Whats people's thoughts of the Monty Roberts methods then

Baileybones said:
The final straw for me was when I saw a horse tied to a large telegraph pole in the middle of a field in summer with no shelter or water for several hours. It was "punishment" for a the horse who refused to "Join up" with said expert.
I argued this was barbaric to the point I was told to shut up or leave. I left.
.
Click to expand...

Baileybones - I am absolutely horrified to read of this treatment, by a so called expert. These types of abusive behaviour are exactly the sort of barbaric methods that Monty has committed his life to stamping out. The fact that the 'expert' is trading on Monty Roberts' name and claiming to use his Join Up techniques makes it all the more unpalatable.

I respect your right to not name and shame him in public, but I urge you to report this abuse directly to Intelligent Horsemanship (www.intelligenthorsemanship.co.uk) to alert them to his practices.

IH Recommended Associates and certified Monty Roberts Instructors are the ONLY practitioners that are recommended by Monty Roberts or Kelly Marks in the UK.
 
Ok not sure I really want to get into an argument of the pro's or cons of these training methods as ultimately it will come down to personal opinion anyway.

Please believe me when I say I made a hell of a noise about the trainer who's methods I did not agree with. The main point I was trying to make however was that the people who were using him and his methods thought this was ok. The backing horses in such a short space of time, the using of pressure halters and forcing them backwards and then releasing the pressure as a reward for the "right" behaviour. Even the extreme case of the telegraph pole - it was right outside of the main office with a rope hanging from the top and hoof marks and poo around it so quite obvious that horses were being tied to it even if you didn't know the duration of time for. These are all things that I don't agree with but he was being paid very well for.

My opinion and it is just that, is that sometimes people want the showmanship that comes from a lot of these "Horse Whisperers". And as was my experience many of these people almost wanted to be told that their horse was a "Bad un" rather than accept that they were a part of the problem and seek genuine help. If you have Ex racers you also know just how many "bad" horses there are that are just in the wrong hands / situation.

To answer your original question Yes I have used Michael Peace, Yes it worked for me and my mare and we owe him a debt we can't repay and yes I would recommend him to anyone.
 
irishcob said:
Baileybones - I am absolutely horrified to read of this treatment, by a so called expert. These types of abusive behaviour are exactly the sort of barbaric methods that Monty has committed his life to stamping out. The fact that the 'expert' is trading on Monty Roberts' name and claiming to use his Join Up techniques makes it all the more unpalatable.

I respect your right to not name and shame him in public, but I urge you to report this abuse directly to Intelligent Horsemanship (www.intelligenthorsemanship.co.uk) to alert them to his practices.

IH Recommended Associates and certified Monty Roberts Instructors are the ONLY practitioners that are recommended by Monty Roberts or Kelly Marks in the UK.
Click to expand...

Hi IrishCob

I did report him to Intelligent Horsemanship and to the best of my knowledge he's is getting by on a couple of loopholes. They explained it to me that as he is not claiming to be indorsed by MR but instead is claiming to use his methods - the round pen / the halters etc there is little they can do.

Sadly as we all no doubt know there are many people who call themselves experts who we would not leave our beloved horses in the care of.
It is also only fair that I point out that this was 12 years ago and whilst the person in question has continued to do well for themselves I personally doubt that much has changed with regards their approach but I could of course be wrong.

The main reason I brought this up was just to explain that I didn't take the decision to call in an expert lightly as I'd had personal bad experiences but that MP has completely restored my faith using an honest and logical approach. I'm not saying that there aren't some brilliant trainers out there in their own right but I feel that MR name gets bandied around alot by people with little or no experience.
 
In fairness though, surely when you get a lot of trainers teaching a certain method, you'll always get a few bad apples. I'm not a follower myself but logic says monty Roberts can't be held personally held at fault for every idiot that claims to use his methods.
 
littlelegs said:
In fairness though, surely when you get a lot of trainers teaching a certain method, you'll always get a few bad apples. I'm not a follower myself but logic says monty Roberts can't be held personally held at fault for every idiot that claims to use his methods.
Click to expand...

Oh god not at all.
I loved the principle of MR when he first appeared on the scene and the fact that for the first time people were being shown a "fairer" way to back and start horses.
I have since seen MR himself at a demo and have to say that I was personally disappointed that on that day with that horse some methods that I found questionable were involved.
But perhaps that was a one off?

I suppose all I was trying to say (probably quite badly) was that I think sometimes people are being drawn to those who make a lot of noise and lay on impressive crowd pleasing demo's but who aren't perhaps the greatest of horsemen.

Michael Peace has in fact been criticised on here for not being great with people and not being full of charm or waffle.

To me though this was fine. I was looking for the best person possible to work with my mare and he was that person. The fact that he didn't spend his time trying to make me feel warm and fluffy was not an issue.
 
I see what you mean. Whilst I'm familiar with the methods & logic behind them, I haven't had personal experience with the trainers, so can't comment on them. Do have experience with a few weird followers though. Know a very ignorant owner who has started following Kelly marks though, and for every stupid thing she does relates it back to Kelly marks. Eg Kelly marks says it is ok for her horse to barge out of the gate & charge back to the yard at canter. And when I objected was informed Kelly marks said my opinion doesn't count because I haven't done join up. Now I know, apart from the fact the woman has never even spoke to her, Kelly marks isn't likely to say anything of the sort. But I think she's probably a pretty good example of the type of owner you mean. But 20 years ago it wouldn't have been Kelly marks she used as an excuse for her own bizarre ideas, it would have been the bhs or 30 years ago Barbara woodhouse. So I don't think stupid owners are being encouraged by it. More that the idiots have discovered monty Roberts & are shouting the loudest about it. Which is a shame as it can give things an undeserved reputation.
 
Thanks for posting that, interesting reading. My own thoughts on the dominance theory all come from observing mine & other horses turned out in groups. And my oldie is very much an alpha, lead mare in every group she's been in, so fair to say I have always really just based my ideas on her behavior as much as possible if that makes sense.
 
fburton said:
Just came across a discussion relevant to this thread with a variety of interesting views:

http://www.newrider.com/forum/showthread.php?t=231956
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting that very interesting thread. I shall probably get the book and it has also reminded me to re-read Marthe Kiley-Worthington.

I don't see dominance and alpha as clear cut when you look at horses' interaction. In any one–to–one relationship, one horse may dominate and the other submit, then there are those who challenge the relationship daily, like the welsh pony — until they are around 35 it seems.

I prefer to see the interaction that we emulate, in one of Monty's less quoted terms, the "contract". Anna Twinney, who ran Monty's training for many years expresses it better. She talks quite clearly about establishing the contract with a horse on new acquaintance and adding that, once you have signed the contract, you do not start every encounter by going over the full agreement over and over. Once the horse has shown he has learned the ground rules, you know you can dispense with checking the contract and move on. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBEdiCZNbQ8

I have frequently seen bands of domestic horses, where the apparently dominant horse is the bully and a different horse is the leader: no-one chooses to follow a bully and good leaders know when 'dominance' is necessary and when it can be dispensed with.
 
:eek:
littlelegs said:
I see what you mean. Whilst I'm familiar with the methods & logic behind them, I haven't had personal experience with the trainers, so can't comment on them. Do have experience with a few weird followers though. Know a very ignorant owner who has started following Kelly marks though, and for every stupid thing she does relates it back to Kelly marks. Eg Kelly marks says it is ok for her horse to barge out of the gate & charge back to the yard at canter. And when I objected was informed Kelly marks said my opinion doesn't count because I haven't done join up. Now I know, apart from the fact the woman has never even spoke to her, Kelly marks isn't likely to say anything of the sort. But I think she's probably a pretty good example of the type of owner you mean. But 20 years ago it wouldn't have been Kelly marks she used as an excuse for her own bizarre ideas, it would have been the bhs or 30 years ago Barbara woodhouse. So I don't think stupid owners are being encouraged by it. More that the idiots have discovered monty Roberts & are shouting the loudest about it. Which is a shame as it can give things an undeserved reputation.
Click to expand...
:eek: don't you think that some of these people claiming to be trainers of these various methods, IF they were any good,they would have made it on their own, without having to hide behind people like MR, KM etc, after all its the results of their work being far the best recomendation, ok they can talk the talk most of them but can they walk the walk I wonder !
 
I imagine they have done it for the same reasons lots of people are affiliated to the bhs. Lots of bhs instructors don't follow the bhs teachings, but its an easier way to get a larger market (& cheaper insurance etc) than personal reputation. So from an economic pov I can see why they'd do it.
 
talkinghorse said:
I have frequently seen bands of domestic horses, where the apparently dominant horse is the bully and a different horse is the leader: no-one chooses to follow a bully and good leaders know when 'dominance' is necessary and when it can be dispensed with.
Click to expand...

Totally agree, watching my own herd of mares, the real leader is an older mare who only ever has to flick an ear, there is what I call a Second Lieutenant who is much more active, displaying strong and yes bullying behaviour, however, this 'bully' will always give way to the older mare, what is interesting is that there is a young filly in my herd who is def the bottom of the order, however, she has figured out that if she stays close to the older mare, the 'bully' leaves her alone, you can virtually see her poking her tongue out to the other mares, however, without the older mare close, she reverts back to a submissive bottom feeder. The older mare is not related to her at all, but her mother IS part of the herd (albeit second from the bottom). I find it all fascinating :)
 
Interesting amaranta, very much like my mare. I have watched her stop the second lieutenant from a good distance, purely by standing square on & staring, with no obvious sign of aggression whatsoever. And in various herds she has had that same role most of her life. What I did find fascinating was when a previous second lieutenant wore a muzzle 24/7, how quickly he lost his position. And yet my mare, at 14.2 has been out with lots of bigger, stronger, quicker dominant horses & has never had to do much to retain her position, despite the fact in a fight she would come off worse. And seen similar with other ponies in that role too with groups of hunters.
I am familiar with the body language involved, but I would love to know why some like mine can meet a new horse/herd & be accepted as leader without aggression pretty quickly, whilst others are challenged often? Not in a basic herd hierarchies way, but is there something about my mare (& similar ones) that quickly conveys to others she is the best equipped to lead?
Only explanation I can think of is that there is a limited no of true leaders & in lots of cases the relatively small herds we keep them in dictate the most dominant ends up in charge, rather than the best leader? But still, would like to know how other horses instinctively recognize a true leader without major confrontations.
 
Fellewell said:
Great news on your horse, he sounds very well-mannered.

They're blowing smoke up our rears with these gadgets. They're not nearly precise enough IMO.

FWIW after watching someone 'in the field' I was also lent an official training video.
Click to expand...

He's largely well mannered now due to the dually, previously he would drag me all over, its taken time.
 
xxMozlarxx said:
He's largely well mannered now due to the dually, previously he would drag me all over, its taken time.
Click to expand...

You see this sums it up for me. Absolutely no offence intended here btw.. but.. I would far rather have my horse well mannered because he/she wants to be rather than because they respect/fear the outcome of a piece of gadgetry. Three out of our five will walk in from the field without a headcollar and match our pace because that is what they want to do. Of the other two, the first we made mistakes with and the other came from a home that was fairly violent to her although there are more and more days when she will walk with us.
 
That's the interesting thing about this forum, finding out how different people deal with different types of horses and the challenges they present. How some are quick to use, what I think, is an inappropriate peice of tack, before attempting to solve the clues the horse gives.

Others seem to find the right track, very quickly, instinctively almost.
 
I think part of it though does depend on situation though. Eg 6yr old 17h wb, highly strung & spent last 2yrs dominating nervous owner, so much so turning out involves opening gate & allowing horse to fly out of stable to field & vice versa. Sells to me as cheap project complete with other issues. Turnout involves walking a few 100m down a lane. Using a stallion chain (correctly) for a few days is the safest & only workable solution. In an ideal world there are other ways, but my set up didn't allow that. Within a week horse walking on a loose rope shoulder to shoulder, being cruel to be kind really.
Other situations I have done things without resorting to using harsh equipment, & agree they are often too quickly resorted to.
 
littlelegs said:
I think part of it though does depend on situation though. Eg 6yr old 17h wb, highly strung & spent last 2yrs dominating nervous owner, so much so turning out involves opening gate & allowing horse to fly out of stable to field & vice versa. Sells to me as cheap project complete with other issues. Turnout involves walking a few 100m down a lane. Using a stallion chain (correctly) for a few days is the safest & only workable solution. In an ideal world there are other ways, but my set up didn't allow that. Within a week horse walking on a loose rope shoulder to shoulder, being cruel to be kind really.
Other situations I have done things without resorting to using harsh equipment, & agree they are often too quickly resorted to.
Click to expand...

Given your reasons of having to walk down the lane (eeeek!) and the fact that his behaviour had, in his mind, been endorsed and approved by previous owner then your options were limited. Also of course, it seems that you are rather more experienced and knowledgeable than some of the people seen to be using duallys because they know no other way to sort out minor problems and have been led to believe that using a dually will make the horse their 'friend'

I have long held the view that many of todays problem horses are created because of fearful owners who really don't have a clue. They have certainly created their own niche market for expensive gadgets and quick fixes.
 
Almost as interesting as wathing herd dynamics is watching the goings on with the human liveries in my yard! The 'dominant mare' calls the shots, everyone else obeys but one or two play both sides of the field and cause chaos with chinese whispers and backstabbing. Oh to be a horse.
 
I agree too, so called problem horses aren't born that way. Only ones that aren't caused by people are the rare cases of undetectable physical issues, eg brain tumours. And even in the case outlined above, in an ideal world I could have left him out 24/7 & handled him in the field for however long it took to gain respect in a nicer way & break the habit. Should always be a last resort imo.
 
EMC said:
Almost as interesting as wathing herd dynamics is watching the goings on with the human liveries in my yard! The 'dominant mare' calls the shots, everyone else obeys but one or two play both sides of the field and cause chaos with chinese whispers and backstabbing. Oh to be a horse.
Click to expand...

So true!
 
:) In my opinion to many horses are not being started right in the first place, its all to easy to blame he horse, but in fact its the humans that are the problem in most cases, I know MR tells us what the horses is thinking, BUT is this correct, that we will never know and it can never be proved, because we cannot talk horse only try to listen to them, maybe he is correct, but maybe not, in a herd horses get sent out if they do wrong, but they are sent out in the round pen, what have they done wrong, dose the licking & chewing etc really mean what MR tells us, IMO maybe he's right but maybe he is wrong, again it can never be proved, i.e a dog can run up to you wagging its tail and still bite you ! :)
 
I have read through a lot of this thread and there are so many interesting comments on here. Have to admit that by page 28 I thought I had best actually do some work instead, but felt the need to give my input, so apologies if I am not totally up on what's been said. I have worked with a lot of NH trainers over the years and they have taught me so much. I am not on here to sl*g anyone off, so instead I just want to tell you about the one person who I totally believe in, admire greatly and hope I can help others in the meantime. And that's Michael Peace. Oh and I am not advertising, by the way, simply talking from experience.

Case study one: My horse wouldn't load and broke someone's leg in the process after several weeks of trying to load her. It took Michael about four minutes and no force/gadgets/shouting/abuse went on, she just realised that Michael had a gift with horses and went quietly on the lorry. Within seven minutes, she was loading herself and has continued to be a delight to load ever since.

Case study two: I had a nappy horse. I couldn't even get her to the school. With Michael Peace present, he watched as I got pinned against the fence and the mare wouldn't budge an inch. Yet again, no force or uncomfortable training, and in minutes, Michael had her walking, trotting and cantering around the school and even hacking out.

He is truly inspiring and I feel lucky to have met him. I wish everyone the best with their horses and I hope you all find a method that works for you.
 
I think it's really great to have threads like this, where people are able to voice their many different opinions. I have to say that I start to flick over the posts where one person repeats the same point of view over and over again, just as I do if I'm in a live discussion with people - I guess I'm just not that good socially but I feel that everyone's entitled to their own opinion, and to the opportunity to influence others to agree with or learn from that opinion, but also that everyone else has the option of disagreeing with some or all of that opinion without it being repeated ad infinitum!

What fascinates me most about this thread is how many people on here talk about the amount of time they spend watching and learning from horses - I work with horses full time (as an Intelligent Horsemanship Recommended Associate, BHSAI, Chartered Veterinary Physiotherapist and Equinology Equine Body Worker), and have just given up 3hrs of time when I should be doing admin (i.e. getting back to client's emails) to read this thread - when do these people find time to spend all this time with horses?! Not a criticism, but a genuine question - I'd love to see more of my mare, or read around the subject more, or get more involved in the scientific studies that I am so fascinated by! But I find that all the time I spend with horses means that I don't get to spend much time on the computer, or doing anything else for that matter!

Michael Peace, of course, trained with Monty Roberts (as have so many others) and so will have learned much from him (I'm sure he would agree with this).

There are so many points throughout the thread that I'd love to respond to, but the right time has long passed. Probably the only comment I'd like to make is that some people (not all) seem to believe there is a gulf between IH 'methods' and BHS / other training methods. As has been pointed out previously, the top people (current and past) in the BHS are supporters of Intelligent Horsemanship, and I know that most of the Intelligent Horsemanship Recommended Associates have some level of BHS exams (I can't speak for the others to say precisely how many, but as I said, I'm a BHSAI - I chose not to take the exams any further because there were other routes I wanted to study - I can only afford to do a limited number of courses in a lifetime). For example Carrie Adams (www.centrelines.co.uk) is an RA who is also British Dressage Group 2 rider and trainer as well as a BHSII.

Brought up in a scientific world (I qualified at Kings College London as a physiotherapist, which is very much an evidence based profession, and have two BSc degrees and an MSc), I am very keen to link the practical work that I do to an evidence base. However, having studied in depth, and carried out dissertations myself (including presenting my MSc study at the 6th Symposium of the International Association of Veterinary Rehabilitation and Physical Therapy), I also recognise that there is much that is effective in practice that we do not have evidence for - that could be because there is no funding to search for the evidence or lack of (how many of the contributors here would be interested in financially contributing how much to a study to answer some of the questions asked, and how valid do you think that study might be as a one off?), or because we do not have objective outcome measures available (as far as I know, there is no science as yet to tell us whether a horse is suffering 'back pain' for example - I wanted to look into that for my MSc study but was told that it was simply too difficult), or because we can't find enough horses in the same situation with the same condition / behaviour, etc. It is my personal belief that if I only did what there is scientific evidence for, then I wouldn't be doing very much, and I certainly wouldn't be an effective practitioner! Did you know, for example, that much of the evidence for stretching (in the human field) demonstrates that stretching is detrimental to your performance? And yet I bet anyone who is a runner or goes to the gym still uses stretching (and I would suggest that you continue to do so, before you ask!). We're not just talking about the equine field here.

Oh, and one more - the original question was 'what's people's thoughts of the Monty Roberts methods then?'. The simple fact that so much of this thread seems to have become 'what's people's thoughts of join up then?', or 'what's people's thoughts of the Dually halter then?', shows me how much more Monty has to do in spreading his concepts throughout the UK, if not the world. If 'Monty's method's' equalled 'join-up' or 'use the Dually halter', I can't imagine that this thread would exist because he wouldn't have achieved the outstanding success and recognition that he has with horses of all shapes and sizes and in all disciplines. Personally I have immense respect for both Monty and Kelly in the work that they do to promote good horsemanship, whatever that might mean for the individual and their horse.
 
Don't know about anyone else but I always spent ages watching horses turned out together as a child, teen & even now as an adult, & everyday situations rather than doing book & web research & drew my own conclusions. I do find it interesting to research but practical experience is just as vital. Once you've figured out why pony a moves from pony b at haying time its only natural you'd carry on having questions. A lot of body language comes into play just catching a nervous pony as a child, or a biting shetland. Always seemed logical to me that if horse a dominates everything but horse b then copying horse b is the best way to go. I'm not sure funding research is necessary, most horses with problems are caused through lack of basic horsemanship, which we already know about but it doesn't prevent these problems occurring.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top