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

I love it when people start demanding threads be closed :rolleyes: heaven forbid people be allowed to keep chatting about something :p

its really very easy to get it done but I'm not one for giving hints ;)
 
I said that 20 posts ago I think and got shot down about closing it down, but then realised everyone has a right to have their say. what somebody should do is have a poll. Do Parellie do any good for horse/Are Parellie in it for the money.
And if I hear the word SAVVY from someone close I'll deck them.;);););)
 
Face up to it everybody. Parelli made a big mistake. The horse Catwalk is ok which of bloody well course he would be after such a short period of training time. Damage limitation is in order, parelli actually is a clever horseman same as the whitakers, we don't need to follow them blindly!!! use your own personal judgement, ethics and stop being so bloody anthropomorphic about the animal involved, CATWALK IS OK that is all that matters!!! the rest can be sorted. Get over your selves!!!!
 
shysmum said:
vandypip, I think it's time you just stopped logging into this thread now. This is of serious concern for a huge number of people, and to be insulting to them is just - words fail me. I hope that your comments are removed. I am determined to know what is going to happen, as are most of the people on this forum. Who are you to tell us what we should/should not do ? This forum is being read internationally, and it is you who looks the complete numpty.

Itsmylife - please don't leave !! There are only a few who are showing their age. The vast majority of people are interested in everyone else's views - and that includes yours. Btw, welcome to the forum :D
Click to expand...

In the big wide real world nobody is really interested!!! I use some parelli tactics myself very successfully, But I'm not buying the package thankyou very much!!! use and discriminate according to your own personnel judgement and morals. Don't blame Parelli if you've forked out thousands on their package. Your decision, no gun at your head. Thats business. Yes, they've evidently been abusive in the past, their very reason to do what they are doing, nothing wrong with that. Lapse of judgement to delver the goods at festival of the horse = damage limitation. Let them prove it!!!! Naivity??? you bet!! don't ever delve into showjumping!!!
 
Echo Bravo said:
I said that 20 posts ago I think and got shot down about closing it down, but then realised everyone has a right to have their say. what somebody should do is have a poll. Do Parellie do any good for horse/Are Parellie in it for the money.
And if I hear the word SAVVY from someone close I'll deck them.;);););)
Click to expand...


Of course Parelli is in it for the money. He's a SAVVY businessman as well as a SAVVY Horse Trainer. There are many people out that would love to be making a living, working, riding and playing with horses.

Of course some let jealousy get in the way of rational thinking.

As for a poll...answered the money question.

As for good for horses, using his methods, I have been able to have a good partnership with my horse and an understanding on how to deal with others. Not sure whether sometimes it's accurate to say he's training horses, more he's training people. Horses know how to do it all already.

A good definition of NH by another trainer is...

"Natural horsemanship (NH) simply means that we know and understand the horse's instinctive and herd behaviors and that we use that information to develop a willing partnership and communicate with the horse and in a way that he understands." ~ Julie Goodnight


Surprised no one has brought up the secret handshake that us Parelli followers use. ;)
 
Diggerdog2 said:
Your guess was right Tannis, your post was so incendiary, I had to stop lurking and register so that I could respond!

Playing devil's advocate and assuming that you won your court case, the following would be likely to happen:

The organisers' liability insurance for all events featuring horses would rise dramatically. This would apply to any event as there is risk of horses being injured and therefore spectators becoming distressed - show jumping, Monty demos, team chasing, racing, eventing, express eventing, right down to your local show. Insurance premiums are not calculated by horse people who would differentiate between Parelli and the possibility of a horse breaking its neck in a rotational fall across country

The Festival of the Horse would certainly fold with those increase costs, along with many other shows that are hanging on by the skin of their teeth in the current economic climate. Horse shows are already unprofitable, as shown by The British Open SJ.

Venues would consider their own liability and increase costs to cover their perceived risks, or decline to take bookings from horse events.

Events that continued to host demonstrations would not arrange any demos featuring problem horses or unstarted horses. "Bye bye Monty, Kelly Marks and Richard Maxwell"

Welcome to Utopia, are you proud of what you have achieved?

Tannis, I appreciate that you feel strongly about this, but your idea of a legal course of action has consequences that you have clearly not even considered.

From an event organiser.
Click to expand...


Yes, I carefully considered before I wrote.

Event organisers cannot demand what has already been described in H&H as an extortionate entry fee and then not take responsibilty

Any business is open to litagation if it fails to meet its obligations or advertises itself as something it isn't - that's why the laws exist.


This is what was advertised


The Royal Festival of the Horse is delighted to welcome Pat and Linda Parelli. The Parelli programme stands alone as the world’s first step-by-step, learn at your own pace horse/human development programme. It was Linda and Pat Parelli who coined the often used phrase ‘natural horsemanship’ and today they command the largest number of followers around the globe.

The Parelli method allows horse lovers at all levels and disciplines to achieve success without force, partnership without dominance, teamwork without fear, willingness without intimidation, and harmony without coercion. The Parelli programme combines common sense psychology and communication. The Parelli method teaches the human, not the horse.

Come along to the Parelli Pavilion at the Festival, open to all Festival visitors on Friday and Saturday. The Parelli Pavilion allows you a chance to find out more about natural horsemanship. Why not treat yourself on Friday or Saturday night to one of the evening gala performances when Pat and Linda will be sharing their valuable experiences. For more information about Parelli visit www.parelli.com



Take all emotion out of it. Can you honestly, hand on heart, say that this is what customers witnessed:

success without force
partnership without dominance
teamwork without fear
willingness without intimidation
harmony without coercion
gala performances when Pat and Linda will be sharing their valuable experiences


There was force
There was an attempt to dominate
There was behaviour which is could be described as fear
There was behaviour that could be described as intimidation
There was coercion
Pat, removed him microphone, and so was not sharing valuable experience because he failed to explain his methods or his motives


That is simple fact. Not emotion. Not for or against Parelli. Not for or against Natural Horsemanship. Not for or against an event taking responsibility.

If an event sets itself up as a money making venture then it must fulfil the obligations that go with that.

The law states that all events should undertake a risk analysis and take steps to mitigate against that and take the necessary insurances.

It's not bye bye Monty Roberts, Kelly Marks, Richard Maxwell et al. Responsible horsemasters and mistresses will know what should and should not be attempted in the name of entertainment and what should be done privately. If a horse behaviourist takes on a task beyond what is reasonable for "entertainment" then they should use their expertise to advise the owner/organiser/audience as to why that particular animal is not to be used as a subject for demonstration purposes. They can then go on to explain how they would achieve success but not actually attempt it.

Organisations/events will only be sued if, as would appear to be the case in this instance, the people undertaking the demonstration continue to advertise their prowess without being able to deliver the goods as described in their publicity material.

All that was needed was for the people involved on the night to say that this horse had severe problems - illustrate what the problems were and then identify how they would deal with it and then a few days later bring the horse back.

All they needed to do was be honest in the publicity material and say that some cases require longer treatment than can be provided in a demonstration slot.

The simple matter of fact is that these people have been hoisted by their own petard - they believed their own publicity instead of being honest.

Or to put it simply - they shot themselves in the foot.

Be honest and there is no need for litigation.

What would have happened if this had happened in America? The grounds for litigation there would appear to much stronger than they are elsewhere.
 
Can I be polite and ask how many people that have posted here in the last few day and are still here, were actually there?
I wasn't and I have not made any comments regarding what actually happen, by watching a very poor quality phone/camera video I would not put my hand on my heart and stand up and say that what I saw was horse abuse, I saw no trauma or fear displayed by Catwalk, in fact I thought he looked very good natured and was just saying 'I'm not having it' he obviously has worked out very well how not to let someone touch him on the head, so most of the time he was just obstructive, if he had really wanted out of there and was scared for his life I don't think Pat and Linda together would have stopped him, yes he didn't like what was happening to him that was obvious.
I really do believe that if PP had thought that this horse was going to 'blow up' and injure itself, he would have been the first person to see it coming.
Just my view of what I personally saw on the video clips, I don't listen to hearsay if some saw something then thats what they saw, we all know that 50 people might have seen the same thing but none of the description would be them.
I have witnessed several cases of abuse to both horses and pets and twice I have informed RSPCA and got them to intervene and help the animal, if this was so bad can any one who saw it, tell me why the RSPCA was not called immediately, it was apparently going on for 2 hours.
If PP is found guilty of abusing this horse (in a court of law) I will be the first one to throw the rotten apples.
 
Tannis said:
The Parelli method allows horse lovers at all levels and disciplines to achieve success without force, partnership without dominance, teamwork without fear, willingness without intimidation, and harmony without coercion. The Parelli programme combines common sense psychology and communication. The Parelli method teaches the human, not the horse.
Click to expand...

Snort :rolleyes:
 
vandypip said:
7HL You are clearly right here. Big mistakes have been made but this forum is now made up or NH "disciples" and those baying for blood. Its rubbish and H & H should intervene and close this thread now.
Click to expand...

What a shame I couldnt reply to the post you made in reply to me! But I did see what you wrote on other ones who had quoted it....so I'm in luck!

Why did I sound so sarcastic?

You are incapable of a debate, the majority here have good things to say and points to make. You just decided to throw in an insult.


You talk about closing the thread, why are you still here bumping it along?
 
What would have happened if this had happened in America? The grounds for litigation there would appear to much stronger than they are elsewhere.
Click to expand...

Litigation for what?

You obviously haven't seen other trainers give demos.

You should have been at the Road to the Horse, when Clinton Anderson brought out the chain saw, the bull whip and shot off some pistols.

Us Americans like a good show.

I guess it doesn't matter what Mr Whittaker thinks and feels about the demo, since he does own Catwalk?
 
*Sticks head round door*
So....no one would like to tell us what exactly Catwalk did when someone attempted to bridle him? Why am I not suprised..... *sigh* ;)

Funny thing is,thae ONLY possable glint of an excuse PP would have is that the horse was pretty much leathel in his objection to the bridle.
His worshipers,sorry,followers should eb pretty quick to dig up evidence if that was the case.
If,as suspected,he objected but was not a real danger ot his handler why the forcefull nasty "cure" to the problem?

EQT,and FWIT,this forum has had threads just as long as this about traditional methods we don't agree with-it is not simply because of who did it-the issue is firmly with what was done.
 
pippinpie said:
If PP is found guilty of abusing this horse (in a court of law) I will be the first one to throw the rotten apples.
Click to expand...

Abuse would be difficult to prove

But he definitely did not provide what he and FOTH advertised and that is open to civil proceedings should anyone wish to follow that course
 
the legal term for "abuse" is unnecessary suffering. Like I say, witness statements, a vet statement, and voila ! You have a case to answer under the Animal Welfare Act 1996. For me, this is one of the big questions - is there enough evidence ?
 
7HL said:
Litigation for what?

You obviously haven't seen other trainers give demos.

You should have been at the Road to the Horse, when Clinton Anderson brought out the chain saw, the bull whip and shot off some pistols.

Us Americans like a good show.

I guess it doesn't matter what Mr Whittaker thinks and feels about the demo, since he does own Catwalk?
Click to expand...



Absolutely nothing to do with my position on this

This event was advertised as stated above - it did not deliver what was advertised.

End of

That equals cause for civil proceedings.


If you went to buy a horse advertised as one thing and it turned out to be something completely different after you bought it, you would have recourse to civil proceedings if you could not resolve it privately and compensation would be forthcoming if you were successful. This is exactly the same.

This is Sales of Goods. People bought tickets believing one thing and what they got was something else.

This slant of things is not to do with who, what, how, - it's about what was advertised and what was delivered.

This is absolutely nothing to do with Robert Whitaker, or Pat Parelli as a person. It's to do with business - the business of Parelli advertised via FOTH, something it could not deliver. Based on the publicity, people bought tickets in good faith to watch something that turned out to be very different.
 
Last edited:
DragonSlayer said:
What a shame I couldnt reply to the post you made in reply to me! But I did see what you wrote on other ones who had quoted it....so I'm in luck!

Why did I sound so sarcastic?

You are incapable of a debate, the majority here have good things to say and points to make. You just decided to throw in an insult.


You talk about closing the thread, why are you still here bumping it along?
Click to expand...

I'm bumping it along because their are too may people baying for blood. None of what has happened is quite that serious. It can all be got over and improved if everybody would calm down and let things move on. Evolvement is the key, and I'm sure the Parellis and Whitakers would agree.
 
TANNIS this sound familiar...
None of us supports or should tolerate abuse. All of us should support open and fair analysis of evidence. But all of us should make sure evidence is available before condemning individuals and organisations in such a public manner.
Click to expand...

So produce the evidence, and take them to court. Put up or shut up! Not opinions, just the facts.
 
Is there anybody here now that was there? I am not being rude, sarky, or insulting (as many have been, on both sides I may add!)
You can't debate the rights and wrongs of anything when immature, insulting comments keep cropping up, it just devalues what you are saying, yes you might feel big in the moment but is it really necessary?
 
There is evidence - the video is evidence.

From your perspective, it may not illustrate the whole 3 hours but in that case a defence would be required and the defence should be a video of the other 2 hours 48 minutes (or whatever it is).

We are now on day 7 and no defence has been provided or is forthcoming from anyone.

If this video was out of context and the allegations made, then defend it with video.

Otherwise, out of context or not, there is evidence to support the allegation that what was advertised is not what was demonstrated.

Unfortunately, all the wording used on Parelli's own site only go to show how far the behaviour shown on the video (albeit out of context) deviate from what is professed to be "the norm"

My argument is not about abuse. It's a simple matter that what was advertised is not what was delivered. And that, quite simply (personalities and emotion aside) is grounds for litigation.
 
Last edited:
JanetGeorge said:
Funny how - whenever there is a 'contentious' thread here - all sorts of goblins JOIN the forum! Usually disagreeing with majority opinion and insulting all the forum members with whom they disagree! Generally they disappear up their own a*ses fairly quickly! But some join because they want to debate the issue in a sensible manner - and hopefully they will stay!
Click to expand...

I don't know as it's funny - I think it's rather human nature. Contentious or controversial subjects tend to get more people interested. After all, the majority of posts on this thread are from long-time posters judging from the post counts.

I freely admit I joined to put in my 2 cents (which is probably about what it's worth) but I have lurked here for several months. I never joined prior because much of what is discussed is more relevant to the UK but I have found some interesting reading and I would certainly like to stay now I've taken the plunge.

A poster on this thread rather attacked me and accused me of mentioning where I come from originally (New England) in order to "suck up" and insinuated that I was trying to weasel my way in by agreeing with the majority. I felt it was a foolish statement at the time but reading this remark about people joining at a time like this, I hope it's not the majority view that those of who come along as I did are somehow lesser members of the community. I'm a horse lover, I love talking to other horse lovers and this incident outraged me to the extent that I joined in order to discuss it.

Although I will say that even if I disagreed with the majority, I would hope that if I was civil and polite, I would be welcome to stay as well. :)

(and I don't mean any of this as a criticism of what you posted JanetGeorge - I am just using it as a means to clarify where I come from. It's always a bit nerve-wracking joining an established group of people)
 
vandypip said:
I'm bumping it along because their are too may people baying for blood. None of what has happened is quite that serious. It can all be got over and improved if everybody would calm down and let things move on. Evolvement is the key, and I'm sure the Parellis and Whitakers would agree.
Click to expand...

But you just said it should be closed, so which is it?

I'm not here baying for blood. Never have been, I have been reading and making comments as I see fit. Insults are not the way, but I'm sure you have realised that by now seeing as the offending post was pulled....

I don't believe anyone here reported you for calling them pathetic, yet someone comes back at you, not with an insult, but good old sarcasm, and you call them an a******e. That's nice, I must say! BUT I have been called much worse by students at school, so it's water off a ducks back I'm afraid!

I have never followed Parelli. Why? Because I believe what I do works. My horses respond to what I ask of them and are rewarded for their efforts. Why fix something that ain't broken? The fact of the matter remains, a horse was apparently hurt during a demo that was MEANT to show a non-invasive technique. IF the horse was injured, then obviously it didn't go as well as Mr. P had hoped. NOT ONCE have I slated the PP technique, I have just asked questions about it, and followed with interest many different points of view. So I am certainly not out for blood.

It takes a big man to admit he made a mistake. IF all the facts are true, IF indeed a grave error of judgement was made, then he needs to stand up and admit that. The public will respond to that in a much better way than saying nothing at all and carrying on as if nothing has ever happened.....
 
Baymareb - Personally, I think it's fab you've taken the trouble to join, and your cent's worth is just as good as any penny's. It's interesting to hear things from a US point of view, and I hope that you do feel that you are welcome here. People join here all the time, tbh, but this is the debate that has triggered so many responses from here and from the US, and has encouraged a lot of peeps to join. As Parelli is a US thing, the US viewpoint is especially welcome!

I for one would hate to think that you don't feel welcome. This forum is a lively one, and things do get debated, but there is also a lot of help and support here. And a lot of humour too... sm x
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top