RANT. Pink and fluffy would be Parelli- ites should not be allowed to ...

cptrayes said:
She ordered it not to bite and kick people by threatening it, biting it or kicking it when it did. When it did not obey her, she banished it, which is a death sentence to a herd preyed-upon animal.
Click to expand...
Oh I see - I thought you meant she ordered it to do stuff after the banishment was lifted. My misunderstanding, sorry.

No-one said we "have" to use violent methods, but I laugh myself silly at the people who believe that it is never right to hit a horse. The have obviously never had to handle a highly strung horse who is, for example, swinging its head about and risking knocking you out because it is so excited by something going on around it. The safest thing to do in that situation is to get the attention focussed on the handler, and fast, and a slap is very often the best, safest and fastest way to achieve that. I'm not suggesting that it should be routine but it's completely ridiculous, in my opinion, to declare, as some people do, that it is never right to hit a horse.
Click to expand...
Never say never - especially where a person's safety is concerned - agreed. That said, it is not unusual to see people hitting horses in situations where another approach - such as prevention! - would be more effective (as well as fairer), and in ways that a liable to do more harm than good, for example when the timing is so poor the horse doesn't know what it is being punished for.

The TV program on the feral herd was donkey's years ago. It was a David Attenborough, that's all I remember.
Click to expand...
Thanks! Although I have a large collection of Attenborough documentaries on DVD, all of which I watched at the time of broadcast, I don't recall the segment you described. However, I will take another look at the more likely ones.
 
I'm trying to remember if I was even in this house. I think I was, so it would have been less than 20 years ago, but I think probably at least 10 and more like 15. Have fun trying to find it - let us know if you succeed, it was very interesting.
 
It seems to me these discussions pro/anti natural/traditional are all fairly pointless.
At the end of the day I haven't come across a training method that doesn't use pressure. The difference generally lies in how the pressure is applied be it physical, mental or a combination of both.
In all methods the stars will shine. There are beautifully trained horses from both traditional and NH/PNH menthods.
However, I would suggest that the trainers of these horses would have acheived the same results no matter what method they used.
The key to training any animal is to be able to 'read it', understand why it does xyz and pick up on the tiny clues.
Where PNH is concerned it is no less fluffy or brutal than any other method and still has the key to success in being able to read the horse. How the method is implemented by the trainer and the level of pressure used will ultimately be determined by their natural ability with horses.
Generally its not the methods which fails, its the people that use them.
Good horsemanship is good hormanship what ever label is applied.
What I have noticed is the less someone can read/feel a horse the more they are likely to over or under apply the appropriate pressure leading to confused/problem horses.
 
Ha ha! I'm keeping well out of this one. :D

Natural Horsemanship is a dirty 'word' to many, many people however those using it may understand, interpret or apply it. It's either wet, ineffective and fluffy, carried out by idiots who haven't got a grain of common sense or it's a cruel, unfair, con used by deluded twits.. :rolleyes: :p No wonder I'm a foolish numpty. ;) We are how we are treated and or viewed, just like horses. :p
 
BMA said:
I have never dealt with a nice parelli horse - i either find that they are rude beyond belief...heaven forbid they step back when you open a stable door or the fit into the switched off category...you know how some riding school horses look like are here in body but not in mind...i think quite a few look like that as well as looking utterly confused

I'm sure that there are some horses that are very well trained/competed to a high level but I’m pretty sure that 99.9% of competition horses/horses that are competing to a decent level do not do parelli. and the same with legendry riders
Click to expand...

Oh, you should meet my horse, she has lovely manners and is very bright and friendly.

High level Parelli people - I don't really follow high level equestrian sport (or any other sport for that matter) but David and Karen O'Conner and Lauren Barwick spring to mind. A lot of the higher level Parelli people compete in Western disciplines - Pat and his son Caton do very well in cutting and reined cow horse apparently but not many people over her follow that (I don't, although I'd love to have a go :p).
 
The thing about nonviolence; yep totally agree horses use it, but then we come back to do we want our horse to do things for us because they respect and are not afraid, or simply because they know if they don't punishment will follow? The colt in cptrays' example would surely be a prime example of category b. A friend of mine's herd leader is a wonderful example of the other type, he has his herd's full respect and they go wherever he does but keep a respectful distance apart from his pair bond, and if one pushes his luck its put right by a flick of an ear or at most a look. The times he has ever used aggresion can be counted on one hand, and relate to protection of a youngster.
 
The example Cptrayes gives is a good example of a herd leader using dominance as a tool to educate a young colt. This behaviour is well documented amongst mustang groups.
However, too many people confuse leadership and dominance in horse training, and become a one trick wonder, using dominance.
A more balanced approach to training using different strategies to engage with different horses with different issues leads to more success.

I am convinced that a lot of the regular problems highlighted on these threads are easily solved, without the need for strong bits, additional quick fix tack items, the constant need to demonstrate whose boss.

It is the negativity of many owners and trainers that perpetuate these problems unfortunately.
 
cptrayes said:
She ordered it not to bite and kick people by threatening it, biting it or kicking it when it did. When it did not obey her, she banished it, which is a death sentence to a herd preyed-upon animal.

No-one said we "have" to use violent methods, but I laugh myself silly at the people who believe that it is never right to hit a horse. The have obviously never had to handle a highly strung horse who is, for example, swinging its head about and risking knocking you out because it is so excited by something going on around it. The safest thing to do in that situation is to get the attention focussed on the handler, and fast, and a slap is very often the best, safest and fastest way to achieve that. I'm not suggesting that it should be routine but it's completely ridiculous, in my opinion, to declare, as some people do, that it is never right to hit a horse.

The TV program on the feral herd was donkey's years ago. It was a David Attenborough, that's all I remember.
Click to expand...

My Highland did just that with a very stroppy young gelding once.Fascinating to watch and they were best of friends after.
 
AndySpooner said:
The example Cptrayes gives is a good example of a herd leader using dominance as a tool to educate a young colt. This behaviour is well documented amongst mustang groups.
However, too many people confuse leadership and dominance in horse training, and become a one trick wonder, using dominance.
A more balanced approach to training using different strategies to engage with different horses with different issues leads to more success.

I am convinced that a lot of the regular problems highlighted on these threads are easily solved, without the need for strong bits, additional quick fix tack items, the constant need to demonstrate whose boss.

It is the negativity of many owners and trainers that perpetuate these problems unfortunately.
Click to expand...

My very traditional, done the Badminton thing etc.instructor would agree with an awful lot of that I think Andy.
 
AndySpooner said:
The example Cptrayes gives is a good example of a herd leader using dominance as a tool to educate a young colt.
Click to expand...
Using aggression and threats of aggression, certainly. Dominance can also be viewed as the relationship that results from this process. In relation to the clip that Cptrayes clip, do we know that the horse in question was actually herd leader or simply the most dominant? The common assumption is that they are (must be) one and the same, whereas we know that isn't true. As humans, we naturally assume that the most dominant horse is the herd leader, and vice versa. Discarding these in-built preconceptions is a challenge!

This behaviour is well documented amongst mustang groups.
Click to expand...
I think this is right, though it's worth bearing in mind that feral horses don't always show exactly the same sets of behaviours, the differences apparently being related to habitat ecology. This just goes to show how adaptable horses are. I think it also shows that, while all horses have the potential to express aggressive and threatening behaviours, it isn't a given - rather, it depends on the situation they find themselves in. I believe horses are generally peace-loving and will choose the option of less hassle as long as they are able to satisfy their basic needs. If we can work with that tendency and avoid unnecessary conflict, so much the better.

However, too many people confuse leadership and dominance in horse training, and become a one trick wonder, using dominance.
Click to expand...
I agree - it's probably the easier option (certainly easier to understand and relate to from our human point of view).

A more balanced approach to training using different strategies to engage with different horses with different issues leads to more success.
Click to expand...
Again, I agree, but would go further to say that it is possible to train and work with horses very effectively without having to engage/create dominance at all. It isn't necessary to use actively aggressive threats to move horses around, just the right amount of pressure. Unwanted behaviour can (and should) be punished, but that doesn't have to be done in the manner of a dominant horse.

I'm not sure if Natural Horsemanship demands that one does, as a matter of principle. Perhaps you could throw some light on that?
 
AndySpooner said:
JunoXV, this is an excellent post.
Click to expand...
I agree.
I'm keeping out of the perceived herd dynamic in horses and it's relevance, or not, to us. Done it a few times. :)
I'm more interested in horses behaviour and responses than how herds work these days. I mean interested in the sense of relevance to me as a horse owner.
Of course I'm extremely interested in everything about horses.
 
fburton said:
Again, I agree, but would go further to say that it is possible to train and work with horses very effectively without having to engage/create dominance at all. It isn't necessary to use actively aggressive threats to move horses around, just the right amount of pressure. Unwanted behaviour can (and should) be punished, but that doesn't have to be done in the manner of a dominant horse.
Click to expand...
With my new concept of dominance I agree.
"just the right amount of pressure. "
I would aslo go further on this point and agree with Andy that learning to see the smallest response from the horse and then releasing that pressure is the really important thing. I also believe learning to see and release early is a big way to stop that increase in pressure and frustration that we all fall into. This is my opinion of course.
 
amandap said:
I'm keeping out of the perceived herd dynamic in horses and it's relevance, or not, to us. Done it a few times. :)
I'm more interested in horses behaviour and responses than how herds work these days. I mean interested in the sense of relevance to me as a horse owner.
Click to expand...
Yes, I too believe the significance of herd dynamics is overplayed and unnecessarily complicating. The dyed-in-the-wool NHers will probably pounce on me for that, but I think one can focus on one-on-one behaviour of horses relating to us as humans (rather than other horses) and still be within the definition of NH. Of course, others would argue it is just good horsemanship, and I would be inclined to agree! :)
 
fburton said:
Yes, I too believe the significance of herd dynamics is overplayed and unnecessarily complicating.
Click to expand...
Re-reading what Amandap wrote, I realize I may well have misrepresented her, for which I apologize. :o I should have written something more like:

"Yes, I agree. I personally believe the significance of herd dynamics is overplayed and unnecessarily complicating."
 
fburton said:
I personally believe the significance of herd dynamics is overplayed and unnecessarily complicating."
Click to expand...

On the contrary - an understanding of herd dynamics is essential in order to understand why horses behave the way they do (which is probably the most important bit!) :)
 
That depends fburton. :D I think I probably do agree with you and especially because herd dynamics are not universally agreed upon in my understanding. No need to apologise but thank you for seeing the possible difference in emphasis.
You have prompted me to write my thinking down to get it clear in my head, possibly for a short article. :eek: Be very scared. :p
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree with fburton. It may be relevant to have some understanding of herd dynamics (although what is the one correct interpretation of that?), but I think that in some training it is overplayed and unecessarily complicating.
Just a sort of "for example" - Parelli teaches one version of herd dynamics, which is slightly at odds with what Monty teaches, which again doesn't quite agree with Mark Rashid, who is at variance with Ben Hart... so someone must have some of it wrong... however they all manage to train horses quite effectively.
 
Golf Girl said:
On the contrary - an understanding of herd dynamics is essential in order to understand why horses behave the way they do (which is probably the most important bit!) :)
Click to expand...
Do we need to fully understand herd dynamics to understand behaviour and responses though? We can observe horses and get a good feel for their feelings about other horses, humans and events etc. without knowing precisely how they interact with each other in a horse only herd surely. :confused:

Learning how to move and control a horse is partly down to us knowing how they respond to stimuli which we can and must learn from observing them interacting but what more can the 'natural' herd structure and dynamic give us in practice? I don't want to kick them and if I did why shouldn't it be ok for them to feel the same and kick me? Which is where the horse herd behaviour ultimately goes surely.

Mta. Strangely I read and see non 'NH' people advising to and kick back and hit much more commonly than those who practice some form of 'NH'. None of us thinks a horse should bite or kick us though. It has always puzzled me where this thinking actually comes from.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Golf Girl said:
On the contrary - an understanding of herd dynamics is essential in order to understand why horses behave the way they do (which is probably the most important bit!) :)
Click to expand...
It's useful, but to my mind the most important bit is what some call "learning theory". Of course it's also essential to know what motivates horses (as opposed to dogs or people, say) and to be aware that the way horses perceive the world around them is very different from the way we do, so as to be able to apply learning theory sensibly. Reading body language - tuning in to very subtle cues - is also a crucially important skill for anyone wanting to be successful with horses. However, understanding herd dynamics - which essentially boils down to "dominance hierarchy" for a lot of folk, I'm sad to say - comes fairly low on my list of priorities.

Tinypony said:
Just a sort of "for example" - Parelli teaches one version of herd dynamics, which is slightly at odds with what Monty teaches, which again doesn't quite agree with Mark Rashid, who is at variance with Ben Hart... so someone must have some of it wrong... however they all manage to train horses quite effectively.
Click to expand...
That's quite telling, isn't it? I would venture to suggest that it is their ability to apply learning theory, whether they are consciously aware they are using it or not (Ben Hart certainly is), which really accounts for their success in training.
 
fburton said:
I think it also shows that, while all horses have the potential to express aggressive and threatening behaviours, it isn't a given - rather, it depends on the situation they find themselves in. I believe horses are generally peace-loving and will choose the option of less hassle as long as they are able to satisfy their basic needs. If we can work with that tendency and avoid unnecessary conflict, so much the better.
Click to expand...

I don't understand how anyone who has ever kept more than two horses together in an area where they have plenty of freedom, food, shelter and water (ie their basic needs are all met) and watched them for any length of time can believe that horses avoid being aggressive.

Mine, in ten acres of knee high grass, will walk over to each other, say "what plant have you got there that I might like better than what I've got" and if the other will not give it up, will bite or kick or at least threaten to do so.

I've been watching horses do this for 30 years. Aggression, unless your turnout is single horse paddocks only (and why would there be so many of those these days if horses were sweetness and light to each other all the time???) is part and parcel of daily horse life.

Young horses will deliberately cause a fracas to have some fun. My Shetland will stand directly behind one of the others, touching his hocks. Then turn his head and bite the other's hamstrings. He means to make them run, and he stands where they can get no power into the kick that he knows full well is coming his way.

My big boys bite each others lips to get a twitch on all the time. Several times a year I will find kick marks on the front legs.

That's what horses do!

I often used to kick my Shetland, it's easier than leaning down to thump him when he is trying to get into the feed shed and kill himself with a bellyfull of unsoaked sugar beet. Strangely, he never seems to think that means that it's OK to kick me, but he does beg like a dog with one paw when he wants me to scratch his back for him :) I hear other people calling them "Shitlands" because they behave so dominantly and badly. Mine is more like a poodle, I wonder why?
 
Last edited:
cptrayes said:
I don't understand how anyone who has ever kept more than two horses together in an area where they have plenty of freedom, food, shelter and water (ie their basic needs are all met) and watched them for any length of time can believe that horses avoid being aggressive.
Click to expand...
In some domestic herds I have observed, aggressive behaviour really amounted to a tiny part of all interactions. In the groups where aggression was more obvious, it was because there were one or more bullies. I guess it depends on the individual horses and the setup (amount of space, opportunities for competition). Of course aggression is part of what horses are. However, I would suggest that it's not a very important part - or at least, need not be. If horses are spending a significant amount of time and effort being nasty to each other, I would begin to thing something was wrong - and I wouldn't count play fighting as true aggression.

I often used to kick my Shetland, it's easier than leaning down to thump him when he is trying to get into the feed shed and kill himself with a bellyfull of unsoaked sugar beet. Strangely, he never seems to think that means that it's OK to kick me, but he does beg like a dog with one paw when he wants me to scratch his back for him :) I hear other people calling them "Shitlands" because they behave so dominantly and badly. Mine is more like a poodle, I wonder why?
Click to expand...
Because he has learned to be like that?
 
I don't doubt that aggression does play some part in the interaction of domestic horses kept on limited areas, I expect that other emotions such as boredom also influence their interaction with one another in a very contrived existence .
 
fburton said:
I often used to kick my Shetland, it's easier than leaning down to thump him when he is trying to get into the feed shed and kill himself with a bellyfull of unsoaked sugar beet. Strangely, he never seems to think that means that it's OK to kick me, but he does beg like a dog with one paw when he wants me to scratch his back for him I hear other people calling them "Shitlands" because they behave so dominantly and badly. Mine is more like a poodle, I wonder why?

Because he has learned to be like that?
Click to expand...

Precisely. I got him as a little handled two year old, and I treated him in the way that his mother would have treated him whenever he offered behaviour that was unacceptable around humans, and I have a Shetland that people who HATE Shetlands swoon all over when they visit me and who is safe alone with the smallest child. He tried to bite me once. I smacked his nose so quick and so hard he's never forgotten it. He has never offered to bite anyone since. Is it kinder to have told him off with my voice, waited for him to do it again and told him off again, and so on until he finally, (if he ever did, being a Shetland with all the strong will that goes with the package), got the message that it is not OK to bite people? Meanwhile, there will be a whole bunch of people on this forum thinking or saying that it is cruel and unnecessary to hit horses in training them, whose horses are taking a chunk out of their backsides and rifling their pockets for their clicker treat at every opportunity.

Horses speak the language of a quick physical reprimand and then immediate reward for desired behaviour. If its good enough for them its good enough for me.
 
AndySpooner said:
I don't doubt that aggression does play some part in the interaction of domestic horses kept on limited areas, I expect that other emotions such as boredom also influence their interaction with one another in a very contrived existence .
Click to expand...

Andy do you not think it is normal for horses to be aggressive at all?

Have you never seen feral stallions fight?

Have you never seen how a feral mother of a yearling tells it that it cannot suckle from her any more because she has a new foal to feed?

I can't really see how my three and a bit boys free to roam in twelve acres of hill meadow could constitute being bored by a contrived existence, really. They race because it is natural to them to race (the cows and sheep on land around me will do it too from time to time and lambs do it constantly). They kick out at each other when they are racing because they want to win. They want to win, of course, because in the wild the one at the back is the one who is going to get eaten. So how much more natural can it get than to disable your rival so the lion eats him and not you??
 
Agression is very minimal in any stable herd. Most domestic horses however are subjected to constantly changing herd environments and as a consequence cannot establish a harmonious co-existence. If a herd is steady and stable infighting is a rare occurrence, the members establish relationships within their herd dynamic and accept their roles.
If the herd is party to one or more challenging, overly aggressive members it will of course suffer a certain degree of friction (usually surround those particular horses) as they will undoubtably challenge for leadership despite their temperament's utter unsuitability.
 
team barney said:
Agression is very minimal in any stable herd.
Click to expand...


But this just isn't true in the wild, is it? Every year a colt will get old enough to think it can challenge the stallion and there will be at least one violent fight, probably at least one for the year of birth of a group of colts from the bachelor herd.

Every year each mare will drive off last year's foal so this year's can have her milk and care. Sometimes that will be violent.

Every foal will get playful and be put in its place by either its mother or another mare with threats of bites and kicks, which will be real bites and kicks if it does not pack it in.

Every time food is short, the more dominant horses will drive the lower ones off the best bits of food by threatening, and if they are more equal in rank, actually kicking and biting. The same will happen if water is short.

Life in a normal horse herd is full of threats of violence, and sometimes actual violence, its how horses get what they want. They can't sit down and negotiate over a bottle of Suavignon Blanc, can they :)?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top