So whats wrong with Natural Horsemanship methods ! - Iam so happy

[Storminateacup]

Well as some of you may know I got my new ID/cob 16.1hh 4 year old Appaloosa 7 weeks ago from Ireland. He was almost completely unhandled, and pretty scared of everyone and everything, his response to most things being to run away or get a bit more arsey, and rear buck, plunge and charge off.
Not that I've ever given him the opportunity to do this to me, - but I ve seen him do it with two others, and have not wanted to use their methods as I do not wish to confront his unacceptable behaviour and possibly lose, choosing rather to "shape" his good/positive responses into a well mannered horse the easy, gentle and may I also say, SAFE way, by making what I want him to do the easy option.

Since I ve had him I have very slowly, and gently, used Natural horsemanship techniques to get a headcollar (field safe, normal and now rope training headcollar) on him and start to handle him and touch him all over. As a result he has been desensitized to plastic bags and canvas bags over his head and on his body and he is no longer headshy or scared ofthem.
Today was a really big day for us, as we first of all did the whole sequence of basic training moves. Starting with "join up" then him following me around the home made round pen, then training headcollar on, then back up, come forward many times, LOWER HEAD on gentle pressure (repeated many times with reward - that was new today), then me standing to his side without him trying to back away and both front feet picked up on gentle request ( hand down leg and saying "this one" -STRICTLY NO GRABBING AND HANGING ON!!!!).
Finally fly mask on with lowered head and a few minor wounds attended to with no fuss

I am SOOOooo pleased.
The whole sequence done in less than 25 mins, no stress, fear or anxiety to EITHER of us, and the starting of a really solid foundation of trust and mutual respect for the future.

I am totally sold on this style of CONTEMPORARY Horsmanship as opposed to conventional horse training (whatever you want to call it such as Parelli, Intelligent Horsemanship, Gentle Horsemanship, - and I do think some of the names ARE unfortunate)

I ve done this out of a one book by Pat Parelli, and endless viewing of videos freely available on the internet and reading every word of their techniques and tips, methods, and their various styles,to compare and define the underlying principles of various practitioners ranging from Pat Parelli, Eric Bravo, John O'Leary, Clint Anderson, to name some of the more well known.
So far my only expenditure has been two training headcollars £16.00 each and a 12ft training line, and no, you dont even need the bloody CARROT STICK!

If these methods work on a feisty, sensitive large but very agile middleweight like mine, then I reckon they will work anywhere, on anything as they say. ( I've certainly notice that most of these NH guys saddle a fairly small and quiet QH but then an old cowboy saying is "Admire a tall horse but saddle a small one" which seems sensible )


I bet I ve opened a can of worms now!

 

[touchstone]

It is great that you've had such good results with your horse, however, traditional isn't all necessarily bad - a good horseman is a good horseman whatever 'method' he uses, and to me it is all about common sense, sensitivity, patience and experience. Nothing wrong with traditional methods used properly in my book, and anyone with patience and understanding would get the same results in my humble opinion.

 

[MotherOfChickens]

there's nothing wrong with them when used sympathetically and for the likes of your horse, and my semi-feral colt some of the techniques are invaluable. as with anything they are open to abuse and using behaviour to 'train' a horse is a potentially powerful technique.It can lead to over submissive and switched off horses. just watch Linda Parelli beat the **** out of a one-eyed horse in her training DVD..

my main problem with NHers is that everything is behaviour, they don't address the cause (usually pain) of the behavioural problems.

 

[R2R]

Good for you. I have to say I don’t see any difference in the basic NH stuff to conventional horsemanship. It is all about personal space and the horse not invading it, and being invited into ‘your area’. In the same way the horse submits under saddle, it should on the ground. I think it used to be called ‘good groundwork’

Ways of doing it are different however desensitising to fears, picking up feet, lowering head to relax are all things horse people have been doing for years without having to label it.

I think the ‘rubbish’ claims come from when people try to preach it is something it isn’t or get obsessed. I enjoy a good bond with both of my horses through groundwork but similarly they have both had a broom up their arse when needs be. I like to call it using my loaf and adapting to situations as and when they occur

Well done for doing it though and your horse sounds fab.

 

[mik]

It is great that you've had such good results with your horse, however, traditional isn't all necessarily bad - a good horseman is a good horseman whatever 'method' he uses, and to me it is all about common sense, sensitivity, patience and experience. Nothing wrong with traditional methods used properly in my book, and anyone with patience and understanding would get the same results in my humble opinion.

I agree completely with this.

 

[Honey08]

I totally agree with Touchstone too. Natural horsemanship has been around in conventional horsemanship for years. Its become a buzz word lately! Yes there are some "old fashioned" trainers that hit horses too much, but the majority of them have a natural feel for horses that they have gained from years of experience. They totally respect the horse...

 

[Storminateacup]

It is great that you've had such good results with your horse, however, traditional isn't all necessarily bad - a good horseman is a good horseman whatever 'method' he uses, and to me it is all about common sense, sensitivity, patience and experience. Nothing wrong with traditional methods used properly in my book, and anyone with patience and understanding would get the same results in my humble opinion.

I do agree with you actually, there is much good in conventional methods when applied with sensitivity, common sense and patience. I think maybe that these NH methods will eventually be incorporated into conventional methods as they are with some trainers such as I believe Melanie Watson and Jason Webb Australian Horse training in Kent.
They seem to provide something integral to the very foundations of the relationship of trust and respect between horse and trainer that I ve never seen or experienced with conventional methods.
NH appears to be able to instruct a specific set of methodologies based on the knowledge of horse psychology and equine herd behaviour and I think that is a new thing, not really acknowledged and used before.
I certainly would not have taken on a young horse if I was not convinced that these new methods are truely innovative and that I had a good chance of being able to put them into practice and i ve owned horses all my life but never really understood how they think and react or quite why.
NH methods are compartively simple to learn, they are logical and they work on EVERY horse. Conventional methods are not straightforward, they appear to have no underlying principles, they are intuitive and they do not work for all horses, FACT.
When you say you are using common sense, perhaps you are using your own very subtly developed NH methods that you haven' t really defined, but are no less similar.

 

[Storminateacup]

there's nothing wrong with them when used sympathetically and for the likes of your horse, and my semi-feral colt some of the techniques are invaluable. as with anything they are open to abuse and using behaviour to 'train' a horse is a potentially powerful technique.It can lead to over submissive and switched off horses. just watch Linda Parelli beat the **** out of a one-eyed horse in her training DVD..

my main problem with NHers is that everything is behaviour, they don't address the cause (usually pain) of the behavioural problems.

Yes, I agree with you there too, I dont want that over submissiveness either, and the Linda Parelli thing was bad, and I do not support her actions on any level.
I agree that behavioural problems caused by pain may also not be addressed but surely this applies in conventional training too?

 

[Storminateacup]

I did some of this NH training with my older conventionally backed horse and was surprised at how brave and confident it made him and for a very heavy cob ( in my siggy) and quite responsive and light to ride and lead about.

 

[touchstone]

NH methods are compartively simple to learn, they are logical and they work on EVERY horse. Conventional methods are not straightforward, they appear to have no underlying principles, they are intuitive and they do not work for all horses, FACT.
When you say you are using common sense, perhaps you are using your own very subtly developed NH methods that you haven' t really defined, but are no less similar.[/QUOTE]


I would have to take issue with the statement that conventional methods do not work with every horse - I believe it is more likely to be the practitioner of those methods that cannot make it work rather than the method itself. Also, I am pretty sure that there are some horses that haven't been rehabilitated by NH methods and have been sent off to the slaughterhouse.

There are many variables involved in training a horse, more than a single 'way' can deal with in certain cases, that is where a good horseman steps in, looks at all the options and takes it from there, but above all he deals with the horse with kindness first and foremost. Same as good 'conventional' horsemen have done for generations.

 

[Storminateacup]

Yes perhaps I was a little harsh in making a generalisation, but I personally found conventional methods are much more variable and highly dependent on a v. good practitioner.
My earlier young horse a few years ago was backed conventionally and he was an angel during and after training , but our ID stallion never stopped rearing and bucking until a good 3 years later. It didn't work on him.

 

[touchstone]

I think this article is pretty good at explaining some of the drawbacks that can happen with sticking to one 'brand' of horsemanship, also that NH was around long before it was called NH http://www.horseproblems.com.au/natural_horsemanship_explained.htm

 

[SVMel]

I understand what you are trying to say with the term 'conventional' methods. And I totally understand where you are coming from!!! It can be very hard to get people to understand what you mean when writing on a forum!!

I was brought up with very 'bhs' style training, and trained to pass my exams. It was only after I did this and moved through some other yards that I 'discovered' a better way of doing things. I find that the 'bhs' training I received always spoke of the importance of trust from the horse, but was very ready to be firm, and 'make' the horse do as it was told. I think a lot of this stems from Riding schools having to be economically sound, mainly from the pressure of people learning needing to feel that they are learning and getting results quickly. This I think is why a lot of trainers resort to stuff which will effect a quick fix, so the rider feels they are progessing, and that its worth paying the money, so to speak. I'm not saying 'conventional' trainers resort to violence, of causing pain, but possibly enforcing quick results in a more forceful way, if you get my meaning.

This is in no way derogatory to bhs instructors, I am one myself, and I expect everyone can in some way understand the point I'm trying to make. I, for one, am lucky to be able to freelance, but not depend totally on that money for survival, so I guess some would say I just 'play' at it. But I can pick and choose my clients, and refuse to rush or change my methods to suit the impatience of humans!!!! The horse comes first!!!! and since I've grown up and discovered I'm not all knowledgable (as most teenagers can be!!) I'm happier, my horses are happier and we're all a lot calmer!!!

So glad you've had such great success with your horse, keep it up!!!!!

xxxxxxx

 

[bluelady66]

that is excellent - as a novice and new owner - i got back into riding 2 years ago and did lots of helping out at local stables, reading and generally studying whatever i could get my hands on, watching whoever i could i now own a 7yr old sometimes very stubborn cob. I tend to use bits of advice i know will suit him and appeals to me - i do like the nh methods and trains of thought but i have given my horse a short sharp tap on his shoulder along with a very loud no when he has been particvularly rude or bargey. Im a mum of four humans too - of course i wanted to bring them up with no smacking ever and on teh whole i did - but even my children were different - my middle son was a sod who didnt care how much i adminished my verbally. He got several whacks in childhood for doing dangerous naughty things - in contrast i never ever had to smack my eldest - a look was enough. Horses must be the same - after all dont mares "smack" their foals if they push teh boundaries too much?
in now way am i adviocating loss of control beating - but an instant short sharp whack on the shoulder if they barge out of stable for instance - i do not see a problem with it at all. Better a well behaved horse who has a life of love of care than an uncontrollable bully who goes from home to home before ending up at teh meat market xxxx

 

[Storminateacup]

I think this article is pretty good at explaining some of the drawbacks that can happen with sticking to one 'brand' of horsemanship, also that NH was around long before it was called NH http://www.horseproblems.com.au/natural_horsemanship_explained.htm

I think John O'leary is great! He appears to combine both conventional and NH to create his own unique blend of horsemanship.

 

[Storminateacup]

In the article mentioned above by John O'Leary, he talks about partnership, respect and trust being mutually beneficial to horse and rider/trainer. This is the way I wish to do things, not to be DOMINANT as a leader, rather more a buddy that the horse wishes to be around.
The Parelli seven games seems to achieve this for basic groundwork if used sensitively and gently and not in a domineering fashion. I see too, that by being too "hard" people could terriorise a horse, as John O'leary points out.
As for the backing/breaking part, I would not dream of trying that with any horse, conventional or NH style, my horse is going off to Jason Webb to start his ridden education!

 

[thehorseloader]

Nothing wrong with NH. Like all things it is how it is done. People need to realise that so much promoted in NH isn't new, and doesn't just belong to NH.

TRAINING = TRUST, just food for thought!!!

 

[Chavhorse]

Nothing wrong with NH. Like all things it is how it is done. People need to realise that so much promoted in NH isn't new, and doesn't just belong to NH.

TRAINING = TRUST, just food for thought!!!

Can I just add to the above quote

GOOD TRAINING = Trust and mutual respect which takes time.

Nothing wrong with NH, Nothing woring with some conventional methods as long as the above is remembered.

 

[Festive_Felicitations]

There is nothing wrong with NH as such it is often the way people go about it or use that is wrong and has given it a bad name.
How many people have had some one on their yard who wants to work with their horse/ teach them the 'NH way' and day after day you see them going in circles getting no where with an ill mannered horse (that everyone else has to live with) becaue they see NH as never using force (and I don't mean beating, just a slap or punch in the shoulder ocassionally) so the horse walks all over them with no respect. But as an outsider you can see that a few sharp words and a slap or 2 and the horse would start to behave and respect the owner alot more.

I have to disagree with the comemnt that NH always works where 'traditional' often fails.

I'm not sure how you are defining traditional, but I worked on an Argentinian QH stud breaking in their semi-feral 3 yr olds, the owner insisted it was all done 'a la Monty Roberts'. His approach worked for laying the basic ground work but once you got to the stage where you were hopping on their backs you had nothing. After a long argument/discussion with the boss, the head trainer (on my side), and the farrier (?) I had to go back and do another week or two's work on each horse from the ground teaching them voice aides etc (as I would traditionally) before I hopped back on and was able to get them to walk forward, stop and so on.
Of the 15 I broke in 4 dumped me (and set out to dump me, not falls as a result of a baby moments), were part of the 10 that I started Montry Roberts way as opposed to the 5 I started traditionally after 'the discussion'. Not a scientific case study or by any means unbiased but it put me off doing anything further than the basic join-up.

 

[Chavhorse]

There is nothing wrong with NH as such it is often the way people go about it or use that is wrong and has given it a bad name.
How many people have had some one on their yard who wants to work with their horse/ teach them the 'NH way' and day after day you see them going in circles getting no where with an ill mannered horse (that everyone else has to live with) becaue they see NH as never using force (and I don't mean beating, just a slap or punch in the shoulder ocassionally) so the horse walks all over them with no respect. But as an outsider you can see that a few sharp words and a slap or 2 and the horse would start to behave and respect the owner alot more.

I have to disagree with the comemnt that NH always works where 'traditional' often fails.

I'm not sure how you are defining traditional, but I worked on an Argentinian QH stud breaking in their semi-feral 3 yr olds, the owner insisted it was all done 'a la Monty Roberts'. His approach worked for laying the basic ground work but once you got to the stage where you were hopping on their backs you had nothing. After a long argument/discussion with the boss, the head trainer (on my side), and the farrier (?) I had to go back and do another week or two's work on each horse from the ground teaching them voice aides etc (as I would traditionally) before I hopped back on and was able to get them to walk forward, stop and so on.
Of the 15 I broke in 4 dumped me (and set out to dump me, not falls as a result of a baby moments), were part of the 10 that I started Montry Roberts way as opposed to the 5 I started traditionally after 'the discussion'. Not a scientific case study or by any means unbiased but it put me off doing anything further than the basic join-up.

Felicity I agree totally, My trainer uses both Natural and traditional methods, he is always calm, but he says there comes a time when a horse has to realise it has to work and sometimes that means you have to be tougher with it, they have to understand pressure and the release they get from working well.

On the converse I went to look at a horse to buy once which had been totally Parellied (nothing against Parelli its the idiots who think 1 DVD makes them Pat!) she ground worked him then we asked to see him ridden apparently the horse said no so we left. Madness!

 

[NeedNewHorse]

Can I just say, NH methods for some people are a godsend to the horses and riders alike. Sorry but look in any old BHS manual. They teach nothing of what the horse might be thinking at all, nor do they open your eyes to be aware of your body language or the horses as half as much any anyone who teaches NH.

Some of you who think it's common sense - Great. Well done. But let me say ALOT of people simply don't have a clue. Will smack it, pull it, yank it and shout at it.. If the horse is not doing what they say. They simply do not understand that a horse who does not do what it's told is doing anything but being naughty. Now with all this NH techniques coming out, it has taught so many to stop and assess the situation. Saying actually lets look at this from the horses point of view.

So yeah, I love the fact that OP has managed to work and gain some trust with her new horse.

And I think it's great and anyone who is saying that old school methods are just fine they way they are, well that's possible because they work for you as a person, but use those same methods across the board and they will not have the desired effect... You need to open your eyes whend dealing with horses and think outside the box sometimes. Old school I don't feel do this!


x

 

[touchstone]

Can I just say, NH methods for some people are a godsend to the horses and riders alike. Sorry but look in any old BHS manual. They teach nothing of what the horse might be thinking at all, nor do they open your eyes to be aware of your body language or the horses as half as much any anyone who teaches NH.

Some of you who think it's common sense - Great. Well done. But let me say ALOT of people simply don't have a clue. Will smack it, pull it, yank it and shout at it.. If the horse is not doing what they say. They simply do not understand that a horse who does not do what it's told is doing anything but being naughty. Now with all this NH techniques coming out, it has taught so many to stop and assess the situation. Saying actually lets look at this from the horses point of view.

So yeah, I love the fact that OP has managed to work and gain some trust with her new horse.

And I think it's great and anyone who is saying that old school methods are just fine they way they are, well that's possible because they work for you as a person, but use those same methods across the board and they will not have the desired effect... You need to open your eyes whend dealing with horses and think outside the box sometimes. Old school I don't feel do this!


x

I have used 'traditional' methods with all the horses I have started, as have the several generations before myself in my family, if you read what I have written about it though I said:- "There are many variables involved in training a horse, more than a single 'way' can deal with in certain cases, that is where a good horseman steps in, looks at all the options and takes it from there, but above all he deals with the horse with kindness first and foremost. Same as good 'conventional' horsemen have done for generations."

BHS is dare I say, relatively modern in the scheme of things and to be fair it is teaching from a manual - it is going to be fact based and not conveying the niceties of understanding how an individual horse ticks. My grandfathers' both started horses without reading a BHS manual and although I am BHS trained, I view that as a starting post or basic guide, not the be all and end all.
I also think that it is up to the individual themselves to view the horse as a living sentient being and not a machine that has read the manual! That doesn't mean that conventional methods don't work, it means that conventional methods used with understanding do tend to work. Conventional should not necessarily mean beating, hitting and pulling around, classical training has been going on for an awfully long time with no need for brutality. It is the numpty bully trainer that is to blame, not the method itself.
Yes, there are those who I would never let near a horse with conventional methods, just as there are those who I wouldn't let near a horse with 'natural' methods. A bad practitioner of either is damaging. It all boils down to the handler/trainer rather than the method.

 

[thehorseloader]

Yes, there are those who I would never let near a horse with conventional methods, just as there are those who I wouldn't let near a horse with 'natural' methods. A bad practitioner of either is damaging. It all boils down to the handler/trainer rather than the method.

Here, Here!! Such a good point!