Parelli Demo on robert Whittakers stallion Stonleigh Friday 9th...Anybody else bside

Don't know if anyone if familiar with the term 'conditioned suppression' (look up Heather Simpson's work) but basically when a horse (or indeed human or any animal) is continually subjected to forcefull methods that it is made to give into (eg, harsh training, continual punishment etc), the horse eventually gives up fighting and just does whatever it is told. It will either go into a state of hyper-vigilance, always trying to work out what the human wants in order to avoid further mistreatment (and under constant stress as a result). Or will simply stop offering any new behaviours, becoming dull and listless (how many of us have seen this in old riding school horses, continually pulled around, kicked, yanked etc for no clear reason (other than the rider doesn't know what they're doing) and so the horse simply shuts off as a survival mechanism. Both these states are obviously bad for the horses health, the horses are far more prone to colic, stress related illness etc. Often the horses may appear fine on the outside, they never behave naughtily, wildly etc, but really they are not fine at all.
 
Bramley said:
We confronted Pat and Robert . I tried to get the officials to stop it. The gum line was cutting the horses lip and gums causing a wound. Pat tied up it's front leg and also tied it's head to the front leg with Linda hauling on the rope. That horse showed no sign at any point of agression and just took the pain. The vet examined the horse the next day and found a wound under it's lip. He stopped Catwalk being used again. Thank god. I fely phisically sick and was shaking from top to bottom. To quote Roberts words when i asked him why he let his horse be tortured he said that was ok by him! Pat is six foot two and spent two hours hauling on that gumline. So much for love language and leadership. I have never seen anything so viscious in my life. Pat did say he was sorry and what could he do to make it right with me. I said never do this again to a horse. Lets hope he never does.
Click to expand...

My friend and I were there with this lady, who I might add was rightly incenced! All that she has described about the encounter is true. Also when PP was asked by my friend, J"ust why did you feel the need to do that?" Pat replied with a grin, "For the good of the horse......for the good of the horse".
 
I agree with AllySmalice that this sort of technique is pretty barbaric. If it was the only option avaliable and would save the horse a lot of ongoing distress then that is one matter, but it is crude and nasty and in my mind a last resort. There are much much kinder ways of tackleing this problem as so many others have pointed out, and I am surprised that these have not previously been tried/have not worked. As I said, maybe this was a last resort but I very much doubt it. I like to give the benefit of the doubt when I haven't seen something for myself, but my gut instinct tells me that this is WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. Sorry if I keep posting similar things but for some reason this has really got to me

I have worked in animal welfare and I don't consider this 'cruel' as such. Well I do and I don't. It is to me personally and In an ideal world, yes it shouldn't be allowed. But we need some perspective. The type of stuff going on every day to many animals is far, far worse than this and much as this distresses me, I would rather see the extreme cruelty cases dealt with (such as herbivores starved to such an extent they were eating their own dead).
 
savvylover112 said:
I would also like to ask yourself to rethink your meaning of cruelty to horses. Alot of people don't find the likes of rolkur, crank nosebands, tie downs, etc. to be cruelty and it goes on without an uproar. Alot of people all over the world use ideas such as hobbling, and tying up of legs on horses but they are not as well publicised and not seen. These things are not cruelty to twitch a horse while it is being shod is not considered cruelty so why should it be considered cruel to twitch a horse for the purpose Pat did?
Click to expand...
That's your justification for PP's methods? Some people are OK with rollkur etc, so everyone should be OK with Parelli? What tosh. And there is plenty or uproar. I don't use any of the above, does that make me better qualified to criticise Parelli?
And whilst we're on the theme of what is 'natural'. Horses like to bite and kick each other, so why is it wrong to smack a horse if he bites me? I have to analyse why he bit me and treat the cause... right? How is that natural? It's not what would happen in the wild; he would be disciplined instantly.
I also dislike that many of the advocates of Parelli believe it is the ONLY humane way to treat horses; there are many videos on YouTube to that effect. SO, if PP twitches a horse, then that's fine, but if anyone else twitches a horse then that's cruel... what's that all about?
 
Weezy said:
Shauna, I have handled many, many stallions, and it is not my view that they have to be treated *differently* at all - that is man made IMO.
Click to expand...
Well, if leading a stallion you might not want to hang around in front of a mare's stable... :p
You are quite right though; all the stallys in Argentina were treated much as any other horse was... with the above proviso :D
 
With regards this being a last resort, I think Robert had only had the stallion with him for six weeks, so not really long enough to try many other methods. Call me a cynic but I think Robert though PP would be able to fix it so didn't really try much, just booked Catwalk for this demo, probably not expecting to have happen what did (prehaps thinking PP would play afew games with catwalk and then he'd be cured?) and the Parelli's obviously thought being associated with a top UK show jumper was too good a business oppurtunity to miss so jumped at the chance to get involved.

From what's been said I don't think any real attempt was made to 'fix' Catwalk prior to this demo, I know that on most comp yars I've been to the horses are just forced if they have a problem such as this (As Robert basically said), as they 'don't have time' to 'faff around' trying to desensitise the horse etc, they just want to get on with riding and competing it.

So I think they just jumped straight to the most extreme method before trying anything else. Prehaps because it would be more interesting (!) for the crowd to watch and obviously gets resutls/reactions quicker then spending hours/weeks gradually densisitising the horse.
 
I know that rolkur has had a ban but only in the warm up ring that does not mean it doesn't go on and isn't still in practise and being tolerated not liked but tolerated.

I don't think stallions should be treated in a different way but the way they are treated in this day and age by being separated and kept away from other horses is not natural to them and has changed the way they behave towards any horse or human. We do not know if Catwalk has been treated in this way but it is the way *most* stallions are treated today.

I do not believe Pat went against his principles in doing this I just believe that he used a completely extreme but effective phase four on this horse because this was an extreme horse who was effective at asserting his dominance towards people. A human must be the dominant leader in the herd or be dominated. If the human is dominated they will be walked all over. Most stallions are more dominant that other horses and so need a person that can become more dominant still. Pat needed to be the leader in the situation and while I do not agree with everything that appears to have happened at the FOTH Robert Whitaker the owner of the horse seems ok with it. He is sending the horse to James Roberts foundation station for more work after this. It shows he puts trust in the program and the results it will give.

I understand the program but am not far enough into it to understand everything that was done in this session. I know others who are level 4 who completely understand why everything was done during the session on Friday. I believe a lot of people don't understand anything about the program but saying they don't understand anything about horses is insulting and untrue so I am not saying people here don't know about horses just don't know about horses and I would like it not making you do it but would like it if people would put meaning now into "Don't knock it till you try it" not saying try what Pat did to Catwalk but don't knock what Pat did until you try the program or at least try to understand the meaning of the program and it might help you see why Pat did what he did I myself am still looking for answers to that.

Shauna
 
savvylover112 said:
I understand the program but am not far enough into it to understand everything that was done in this session. I know others who are level 4 who completely understand why everything was done during the session on Friday. I believe a lot of people don't understand anything about the program but saying they don't understand anything about horses is insulting and untrue so I am not saying people here don't know about horses just don't know about horses and I would like it not making you do it but would like it if people would put meaning now into "Don't knock it till you try it" not saying try what Pat did to Catwalk but don't knock what Pat did until you try the program or at least try to understand the meaning of the program and it might help you see why Pat did what he did I myself am still looking for answers to that.

Shauna
Click to expand...

You see Shauna, this is the thing that really, REALLY gets my goat. "Don't knock it till you try it" - well yes, sure, but for ANYONE to try it they have to part with a LOT of money. It is utterly wrong to have a public demo and not explain what and why you are doing what you are doing, instead leaving it in the realms of mystery unless you subscribe time and money into a corporate business.

You are saying that you don't understand why he did what he did but you blindingly agree with it - can you see where people have a problem with that?
 
savvylover112 said:
I do not believe Pat went against his principles in doing this I just believe that he used a completely extreme but effective phase four on this horse because this was an extreme horse who was effective at asserting his dominance towards people.
Click to expand...



EAR SHY? By Pat Parelli
Can you touch your husband's ears? What about your best friend's, your child's or your mother's?
If you couldn't then there's probably something wrong with the relationship! This is how I want you to think of your horse's so-called 'problem'. If he doesn't like his ears to be touched its because deep down inside, he does not trust you. There is a flaw in your relationship.
When I talk about the solution here I am going to give you the natural approach, the one that consider's the horse's point of view. To effect a 'cure' you have to gain his trust and permission. The normal way is often to force the horse to accept it, twitch him, tie him, throw him…. In my mind (and in the horse's I'm sure) this is akin to rape and I won't use it.
So to do it with the horse's permission may seem to take a little time, technique and knowledge, but if you do it right you won't have to do it over,




That's what people are not happy about.
 
savvylover112 said:
I understand the program but am not far enough into it to understand everything that was done in this session. I know others who are level 4 who completely understand why everything was done during the session on Friday. I believe a lot of people don't understand anything about the program but saying they don't understand anything about horses is insulting and untrue so I am not saying people here don't know about horses just don't know about horses and I would like it not making you do it but would like it if people would put meaning now into "Don't knock it till you try it" not saying try what Pat did to Catwalk but don't knock what Pat did until you try the program or at least try to understand the meaning of the program and it might help you see why Pat did what he did I myself am still looking for answers to that.

Shauna
Click to expand...

So do realise that youre contradicting yourself here?

So youre saying we must study to level 4 to understand what PP did?

i can tell you for nuthin!

PP used mechanical force to make the horse submit. end of.
 
Binky01 said:
EAR SHY? By Pat Parelli
Can you touch your husband's ears? What about your best friend's, your child's or your mother's?
If you couldn't then there's probably something wrong with the relationship! This is how I want you to think of your horse's so-called 'problem'. If he doesn't like his ears to be touched its because deep down inside, he does not trust you. There is a flaw in your relationship.
When I talk about the solution here I am going to give you the natural approach, the one that consider's the horse's point of view. To effect a 'cure' you have to gain his trust and permission. The normal way is often to force the horse to accept it, twitch him, tie him, throw him…. In my mind (and in the horse's I'm sure) this is akin to rape and I won't use it.
So to do it with the horse's permission may seem to take a little time, technique and knowledge, but if you do it right you won't have to do it over,




That's what people are not happy about.
Click to expand...

Absolutely.
 
I do know that it does sound contradictory and again I am not defending Pat Parelli god if I did that it would be a battle and I would not be a light hearted person anymore.

Pat should have explained EVERYTHING that was going on and if he couldn't because he was concentrating on the horse he should have had Linda or one of the higher level instructors do it. I do feel it is a lot of money to just try it and one way of just trying it is not to go out and buy everything but look for someone in your area that you know does Parelli and ask to have a loan of their DVD material or equipment. Parelli followers have been growing in the UK until now.

To this quote "So to do it with the horse's permission may seem to take a little time, technique and knowledge, but if you do it right you won't have to do it over," obviously Pat felt he did it right because he did not have to do all of this for over 3 hours again.

And no I do not think you should have to study to level 4 to understand what he did because I feel he should have explained everything at the time of it happening. He should have an explanation out now and he should explain truthfully to everyone why this was done to this horse.
 
Don't knock it 'till you try it". I did. I tried it. I tried it all the way into level 3 on the ground (much slower ridden with the horse I had). I started to question some of the things I was seeing and hearing (like the flawed take on certain aspects of equine behaviour for example). Against the advice from the man himself I started to go and look at other trainers. I learnt. I learnt that when I was in Parelli I was being taught to use a level of force that other trainers never "needed". I learnt that most of the horses I was told were dominant were operating from a base of fear. I learnt to think for myself and do my own research and guess what? I'm not a Parelli student any more. But don't accuse me of not understanding what is going on when something like this is inflicted on a horse. I know what is going on, and I even know the Parelli-logic for doing it. The flawed logic that is.
I am not anti-Parelli though, I think there are aspects of it that are good, but sadly, especially of late, the bad seems to be outweighing the good.
 
I want to add something. I think that talk of Rolkur, abuse and cruelty and neglect are irrelevant to the discussion. The fact that other people do things that are arguably worse than Pat did in this long 3 hours doesn't make his actions any better (or any worse).
 
savvylover112 said:
Another thing I would like people to consider is the fact of how different stallions are handled by everyone than mares and geldings. They are kept in confinement away from most horses and will try to defend their territory when they feel threatened and they tend to feel threatened a lot of the time.
Click to expand...
Believe me, not all stallions are kept like that or behave like that. I've known several laid back, gentlemanly, sensible and well-socialized stallions that didn't show any indication of 'feeling threatened a lot of the time'. However, if you treat a stallion like a criminal he may well behave like one!

All stallions can appear to be the same as all horses but they are dominant and extreme.
Click to expand...
With respect, that is an overly simplistic caricature of what stallions are like. Many, many stallions are perfectly manageable and a pleasure to handle. Of course, playing dominance games and getting extreme with them yourself is quite likely to lead to problems!

Pat needed to be the dominant figure in the equation and it appears he had to be extreme in asserting his dominance.
Click to expand...
That's probably where he's going wrong then. I simply cannot understand this obsession with dominance and 'being alpha' that Parelli folk appear to have.
 
haven't read all 39(!) pages, BUT just watched the video, stallion DEFINITELY doped in the first bit, after friday night, labelled Sat, 2nd session, look at glazed eyes, dropped head,and dangly bits(!) as he walks to the right of the pic. bit after that , also labelled sat 2nd session, the horse is completely different , bright , alert and chewing on the bit, very stalliony in stature. very odd ---
 
I know it was said quite a few pages ago now but it has taken me ages to catch up to the end of thread as it keeps growing, however I just wanted to bring back up something that PD mentioned. About the reasoning behind the horses leg being held/tied up. To my understanding PD is claiming the reasoning behind this is that the horse thinks it's going to die, but then when it doesn't die and it lets pat touch it or whatever it learning it's ok. So to my understanding PD is saying the the horse has to feel it'll die to get it to do what he wants and that's ok. But i'm failing to understand the reasoning behind this, if that is indeed the reason pat did it. For example if I walked into a bank and held a gun to someones head to make them think they're going to die and demand they give me money, when they then comply I take the death threat away and it's all ok? I know that's a little over the top but to me that's what it seemed like PD was implying so I was wondering if I was the only one who didn't understand this? As I don't see how instilling the fear of death in an animal as kind horsemanship which seems to be what Parelli is supposedly about.
I've never liked Parelli, in the beginning I looked into it and wanted/tried to understand it a little but after I saw some of the things they do I was completely put off. And what was done to catwalk sounds awful but I guess now that the result seems to have been achieved session one will be brushed under the carpet and pat will be hailed for making such a big change.
 
Binky01 said:
EAR SHY? By Pat Parelli
Can you touch your husband's ears? What about your best friend's, your child's or your mother's?
If you couldn't then there's probably something wrong with the relationship! This is how I want you to think of your horse's so-called 'problem'. If he doesn't like his ears to be touched its because deep down inside, he does not trust you. There is a flaw in your relationship.
When I talk about the solution here I am going to give you the natural approach, the one that consider's the horse's point of view. To effect a 'cure' you have to gain his trust and permission. The normal way is often to force the horse to accept it, twitch him, tie him, throw him…. In my mind (and in the horse's I'm sure) this is akin to rape and I won't use it.

This is tosh. I have seven horses. In the summer 3 of them are unhappy for me to touch their ears. This has nothing to do with our 'relationship' it has however, everything to do with the flies and midges which cause them to shake their heads and move away from me.
Click to expand...
 
shysmum said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8j25pS6ixWk

found this video of parelli with catwalk - looks very heavily edited ??? :confused


:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CyF2QqP29DU

As there are so many peeps watching this thread, I'll add the one of Linda and the one eyed horse, just for good measure. Sorry if you've seen it before. sm x
Click to expand...



This is the first time I have seen the video of LP with this horse, who I believe was blind in one eye, and after watching it I don't think I would like to see what PP got upto with Catwalk, but I know for sure if anybody did anything like that to my horse I would be knocking them out. I have owned horses for well over 40 yrs and have had many in that time and am very proud of each and every one of them, treat them in the fashion you would like to be treated and they will serve you well.
 
I have not read all of the threds, but I know first hand that Parelli sucks.

I have a lovely but cheeky NF pony that I was happy to play the 7 games with, until I have a lesson with a Parelli instructor.

She belted my pony so hard with the carrot stick that I had tears on my eyes and my mouth let rip at her.

Needless to say I left with a very angy self for letting anyone touch my pony, I was so mad I could have punched her, I will NEVER again use his methods.

So I can only imagine what this poor horse has suffered at his hand!
 
Ponydentist:

It is human supremacy over animals....its why we kep horses and other animals....it makes us feel better if we do.
Click to expand...

I think this very sentence, just shows us the very fundamental difference in our thinking towards animals and I can now slowly start to understand your desire for dominance and alpha status.

It also shows that our most basic outlook on animal ownership is poles apart.

To that end there is no way we are going to agree on methods of training if we think of our animals in such a different way from the very beginning.

I most definitely do not keep animals for the reason you state.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top