No real control.

SatansLittleHelper said:
Also I wanted to add that lack of "manners" isnt always down to a lack of respect. Some horses have fear/confidence issues that set a precedence for their behaviour.
Click to expand...

But respect and leadership are just as important for fear and confidence issues
A horse that respects its human leader because it knows what is expected and that the human is always fair will not be fearful .
 
Goldenstar said:
But respect and leadership are just as important for fear and confidence issues
A horse that respects its human leader because it knows what is expected and that the human is always fair will not be fearful .
Click to expand...

Of course. Im not disputing that at all. However, I wasnt referring to fear of the handler as such.
Just trying to put another side to it is all...not excuses for behaviour issues but reasons none the less x
 
DabDab said:
Did you know that the Oxford English Dictionary has now changed the definition of the word 'literally' so that it can be used to mean the same as 'figuratively' or 'metaphorically'. Confusingly though it can also still mean 'literally' (in the traditional sense) - this means that I do now have to ask you to clarify the meaning behind the statement in the quote above ;)
Click to expand...

PMSL... :D My head has just exploded :p
 
Goldenstar said:
But respect and leadership are just as important for fear and confidence issues
A horse that respects its human leader because it knows what is expected and that the human is always fair will not be fearful .
Click to expand...
Not sure if that can always be the case. It would be an idiot horse that wasn't scared if it was about to be swallowed up by a tsunami? And I am terrified every time someone comes anywhere near me with a needle despite my respect for their ability. Expecting a horse to behave logically and rationally all of the time regardless is perhaps neither logical or rational. What I do find remarkable is the amount of scenarios we face them with which they do cope with.
 
Auslander said:
The narrow minds are on both sides of the fence on this thread - wouldn't you agree?
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree 100%.
But I hope you aren't including me in that because I'm not bothered what people do with their horses as long as it isn't cruel, and I am perfectly happy to allow that there are always more than one way to effectively deal with a horse. What frustrates me is when anyone - from either side of the fence - asserts that their way is the only way, or that their horse is some sort of super-beast that nobody else would be able to deal with.
The number of times I've heard people saying "My horse would never put up with/be controlled/behave for that". And of course they do.

Lucy I agree with you 100%. I think horses are amazingly tolerant and often misunderstood beasts.
 
Goldenstar said:
But respect and leadership are just as important for fear and confidence issues
A horse that respects its human leader because it knows what is expected and that the human is always fair will not be fearful .
Click to expand...

Hmmmm - I agree and disagree. Yes, absolutely respect and leadership (and trust) are important . . . but just because Kal respects and trusts me, doesn't mean he won't be frightened of something - but it should mean that even though he is scared, he still does what I'm asking him to do, e.g., walk nicely past the pile of logs without beggaring off . . .

. . . it's really too much to ask of a prey animal that it never feel fear . . . but it isn't too much to ask that it trust it's human handler enough to act against the instincts that fear engenders.

P
 
Down to individuals, any 'system' only as good as user. Lady down road is Parelli instructor (registered, gets paid to teach, so should be relatively advanced & competant), 2 of her horses escaped recently & were on road so we caught them for her & put them in one of our fields for her to collect. They had dreadful manners, thoroughly rude, reared, tried to kick when being caught, bolshie ignorant gits. One was taken to show week later, not controlled properly, kicked a foal which collapsed with internal injuries, don't know if it survived.
 
Pale Rider said:
You need a rope headcollar, a 12 foot line and respect from the horse.
Click to expand...
I would say the first two are optional; one should be able to lead a horse using anything. Or nothing - though some 'misbehaviour override' in the form of physically restraining tack is generally prudent.

And isn't "respect from the horse" simply a slightly anthropomorphic way of saying "a well trained horse"?
 
LucyPriory said:
Not sure if that can always be the case. It would be an idiot horse that wasn't scared if it was about to be swallowed up by a tsunami? And I am terrified every time someone comes anywhere near me with a needle despite my respect for their ability. Expecting a horse to behave logically and rationally all of the time regardless is perhaps neither logical or rational. What I do find remarkable is the amount of scenarios we face them with which they do cope with.
Click to expand...
I agree.

fburton said:
And isn't "respect from the horse" simply a slightly anthropomorphic way of saying "a well trained horse"?
Click to expand...
I think so. However I'm not sure tbh.
 
I believe it is called a conversation, that's what happens. People digress, perfectly normal :)

PR is just sitting back on his porch, watching, hound dawg at his feet on one side, spittoon on the other ;) maybe :D[/QUOTE]

No, Pale Rider is sitting at the edge of the corral wearing a poncho and smoking a cheroot. He's looking at his pocket watch and any minute now he's going to walk over to Alyth, hand him/her a holster and say; "Now we start" ;)
 
fburton said:
I would say the first two are optional; one should be able to lead a horse using anything. Or nothing - though some 'misbehaviour override' in the form of physically restraining tack is generally prudent.

And isn't "respect from the horse" simply a slightly anthropomorphic way of saying "a well trained horse"?
Click to expand...

I would say yes. I try to avoid using that word because no one knows if horse not running you over = horse respecting you. Who knows if the feelings or thoughts in the horse's mind equate to the feelings and thoughts people have when they think of "respect." Or "disrespect" for that matter. Thinking of it in that way, I think, causes too much emotion and preconception than is useful for the handler. If you have a horse who is "disrespectful," you might approach the problem differently than you would if you had a horse who "needs to be trained to lead in a safe way." At least for me, I find the unemotional, behaviourist framework more conducive to good horse training.

I always like what Mark Rashid has to say on the subject, which is more or less that. In one of his books, he has an anecdote about someone at one of his clinics who was chasing her horse around with a wildly swinging lead rope. Mark asked what she was doing. She said, "My horse is disrespectful so I am teaching him to respect me." Mark then asked why she thought the horse was disrespectful. She replied, "When I lead him, he tries to barge ahead." Mark said, "So lets teach him to lead the way you want him to lead, rather than teach him to back away from a swinging rope."
 
Caol Ila said:
I always like what Mark Rashid has to say on the subject, which is more or less that. In one of his books, he has an anecdote about someone at one of his clinics who was chasing her horse around with a wildly swinging lead rope. Mark asked what she was doing. She said, "My horse is disrespectful so I am teaching him to respect me." Mark then asked why she thought the horse was disrespectful. She replied, "When I lead him, he tries to barge ahead." Mark said, "So lets teach him to lead the way you want him to lead, rather than teach him to back away from a swinging rope."
Click to expand...
Like your post Caol Ila . This one one reason I am unsure whether respect = well trained horse, in that scenario it sounds like respect = control by fear in that lady's mind.
 
Yes, and Mark, in that anecdote, went on to say that in spite of regularly teaching the horse "respect" by chasing it with a rope, this person still had trouble leading it (hence being at Mark's clinic). The horse had not made the connection (how could it?) between, "Owner acting hysterical and chasing me around with a lead rope" and "Walking over owner when she leads me."

He has a lot of interesting comments on herd dynamics and "respect." He says that in domestic herds, you often get a "dominant" horse who likes to chase the other horses and bite and kick at them. However, he has observed that the other horses usually don't follow that horse or choose to hang out with it. They just learn to get out of its way. He argues that the horses don't respect this dominant horse as a "leader," but rather they figure out what to do in order to avoid getting bitten and kicked. The horse who the others want to follow, he goes on to say, is what he calls a "passive" leader and while it doesn't accept being bullied, it won't go out of its way to chase the other horses and will be the horse who the others look to if they see something scary, for example, or follow around.
 
My horse sings in a choir.

Ner ner ne ner nerrr.... :D

P.s. sorry just being an idiot as usual, no offence meant to anyone :)
 
Last edited:
Caol Ila said:
He has a lot of interesting comments on herd dynamics and "respect." He says that in domestic herds, you often get a "dominant" horse who likes to chase the other horses and bite and kick at them. However, he has observed that the other horses usually don't follow that horse or choose to hang out with it. They just learn to get out of its way. He argues that the horses don't respect this dominant horse as a "leader," but rather they figure out what to do in order to avoid getting bitten and kicked. The horse who the others want to follow, he goes on to say, is what he calls a "passive" leader and while it doesn't accept being bullied, it won't go out of its way to chase the other horses and will be the horse who the others look to if they see something scary, for example, or follow around.
Click to expand...
I am familiar with his thinking. I am unsure about it myself (from observations of my domestic herd) but it is certainly a more constructive way to view herd dynamics if you are going to use it as a basis for your training.

I am not surprized the horse didn't know how to lead, she hadn't taught it! lol Realizing I had to learn to be a teacher/trainer was a big eye opener for me.
 
Other equine behaviourists and ethologists have also made arguments that dominance/aggression emerges when horses are in situations where resources appear to be finite. In herds where they have a bigger range and don't have to argue over piles of hay, for example, there is less overt conflict and aggression. But the horse who is aggressive or dominant over a pile of hay is not necessarily the horse who the others will follow if they all get spooked.

Ethologists generally make these observations based on feral or semi-feral herds. When you're dealing with domestic horses in your usual livery situation, there are lots of other variables. In addition to the acreage on which they're kept, you might have horses who didn't grow up in a herd environment and they're equine social skills are pretty poor (this would be my horse), plus you have a bunch of horses thrown together in a field who aren't a family group and in many livery situations, you have horses in and out as liveries move yards and new liveries come in.

I think Mark (and the ethologists) are writing at an "NH" audience who have been lead to believe, by erroneous observations of interactions of domestic herds, that dominance and hierarchy are the most important things in a horse's social life and you have to be the dominant horse. Hence all the chasing with a leadrope or excessive amounts of join-up (join-up can be useful in small doses, but people where I am from originally go a little bit nuts with it), for no reason other than chasing.

My own view is that the horse damn well knows we are not horses, which is a good thing. My horse is horrid to her fellow equines, but she is lovely to handle and be around if you have two legs.
 
Last edited:
Oh yes, I agree. I just think there is much more going on than MR describes and it's not that simple. I can categorize my lot but individual relationships are a big factor as well as who might be 'leader' or more aggressive dominant. My 'leader' happens to be dominant but only very rarely aggressive when exerting his dominance. There is one mini mare he listens to though. ;)
 
amandap said:
Oh yes, I agree. I just think there is much more going on than MR describes and it's not that simple. I can categorize my lot but individual relationships are a big factor as well as who might be 'leader' or more aggressive dominant. My 'leader' happens to be dominant but only very rarely aggressive when exerting his dominance. There is one mini mare he listens to though. ;)
Click to expand...

I edited while you were replying. :) I agree, and I think Mark has said more or less the same thing. As I said in my edit, I think his remarks about "passive leadership" are in response to a specific argument made by other trainers about herds having linear hierarchies based on who is the most dominant/aggressive horse.
 
Caol Ila said:
Other equine behaviourists and ethologists have also made arguments that dominance/aggression emerges when horses are in situations where resources appear to be finite. In herds where they have a bigger range and don't have to argue over piles of hay, for example, there is less overt conflict and aggression. But the horse who is aggressive or dominant over a pile of hay is not necessarily the horse who the others will follow if they all get spooked.

Ethologists generally make these observations based on feral or semi-feral herds. When you're dealing with domestic horses in your usual livery situation, there are lots of other variables. In addition to the acreage on which they're kept, you might have horses who didn't grow up in a herd environment and they're equine social skills are pretty poor (this would be my horse), plus you have a bunch of horses thrown together in a field who aren't a family group and in many livery situations, you have horses in and out as liveries move yards and new liveries come in.

I think Mark (and the ethologists) are writing at an "NH" audience who have been lead to believe, by erroneous observations of interactions of domestic herds, that dominance and hierarchy are the most important things in a horse's social life and you have to be the dominant horse. Hence all the chasing with a leadrope or excessive amounts of join-up (join-up can be useful in small doses, but people where I am from originally go a little bit nuts with it), for no reason other than chasing.

My own view is that the horse damn well knows we are not horses, which is a good thing. My horse is horrid to her fellow equines, but she is lovely to handle and be around if you have two legs.
Click to expand...

This. All day long . . . I've never believed that I need to be "dominant" over Kal to get him to behave . . . but I do need to earn/have his respect by putting some black and white boundaries in place and making it very easy to understand which side of that boundary I want him to be.

P
 
equine relationships are not linear and constantly challenged by those horses more socially ambitious than others, so if you take one horse out of the field the others readjust their behaviours/relationships. With an establised group this might go completely unnoticed by us but its one reason there's often trouble in livery yard fields. There are also horses thought to have varying degrees of social ineptitude (good job they aren't on forums ;) ) that don't respond correctly.

I spent a lot of time watching my three geldings, the 'leader' wasn't actually who I thought it was and when the youngster was 2/3 there were constant little 'battles' between the two underlings. atm I just have the leader and the youngster and its much more clear cut. Another youngster will be added in the Spring, it will be interesting!

I prefer Rashid's account of herd dynamics in regard to training to say, the Parellis-still not sure its entirely accurate although agree the one they give up food to isn't they one they would follow necessarily. However, what matters is clear, consistant teaching and being fair-most problems with horses have been taught inadvertantly IMO and 'bad' behaviour on the ground is usually reinforced by the owner. I am far from perfect myself but everytime one of my horses has had a problem its been due to a hole in their education or because I've done something badly! Its good fun getting a youngster straight off the moor, has taught me alot.
 
Last edited:
Caol Ila said:
I edited while you were replying. :) I agree, and I think Mark has said more or less the same thing. As I said in my edit, I think his remarks about "passive leadership" are in response to a specific argument made by other trainers about herds having linear hierarchies based on who is the most dominant/aggressive horse.
Click to expand...
Agreed. :)

PolarSkye said:
but I do need to earn/have his respect by putting some black and white boundaries in place and making it very easy to understand which side of that boundary I want him to be.

P
Click to expand...
I think that way round ie. us earning their respect is a great way to view it. After all would we 'respect' someone who expected us to be mind readers?
 
amandap said:
Agreed. :)


I think that way round ie. us earning their respect is a great way to view it. After all would we 'respect' someone who expected us to be mind readers?
Click to expand...

Yes, respect, insofar as we can infer that a horse has it, comes from clear and fair boundary-setting. Surely you've all had a boss who was a douchebag, but you did as they said because you needed the job. But did you respect that person?
 
Caol Ila said:
Yes, respect, insofar as we can infer that a horse has it, comes from clear and fair boundary-setting. Surely you've all had a boss who was a douchebag, but you did as they said because you needed the job. But did you respect that person?
Click to expand...

So does that mean we're back to the Parelli assertion that withholding water makes a horse respects its human . . . horse NEEDS water/human so does as it's told, in the same way that we've all obeyed a douchebag boss because we NEEDED the job . . . ?

Also, I used the word "respect" knowing that it's a human attribute that I'm not convinced horses share . . . but if you watch herd dynamics they do respond to fairness . . . as well as kindness and demonstrated trustworthiness . . . from their fellow herd mates.

Put simply, they learn to trust when they they know what to expect . . . I hope that made sense . . .

P
 
Caol Ila said:
Yes, respect, insofar as we can infer that a horse has it, comes from clear and fair boundary-setting. Surely you've all had a boss who was a douchebag, but you did as they said because you needed the job. But did you respect that person?
Click to expand...
I had teachers in mind! lol Specifically Miss Bloodsworth! I was terrified of her, so sat silent, not daring to move a muscle in her classes but I didn't respect her!

Yes, I think 'respect' from the horse comes from clear, consistent and fair teaching/training/handling. It isn't really respect though is it? It more trust, comfort and confidence in knowing where you stand and understanding what is expected. Aka solid training/teaching.
 
So really, "respect" is a floridly problematic term and it can be ambiguous when used to describe human relationships and quite critically, it does not equate to obedience. Perhaps that is the muddle that some horse training discourse gets into: the assumption that a "respectful" horse = an obedient one and, more problematically, that a disobedient horse = "disrespectful." The word "respect" arguably reflects the mental processes and feelings of the person doing the respecting. Not always their observable behaviour. You can obey the douchebag boss or teacher, but without respect, and while you might respect your husband/wife, you don't always obey them. :)

That's why I'm going to return to my original assertion, that "respect" is a pretty useless term for horse training because no one actually knows if the horse's mental processes and feelings while he follows your commands, or not, consist of what we understand as respect or the lack thereof. I don't think it is helpful to conflate "respect" with obedience/submission.
 
Last edited:
Clear consistent boundaries should be the basis for training any animal, from humans to elephants, to mice, with all things in-between. I work with adults with mental health problems, and the root cause for most of the people with a diagnosis of 'personality disorder' is lack of consistent care and boundaries (sometimes sadly not even their own skin was a boundary when they were children). No animal is born knowing the rules, and their ability to accept them is only as good as the way they are taught them.
 
Oh heck, I'm supposed to be doing something but a light bulb has just gone off in my tiny brain!

YorksG said:
Clear consistent boundaries should be the basis for training any animal, from humans to elephants, to mice, with all things in-between. I work with adults with mental health problems, and the root cause for most of the people with a diagnosis of 'personality disorder' is lack of consistent care and boundaries (sometimes sadly not even their own skin was a boundary when they were children). No animal is born knowing the rules, and their ability to accept them is only as good as the way they are taught them.
Click to expand...
Love that thinking about skin being a personal boundary! Makes such sense to me.

Yes Coal Ila, I also agree respect is a useless word. So many words become useless in the context of horses though don't they.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top