner/keeper, ties being a must.

I see the increased interest in natural horsemanship as an overall benefit for horses and horse keepers in todays world. I think that the increased use of DVD's etc as the logical progression from the countless books written about horsemanship, is also a benefit, but, having read a book did not make an expert nor should watching a DVD be assumed to do the same.

DVD'S etc. have a role to play in horse training as it a fantastic thing to be able to see what a trainer is trying to demonstrate.

In an ideal world I would like to see the 'natural' and 'traditional' tags become a thing of the past as everyone tries to achieve a high level of 'horsemanship', taking the approach that the horses individuality is one of the most vital aspects in tayloring his training to achieving the desired results.
 
To all the people who say 'it's just common sense' just google 'the curse of knowlege' i.e. 'forgetting what it was like not to know'. I find it fascinating when I'm 'the student' in situations (giant learning curve subject is 'stable planning permission' at the moment) and 'the experts' make so many assumptions about what I 'should' already know.

The amount of people that say to me about their horse 'he's not frightened - he's just stubborn' and the horse is totally rigid, his head held really high, eyes popping out, his breathing about 3 times the rate it should be, doing droppings every 2 minutes - and I point the signs of fear out and it's like they see them for the first time. These are not bad people - it's just we all have a tendency to see what we want or expect to see.

Interestingly sometimes these people may be really good competitive riders. Being a good competition rider has a different skill set from being a great groom/vet/carer/breaker/whatever (common sense really!) Perhaps in the good old days people recognised this more and a yard was more likely to have a resident 'old man' who noticed things and you went to with all your problems. If my memory serves me right their name was often 'Snowy'!

Kelly Marks
 
Last edited:
IHK said:
To all the people who say 'it's just common sense' just google 'the curse of knowlege' i.e. 'forgetting what it was like not to know'. I find it fascinating when I'm 'the student' in situations (giant learning curve subject is 'stable planning permission' at the moment) and 'the experts' make so many assumptions about what I 'should' already know.

The amount of people that say to me about their horse 'he's not frightened - he's just stubborn' and the horse is totally rigid, his head held really high, eyes popping out, his breathing about 3 times the rate it should be, doing droppings every 2 minutes - and I point the signs of fear out and it's like they see them for the first time. These are not bad people - it's just we all have a tendency to see what we want or expect to see.

Interestingly sometimes these people may be really good competitive riders. Being a good competition rider has a different skill set from being a great groom/vet/carer/breaker/whatever (common sense really!) Perhaps in the good old days people recognised this more and a yard was more likely to have a resident 'old man' who noticed things and you went to with all your problems. If my memory serves me right their name was often 'Snowy'!

Kelly Marks
Click to expand...

A huge issue is that people worship their natural horsemanship gurus to such a degree they are almost seen as omnipotent beings.

They defend the rights and wrongs of their chosen leaders unquestioningly.

I have seen many supposedly natural people justify striking a horse repeatedly the face in the name of natural horsemanship, common sense should tell people that it is wrong but tribal feeling justifies it to them.
 
team barney said:
A huge issue is that people worship their natural horsemanship gurus to such a degree they are almost seen as omnipotent beings.

They defend the rights and wrongs of their chosen leaders unquestioningly.
Click to expand...
That's a ridiculously sweeping statement! Maybe some do, but most don't.


I have seen many supposedly natural people justify striking a horse repeatedly the face in the name of natural horsemanship, common sense should tell people that it is wrong but tribal feeling justifies it to them.
Click to expand...
That's just rubbish! A more likely explanation is that you have seen what you wanted to see ....
 
I have to say I WAS a fan but now I take elements of each of the trainers rather than follow any one "religiously" as they would like!

Oh and yes unfortunately I have seen people being taught (in a 3 day course) and it included one woman being told to strike her arab with a stick on the side of its head, several times. I saw it, was soooo shocked and wrote to the firm.

Later on, giving them the benefit of the doubt, I wanted to hold a course using one of their instructors and promoting them. I put up posters which someone emailed to them - they came down on me like a ton of bricks and were going to sue me. Yikes it was scary! Basically they didnt like it as they thought they were missing out on revenue when really I was getting them new followers ....
Turned right off them now - I have seen through the act they have become and I actually feel upset that THEY let me down (never mind the horses!).
Some of the basics are good so just pic out the good bits!
 
team barney said:
A huge issue is that people worship their natural horsemanship gurus to such a degree they are almost seen as omnipotent beings.

They defend the rights and wrongs of their chosen leaders unquestioningly.

I have seen many supposedly natural people justify striking a horse repeatedly the face in the name of natural horsemanship, common sense should tell people that it is wrong but tribal feeling justifies it to them.
Click to expand...

This is the very essence of my concern! Watching Horse and Country TV last night the "Australian" repeatedly said "Point, Cluck, Whack it!" "If it keeps showing you its rear end then thrash it!" What hope is there when it it is being filmed in a large indoor venue full of "supporters" and available for all of us in the UK to watch, whether we are able to make a judgement or not? The "Down Under" trainers are more frightening than any of those in the UK..but then how many of those that we see in the UK are actually based here? Domination and submission seems to be key to these trainers and it takes all forms of horrific "no pain, no gain" behaviours. Maybe I am old fashioned and prefer a less "intrusive" methodology, which would change naturally for each individual as no size fits all. Maybe I don't achieve results as quickly as others, but I do have sane, trusting and willing horses as a result. As the leading international horse transporter once said to me "I would rather have a plane load of TB stallions than one polo pony newly broken in from Argentina!" Don't ask me to explain as I used to live there!
 
PuddingandPie said:
This is the very essence of my concern! Watching Horse and Country TV last night the "Australian" repeatedly said "Point, Cluck, Whack it!" "If it keeps showing you its rear end then thrash it!" What hope is there when it it is being filmed in a large indoor venue full of "supporters" and available for all of us in the UK to watch, whether we are able to make a judgement or not? The "Down Under" trainers are more frightening than any of those in the UK..but then how many of those that we see in the UK are actually based here?
Click to expand...

Please don't tar all trainers with the same brush just because they come from Oz! Steve Halfpenny at www.silversand.com.au visits UK each year and is the best horseman and people person I have met - his respect for the horse, and for the people who come to his clinics, is authentic, unlike some whose only respect is for the £££s they can extract!
 
Pudding, Don't tar all Australians with the same brush, Anderson is totally different to Halfpenny.

The depth of knowledge here really needs to be much improved, most criticisms are half baked, ill informed or some personal axe to grind.

No trainer or method is perfect, live with it, it will drive you mad if you don't.
 
I havnt read through all the other posts because there's so many lol just thought I'd tell you ally side having used natural horsemanship. It really is the best thing for me and my horse. She's one of those typical mares that wants to be dominant, bargy n generally get her own way, she would stand and fight anyone that tried to beat her black and blue, she sees red and that's it, however for the last 2 years I've done natural horsemanship with her, not to perform tricks, I don't get her to stand on blocks and all that 'circus' stuff as people like to call it lol that just shows to what extent it can be used. I use itbin a way that's made her respectful of my space, she doesn't drag me around, basically it's a way of communicating to her in her own language as let's face it they don't speak our language but that's not to say they don't understand praise, of course they do, it makes them sk much more willing as they pick up on your positive attitude and energy. My mare jess will switch on and off so she's not snail pace if I need her to be forward however if I just want her to stand in one place she will, that's jot to say however thy she can't be as alert to everything around her as she would normally she can look wherever she wants.
It's just about getting them to think for tthemselves and figure out what you want without gettin in trouble for making a mistake during learning, they tend to be more in the attitude and mind set of 'where would you like me to be, what would you like me to do'. It can help mentally tire your horse which is great as so many horses turn into drones as they don't think for themselves, and also the activities you do can help them lift and carry themselves in a more natural way. There's always going to be people against it but for me it's changed my horse no end for the better she enjoys to work with me now instead of against me and still retains her personality through it all too which is great, we do have a better relationship and she seems more confident with things now because she's more confident in me. I havnt done it by myself I've got a trainer near me that's fantastic and I've been gettin her every 3 weeks for the last 2 months and can't wait till my next session xxx
 
I have to say that natural horsemanship has saved me and my horse because we would have killed each other without it.

There's always a right way and a wrong way to do everything. If you do natural horsemanship right, it works. If you do it wrong, it goes horribly wrong.

You can't be naive but take everything with a grain of salt. You actually have to pay attention and if you are getting the wrong result you have to be willing to admit your mistake and find a different way to do it.

Everything in balance. Too much of natural horsmanship is bad in the same way that too much classical horsemanship can be bad.

I also think that it depends on the horse. Some horses are fine without natural horsemanship, in fact, most probably are, but my mare wasn't. And we had nowhere else to turn. And it worked. And I take classical dressage lessons.

So take that as you will.
 
Oh just to add, I never hit jess, I would never as it's not Antibes right to force a horse to do something they are an animal and really at the end of the day are gna do as they wish. If you hit my horse you would lose he respect too it's just pointless, my trainer never strikes a horse with anything fir any reason despite it's behaviour. I don't worship her lol but like anything, people see things that you can't yourself so it's always handy to have a regular session with a professional instructor xxx
 
ISHmad said:
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.
Click to expand...

Here here to that, I am a fan of some of the natural horsemanship stuff, but you do really need common sense. 2 of my friends have *******ed up their horses, turning them into a ball of nerves, from overuse of "natural" stuff. I did, however, find a really good trainer here in Ireland, called Laura Domencia. She's fab, no nonsense natural horsemanship, that basically reckons you have to be the "dominant" mare, create boundaries, and not have your horse over step them. As an example, my first ground work lesson with cooper, he was nudging me quite forcefully with his head. She explained that just cos you love him, thats him pushing your buttons... needless to say, we stopped him doing that, by using her methods. she has taught me so much, some of it fairly basic, but unless your told, you'll never know. I feel I am a better rider and more confident handling horses because of her, and am delighted to have met her!!!! www.connectedhorsemanship.com for anybody in ireland interested. she's also on facebook, through her own name.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top