Whats people's thoughts of the Monty Roberts methods then

OH goodness you're right about the warning from the psychiatric nurse! She said you were 'a troll' and anything I did was just 'feeding you' ... OMG I'll sign off here - this kind of thing is WAY out of my league I'll freely admit...
 
Kelly Marks said:
OH goodness you're right about the warning from the psychiatric nurse! She said you were 'a troll' and anything I did was just 'feeding you' ... OMG I'll sign off here - this kind of thing is WAY out of my league I'll freely admit...
Click to expand...

Oh there are some real oddities on the forum.. Best plan is just to ignore the ones who add nothing to the forum other than being overtly critical of the methods of others :)
 
rhino said:
Oh there are some real oddities on the forum.. Best plan is just to ignore the ones who add nothing to the forum other than being overtly critical of the methods of others :)
Click to expand...

I agree with the theory, but what do you do about those whose comments are libellous and downright malicious?
 
Kelly Marks said:
But you are more than well educated enough to know the difference between ‘chasing and sending away’ and just because you work for a clinician doesn’t mean you gain anything by putting Monty’s work down. Especially as the guy you work for is so utterly polite and delightful ( I had a good chat with him at the Melbourne Equitana in 2010 after the ‘Way of the Horse’) and I can’t imagine it’s the way he’d behave or something he’d wish to be associated with?

Must go! Pressing business!;)

Kelly

PS For anyone who just doesn't like me personally - I can well appreciate it - since seeing myself on TV a couple of times I had no idea before I have the most annoying nervous laugh at times, I make stupid jokes that only about 3 people are going to understand plus have no dress sense whatsoever - on the plus side ... I do 'mean well' ... xx
Click to expand...

Just butting in to be nosey - who works for who who was at Equitana? Not Tess surely!
 
Last edited:
lol, no, I don't work for whoever was at Equitana! I think Kelly was referring to LadyinRed - but I think she has her "facts" muddled up there as well, to be honest.
 
I like using this forum as sometimes some really good advice can be found - however, one of my latest posts had replies accusing me of neglecting the welfare of my horse etc. Not nice. My husband reminded me though, one can sit on the computer for hours and become classed as a virtual 'schoolmaster, old nag' etc. But, as most things in the virtual world, how many of these people actually 'are' in real life.... I'll still post on here as there are some sane and helpful people out there whom I am grateful for advice from. Pinch of salt with some of the rest ;)
 
What I like about MR is that his methods appear 'calmer' more gentle than others, anything that promotes this to the masses is a good thing IMO....there are so many people who are not patient and choose to treat their horses in an unkind manner due to ignorance or impatience...if the likes of MR and KM can promote the kinder ways to these people then it must be better than what we all see every time we go to a show and cringe!

I realise many of you know much more than me on this subject...I am simply putting across my opinions based on what I have seen.....I haven't been keen on other methods and I am not 100% sold on MR either...but I certainly haven't seen anything yet that puts me off (unlike other NH methods).
 
tess1 said:
lol, no, I don't work for whoever was at Equitana! I think Kelly was referring to LadyinRed - but I think she has her "facts" muddled up there as well, to be honest.
Click to expand...

I kind of thought it referred to me.

Either way Ms Marks owes me for a new chair as I fell off mine laughing and broke it when I read her post. Talking of making assumptions!

Please note that in spite of a lengthy post none of the questions raised have been answered, as per usual.
 
Ladyinred said:
I kind of thought it referred to me.

Either way Ms Marks owes me for a new chair as I fell off mine laughing and broke it when I read her post. Talking of making assumptions!

Please note that in spite of a lengthy post none of the questions raised have been answered, as per usual.
Click to expand...
Ladyinred, Kelly quite clearly stated that she was happy to put the information required on her own website, so as not to contravene the 'advertising' regs on HHO.
 
debsg, if Kelly Marks answers the questions or puts up information on her own site, it will be because she can then avoid any awkward cross-questioning from people like me, who have been banned from there for asking too many difficult questions and pointing out that plausible, alternative viewpoints exist. However, in light of the "Tragic Accident" thread on the IHDG last night I can well imagine that she really does have more pressing things on her mind at the moment. I see the thread has now been removed, but I hope that a full enquiry will be carried out and any lessons learnt to reduce the possibility of such an awful thing ever happening again be made public.
 
muff747 said:
I have watched and studied MR methods and have studied horses at liberty in the field and the behaviours MR highlights, such as L&C, circling around and dropping the head along the ground does happen between horses. Why do people (particularly Morgan) on here keep saying there is no evidence that this behaviour is natural, have you never watched your horses or any horses meeting and greeting or sussing out a new horse introduced into the herd???
You may not see it in an established herd where they have already worked out which position they are in in the hierarchy.
Click to expand...
Would you say that JU is about establishing dominance or the person's place in the (dominance) hierarchy?

Also, just a small point - there has been some discussion earlier about when the L&C happening after being chased away and the adrenalin is reducing, but I see this behaviour if I just ask my horse to back away from me. Or if a horse is barging against me, I use pressure on the head collar to ask it to back off, or I sometimes use my fingers against the shoulder to ask it to back off me, and it can L&C then:confused: So I interpret that as the horse saying ok ok I hear you, I'm listening now, which is more or less what MR interprets the action as.
Click to expand...
This strikes me as an overly complicated explanation. It could be right, but then I would like to see examples of where L&C is used as a signal from one horse to another, rather than simply something a horse does. For it to be a true communicative signal, it has to affect the behaviour of the receiver. It should therefore be possible to show that the other horse is capable of making use of the information embodied in the signal.

On the other hand, L&C in the situations you describe could still be adrenaline related. You are still applying pressure, albeit momentarily. Given the sensitivity of horses, it doesn't surprise me at all that you see L&C here. Does L&C happen while the pressure is being applied, or after it, during the release?
 
Disclaimer before I start *I own and use both dually and rope halters.* I am going to try to word this appropriately as I don't want a fight said:
unless[/I] the horse particularly disliked poll pressure but was okay with nose pressure, or if the horse was more likely to go confrontational with more severe pressure.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not criticising you, I think its great that you have found what works for you and as I say I use both depending on the horse and activity. I am just really curious as to your situation. :)
Click to expand...

Hi, not taken as criticism,:) yes we are talking about the fine rope halters. Like you I do and have used both on different horses. I can't really answer the why's to be honest, I have used a rope halter to good effect previously and with youngsters, however my new boy is a big strong ID, he pays no attention at all to a rope halter, it has no effect whatsoever. The dually he seemed to understand and respect straight away. :confused:
 
tess1 said:
… Why did Roberts feel the need to include a Buckstop in the list of equipment he had access to during the study of his method? It has been previously stressed on his forum that this is a tool of last resort used only when all other techniques have failed and this is horse's last chance before being sent for slaughter or similar. I don't believe any of the horses in the study fell into that category (?). …
Click to expand...

You know why and when he chooses to use the buckstopper — it has been hammered to death on other fora in recent years. In this case, the answer is quite simple. He had to list all the items he might use to train horses. As Veronica Fowler's link to the full details explains, once that list was submitted, he could not add a piece of equipment that he might have found he needed.

It reminded me of my conversation with Mark Rashid, after he had stated that the commonly–used 'natural horsemanship' headcollar was vicious, as it was deliberately designed to have the knots exert pressure in the most sensitive area of the horse's head. I said, "I have one of those, but I've never used because I think that the thin rope is too severe if a horse pulls suddenly," (I'd tried it on the back of my neck and tugged, but found it hurt!)

I asked Mark Rashid should I throw it away. He surprised me by saying, "I have one in my barn at home. I haven't thrown it away, just in case I find a time when I might want to use it." I can't say I understood his rationale, but his experience of horses is greater than mine. He knows it is highly unlikely he will need it, but perhaps, when something he hasn't ever met before happens, then he might want to use it.
 
To me, Lucy Rees's observations on dominance hierarchies in horses makes a lot of sense.

Her free e-book can be downloaded from this site http://pottoka.info/lapottoka/libro.php?id=en (click on Pottoka's behaviour and training). In particular, pages 20 through to 22 discuss social behaviour and dominance hierarchies. In a nutshell, it appears that the horse who can "move the feet" of the other horses - by controlling their access to food, driving them away and so on is not actually the leader. "The boss" is not attractive to the other horses - they tend to avoid her. LR states that "in domestic groups it is hard to spot the leader until they escape. The horses that live free in the northern sierras usually come down for winter and are hand fed, so the difference between the 'boss' and the leader are clearly seen. One farmer, describing his bell mare said "she's not the one that wins the food, she's the one that all the others follow".

I have observed this with my own horses. I have a group of five who I allow out onto the thousand plus acres of common land outside my farm, particularly during the winter when grazing gets boring in their fields. When I need to fetch them in, I simply go and catch my small, old mare and the rest follow along behind. This mare is the lowest in the "pecking order" - there is only one horse she can move from the hay pile - although that horse can move two others, which in turn can move the old mare - so there is no linear hierarchy to be observed. My large, coloured gelding can move everyone - however when I catch him and lead him away, the others stay where they are, or even head off in the opposite direction - led by the small old mare. The gelding may be the "boss" at the haypile, but he is not the leader. So to me, the notion that driving a horse away or moving his feet makes us his leader, makes no sense to me.

Rees also makes the very valid point that horses' natural behaviours are adapted to open spaces and not enclosures. She suggests that horses don't have signals for submission (unlike dogs, humans and other primates) - the only command the boss has is "go away" - and if the horse does not/cannot get away they may very well get hurt. Natural horse behaviour is about avoidance, not obedience.

There is much worth reading in the paper that can be accessed from the above link. I would suggest that anyone with a relatively open mind and an interest in horse behaviour take a look at it.
 
talkinghorse said:
You know why and when he chooses to use the buckstopper — it has been hammered to death on other fora in recent years. In this case, the answer is quite simple. He had to list all the items he might use to train horses. As Veronica Fowler's link to the full details explains, once that list was submitted, he could not add a piece of equipment that he might have found he needed.
Click to expand...

No, Catrin, the answer is far from simple. These were untrained young horses. In total they had ten hours of training from a standing start to completing an obstacle course and a dressage test. The justification given on the forum is that the buckstopper is a last ditch attempt to save a horse from slaughter because they buck so badly. Horses do not get sent for slaughter after ten hours of training, as part of an experiment to test the "kindness" of certain techniques. He would have used the buckstopper if he had a horse who had objected to the fast, intense training methods that were being used - for example - at least four join ups in the first three and a half hours of training.
 
tess1 said:
To me, Lucy Rees's observations on dominance hierarchies in horses makes a lot of sense.

Her free e-book can be downloaded from this site http://pottoka.info/lapottoka/libro.php?id=en (click on Pottoka's behaviour and training). In particular, pages 20 through to 22 discuss social behaviour and dominance hierarchies. In a nutshell, it appears that the horse who can "move the feet" of the other horses - by controlling their access to food, driving them away and so on is not actually the leader. "The boss" is not attractive to the other horses - they tend to avoid her. LR states that "in domestic groups it is hard to spot the leader until they escape. The horses that live free in the northern sierras usually come down for winter and are hand fed, so the difference between the 'boss' and the leader are clearly seen. One farmer, describing his bell mare said "she's not the one that wins the food, she's the one that all the others follow".

notion that driving a horse away or moving his feet makes us his leader, makes no sense

There is much worth reading in the paper that can be accessed from the above link. I would suggest that anyone with a relatively open mind and an interest in horse behaviour take a look at it.
Click to expand...

Thanks :) I will have a read.
 
tess1 said:
debsg, if Kelly Marks answers the questions or puts up information on her own site, it will be because she can then avoid any awkward cross-questioning from people like me, who have been banned from there for asking too many difficult questions and pointing out that plausible, alternative viewpoints exist.…
Click to expand...
I think only your ISP or the court system of your country can ban you from viewing a website. If you don't like what you see there, you can then put a post here telling everyone why, and start a new discussion, which it seems several of Kelly's IHRAs are pleased to join.
 
tess1 said:
No, Catrin, the answer is far from simple. …
Click to expand...
I have suggested that he would, like any professional, take every possible piece of equipment he might need, even the ones whose probability of being used is almost impossible. Only the amateur leaves things to chance. So why ask us to try to guess an answer, why not just email Monty and ask?
 
Wagtail said:
Tess, I am struggling to work out your views on Monty Roberts methods. :D
Click to expand...

:D

Catrin - you misread my point - I said I couldn't question on there, not I couldn't read it. Isn't it a bit convoluted for Kelly to post on the DG, then me to respond on here, then half the people respond on the DG again, but some people respond here ... and so on. If the RAs are so keen to chat to me, perhaps she should let me back on to the forum :rolleyes:
 
talkinghorse said:
I have suggested that he would, like any professional, take every possible piece of equipment he might need, even the ones whose probability of being used is almost impossible. Only the amateur leaves things to chance. So why ask us to try to guess an answer, why not just email Monty and ask?
Click to expand...

to be honest Catrin, as you know, I've been there, done that and got the t-shirt. there isn't anything, that anyone could say to me to convince me that it is OK to use a buckstopper on a young horse at the start of his ridden career - especially when it is supposed to be part of an experiment on "kind" starting methods. I can only draw two conclusions - either the buckstopper was a tool for horses who "objected", or it is standard Monty equipment for starting youngsters. Neither of which sits well with me.
 
At the start of this thread, I posted my personal reasons for following Monty Roberts' methods. Here are some more global ones that show his influence.

Monty is committed to taking violence out of the lives of horses and people. He empowers others to change and take violence out of theirs. He works with young offenders, disadvantaged communities and individuals whose lives are affected by violence. He has rescued 47 foster children from violence or violent lives. He gives tirelessly of his time and never refuses a request to help a horse or child if he can do so. He has been instrumental in having the use of the whip banned or reduced in various countries and situations. He won't stop until the whip in racing is banned.

Monty is committed to making the management of horses healthier and less stressful. To that end he promotes and teaches ad lib forage feeding; constant access to water, shelter and companions and management and training that reflects the individual horse's needs. He demonstrates the adverse and stressful effect of continuous lunging and promotes alternative methods of training. He has had rules changed to enable horses to perform without shoes. He promotes natural fibres next to the horse's skin and tack and equipment that assists the horse, but does not harm him.

Monty promotes world–wide, and works constantly in, equine assistance programmes for disabled or disfunctional individuals. He is patron of several in UK. His influence had changed the BHS. President Martin Clunes and Chairman Lynn Petersen are both Intelligent Horsemanship students. Monty also worked with former Chairman Patrick Print.

In a few short years, Monty has changed the perception of horse training in South America, where extremely harsh traditional horsemanship has been the norm for centuries, to such an extent that the gauchos who wanted him killed when he first went, now want to follow his methods instead. On June 24, at the Guards Polo Club, Windsor Her Majesty will present certificates to several whom Monty has recommended. The certificate acknowledges their extraordinary efforts to eliminate violence in the training of horses, followed by their name and the country’s name. Recipients are Adolfo Cambiaso (Argentina), Carlos Gracida (Mexico and Argentina), Memo Gracida (Mexico and Argentina), Carlos Leite (Brazil), Catherine Cunningham (Guatemala), Eduardo Moreira (Brazil), Joel Baker (USA), Mateus Ribeiro (Brazil), and Satish Seemar (Dubai).

Monty gives 300 days of his year, travelling 200,000 miles to ensure that he helps as many people as he can, while he can. Recognising that with poor health at 77, he can't go on forever, he has created hundreds of hours of film, covering every aspect of horse handling and management, which he makes available for less than the subscription to Horse and Hound. He also answers people's questions, in emails or at demos.

Since he has a non-profit organisation status, every penny that he makes, from sales of books and equipment, is used to promote the education of non-violence world wide.

It is the little guys like us who change the lives of our horses, it is the big guys like Monty that show us what needs to be done.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top