Natural Horsemanship vs Traditional Training

[saultgirl]

After reading the thread about whether to let a NH person come to see a horse for sale, and a few other threads on this topic, I'm suprised at how some people are so vehemently opposed to "Natural Horsemanship" training methods.

I think we should compare "NH" and "traditional methods" in a few specific scenarios to see just how different they are. How would a NH trainer deal with these issues and how would a traditional trainer deal with these issues? Also, feel free to add how you THINK the "other trainer" would deal with it, if you are more familiar with one than the other.

1. Horse will not stand to be fly sprayed.

2. Horse is difficult to catch.

3. Horse nips/bites.

4. Horse won't stand still to be mounted.

Would anyone like to discuss this?

[philosoraptor]

It's a good topic,but it's been discussed a lot here already.

After reading the thread about whether to let a NH person come to see a horse for sale, and a few other threads on this topic, I'm suprised at how some people are so vehemently opposed to "Natural Horsemanship" training methods.

I think we should compare "NH" and "traditional methods" in a few specific scenarios to see just how different they are. How would a NH trainer deal with these issues and how would a traditional trainer deal with these issues? Also, feel free to add how you THINK the "other trainer" would deal with it, if you are more familiar with one than the other.

I break it down by motivational force:

Traditional is punishment/correction based. Traditional trainers tend to go for chainshanks or harsh bits. The horse will be made to do X or else. The mindset is that horse are to do X when asked and if he doesn't or he bucks or something, more discomfort-pain-fear is applied until the bad behavior stops.

NH motivates with removal-of-pressure. "Pressure" can be tapping,poking, kicking, threat/aggressive stance, etc. NH wraps it up in a philosophy of trying to "communicate" with the horse on horse's level. Depending on which brand of NH,this varies. One common thread seems to be alpha, being boss, domination, etc. NH usually goes hand-in-hand with ropehalters and carrotsticks. Their mantra is "make the feet move" and getting "submission". The whole "lick and chew" seems to be a NH idea.

Dont forget there is also positive-based training. The best known is clickertraining. CT can use food but it doesn't have to. +R tries to understand what motivates an animal. Put simply you offer them something they want more than to do the undesired behavior. If the horse is not behaving, instead of pressure or correction, the first step is to ask why? Pain, health, confusion, illness, physical limitations, etc.

1. Horse will not stand to be fly sprayed.

Oldschool trainer puts on a chainshank. Horse is shanked every time he moves and eventually horse learns standing still is less unpleasant.

NH trainer has a few approaches. Parelli would do "7 games" until the horse got into the habit of listening. Clinton Anderson would probably run the horse in a smallroundpen to exhaustion until he "knows who is boss" (or is too physically exhausted to fight anymore). It's about training the horse to be submissive. Then put him in a ropehalter so he feels pressure/discomfort when he pulls away but the moment he obeys, the pressure stops.

+R would ignore the mistakes but reward the good tries. Everymoment he isn't fidgeting or running from the spray, reward.

Of course any of these could also incorporate flooding or densitization techniques in addition.

2. Horse is difficult to catch.

Traditional might use catching techniques. Some people just walk after the horse until he gives up. Some leave the horse in a stall after breakfast so he doesn't need caught for a noon ride.

NH would do exercises with the horses over and over until he's in such a habit of being submissive. Or they have some catching techniques of their own.

+R trainer uses rewards to reinforce the horsefor standing still when approached or coming when called. Horse looks forward to seeingyou,so difficult to catch isn't an issue.

Approach-and-retreat is a technique common to all trainers. Staying calm and knowing when to apply "pressure" (eg bodylangauge) could be common to all.


3. Horse nips/bites.

Traditional trainer whacks himback. If it turns into a game, horse gets a "coming to jesus" moment that is meant to instill "respect".

NH would do more submission exercises. Thisproblem is on parelli's site. Their answer is to do more of their exercises such as 7 games and "understand your horse's horseanality" by buying another DVD.

+R trainer solves this immediately by requiring manners for the horse to getanything good. How could a horse know good mouth manners if you never hold anything interesting near his mouth? look up clicker training's "mugging" exercises. You also address why he's mouthy: untrained, fear/anxiety,horomones

4. Horse won't stand still to be mounted.

Traditional: MAKE him stand. Could be excessive rein pressure or shanking when he steps away.

NH: there are some NH which reward standing still. If the horse steps, he's run in a circle until he submits. Or apply pressure until his feet stop moving and the moment he stops,you release.

+R: teach "stand" from the ground and just reward when he stands on cue. Slowly make duration longer. Pretty soon horse ground-ties and stands quietly at mounting block. Or reward at mountingblock,so horse wants to stand beside it (look up "body targeting" in clicker training). Or teach cues such as "step towards me" so at the block you can easily move him closer.


GOOD TIMING & SENSITIVITY is essential for any training method to work. ANY method could be confusing to abusive in the wrong hands.

[Bluey]

It's a good topic,but it's been discussed a lot here already.



I break it down by motivational force:

Traditional is punishment/correction based. Traditional trainers tend to go for chainshanks or harsh bits. The horse will be made to do X or else. The mindset is that horse are to do X when asked and if he doesn't or he bucks or something, more discomfort-pain-fear is applied until the bad behavior stops.

NH motivates with removal-of-pressure. "Pressure" can be tapping,poking, kicking, threat/aggressive stance, etc. NH wraps it up in a philosophy of trying to "communicate" with the horse on horse's level. Depending on which brand of NH,this varies. One common thread seems to be alpha, being boss, domination, etc. NH usually goes hand-in-hand with ropehalters and carrotsticks. Their mantra is "make the feet move" and getting "submission". The whole "lick and chew" seems to be a NH idea.

Dont forget there is also positive-based training. The best known is clickertraining. CT can use food but it doesn't have to. +R tries to understand what motivates an animal. Put simply you offer them something they want more than to do the undesired behavior. If the horse is not behaving, instead of pressure or correction, the first step is to ask why? Pain, health, confusion, illness, physical limitations, etc.



Oldschool trainer puts on a chainshank. Horse is shanked every time he moves and eventually horse learns standing still is less unpleasant.

NH trainer has a few approaches. Parelli would do "7 games" until the horse got into the habit of listening. Clinton Anderson would probably run the horse in a smallroundpen to exhaustion until he "knows who is boss" (or is too physically exhausted to fight anymore). It's about training the horse to be submissive. Then put him in a ropehalter so he feels pressure/discomfort when he pulls away but the moment he obeys, the pressure stops.

+R would ignore the mistakes but reward the good tries. Everymoment he isn't fidgeting or running from the spray, reward.

Of course any of these could also incorporate flooding or densitization techniques in addition.



Traditional might use catching techniques. Some people just walk after the horse until he gives up. Some leave the horse in a stall after breakfast so he doesn't need caught for a noon ride.

NH would do exercises with the horses over and over until he's in such a habit of being submissive. Or they have some catching techniques of their own.

+R trainer uses rewards to reinforce the horsefor standing still when approached or coming when called. Horse looks forward to seeingyou,so difficult to catch isn't an issue.

Approach-and-retreat is a technique common to all trainers. Staying calm and knowing when to apply "pressure" (eg bodylangauge) could be common to all.




Traditional trainer whacks himback. If it turns into a game, horse gets a "coming to jesus" moment that is meant to instill "respect".

NH would do more submission exercises. Thisproblem is on parelli's site. Their answer is to do more of their exercises such as 7 games and "understand your horse's horseanality" by buying another DVD.

+R trainer solves this immediately by requiring manners for the horse to getanything good. How could a horse know good mouth manners if you never hold anything interesting near his mouth? look up clicker training's "mugging" exercises. You also address why he's mouthy: untrained, fear/anxiety,horomones



Traditional: MAKE him stand. Could be excessive rein pressure or shanking when he steps away.

NH: there are some NH which reward standing still. If the horse steps, he's run in a circle until he submits. Or apply pressure until his feet stop moving and the moment he stops,you release.

+R: teach "stand" from the ground and just reward when he stands on cue. Slowly make duration longer. Pretty soon horse ground-ties and stands quietly at mounting block. Or reward at mountingblock,so horse wants to stand beside it (look up "body targeting" in clicker training). Or teach cues such as "step towards me" so at the block you can easily move him closer.


GOOD TIMING & SENSITIVITY is essential for any training method to work. ANY method could be confusing to abusive in the wrong hands.


I beg to disagree.

Much of that is a parody of what someone things a "traditional trainer" and their methods are, just as it seems to put the NH trainers as some kind of enlightened horse whisperer.
Both are false as far as what is described, but right if you are talking about bad, good or better trainers in general.

[saultgirl]

For both of you who replied, would you describe yourselves as more on the traditional side or NH side of things?

[pAin't_Misbehavin']

How would a NH trainer deal with these issues and how would a traditional trainer deal with these issues?

Don't you think the answer to your questions would depend on the horse and the person working with the horse? There's no horsetraining cookbook that I'm aware of, although the folks who sell the DVDs and memberships and whatnot would like you to believe there is.

[saultgirl]

Don't you think the answer to your questions would depend on the horse and the person working with the horse? There's no horsetraining cookbook that I'm aware of, although the folks who sell the DVDs and memberships and whatnot would like you to believe there is.

Absolutely. What I am trying to figure out is what people think is involved under the label "Natural Horsemanship" vs "Traditional". Especially since so many people are so quick to bash NH trainers....

Let's look at this from another angle.

Horse won't stand for flyspray. So I walk around him with the bottle in hand, I give him a pat or a rub or a treat if he remains standing. I spray the bottle away from him, until he is relaxed with just the sound around him. If he takes a step, I put him back where he was, and continue. Eventually the spray gets closer until I am actually spraying him. If he moves a little, I put him back where he was, and continue. If he moves away, I try to stay with him. If he tries to barge over or through me, he gets a sharp smack (or two or whatever it takes) on the chest/shoulder and I make him back up several steps quickly. I am open to the idea of completing this task either in one session OR several sessions.

If I were dealing with a horse in this manner, would you call me a "Natural Horsemanship" person or a "Traditional" person?

[pAin't_Misbehavin']

When someone tells me how they follow PP or CA or whomever, I think I'm dealing with someone who thinks you can learn to train horses from a DVD or a book or a TV show. If horse does "A" then trainer must do "B." Which of course only works if you are scripting the training session - IRL stuff never works out like it does in the book or video.

I don't get a lot of the unnecessary crap NH types get into such a lather over. I don't care if the little paint horse knows how to run around me in circles or whether he will stand still while I flip the end of a leadrope in his face. And why in the world must we go around poking our horses to get them to "give to pressure"? :confused: If I want mine to move over, I say "excuse me" like any civilized human, and the horse moves over.:yes:

[Bluey]

Absolutely. What I am trying to figure out is what people think is involved under the label "Natural Horsemanship" vs "Traditional". Especially since so many people are so quick to bash NH trainers....

Let's look at this from another angle.

Horse won't stand for flyspray. So I walk around him with the bottle in hand, I give him a pat or a rub or a treat if he remains standing. I spray the bottle away from him, until he is relaxed with just the sound around him. If he takes a step, I put him back where he was, and continue. Eventually the spray gets closer until I am actually spraying him. If he moves a little, I put him back where he was, and continue. If he moves away, I try to stay with him. If he tries to barge over or through me, he gets a sharp smack (or two or whatever it takes) on the chest/shoulder and I make him back up several steps quickly. I am open to the idea of completing this task either in one session OR several sessions.

If I were dealing with a horse in this manner, would you call me a "Natural Horsemanship" person or a "Traditional" person?

Labels are only good for canned fruit on a shelf, so you know what may be in the can.;)

People and horses and handling and training horses are not quite so easy to put labels on.

I would say that you are training like you train and works for you.
I tie a gentle old horse by the new to spray horse or one with spray problems, a horse that he already is familiar with and trusts, generally tie them by a bucket with some grain.
Then I go spraying the old horse and at times close to the one that is wondering if it wants to eat that great grain, or shy, or both.
After a little, the grain wins and I am spraying all around both, back and forth, without any problems.
I may untie that one horse and walk it with me as I keep spraying the old horse and at times around him and maybe on him, ignoring what he is doing, spraying and away from him, so before he thinks to move is gone again.
I have had horses brought to me with a warning that they will lose it if you attempt to fly spray them, that I could not tie to the bucket at first for their safety, so had just wrapped loosely and in ten minutes were standing there being sprayed.

Have done like that for more years than NH trainers have been around.
That works for me, just as your way works for you and other many ways work for many, some more sensible ways than others, regardless if someone is traditional or NH.

I learned to train from traditional trainers, some almost 60 years ago, have learned also from NH trainers and have worked directly with specific operant conditioning methods, like using a bridge sound like clickers.
I don't go as far as some to call clickers really neutral, because they are still in the hands of an operator.

I will say that there are probably more NH people that are not very good with horses because those trainers that use NH as a marketing tool have been directing their spiel to those kinds of people.
The ones that would have been good under any system are good trainers any way, NH or not, just as the fewer that follow traditional instruction tend to also be good trainers, as they drifted to horses with more of an interest to become professionals, not to be playing at training, as NH has marketed themselves.

Operant conditioning is also just one more way to approach training and good for some goals.

Good trainers have been using whatever works, then you can label what they do, if you want to, but if you really watch them, what they do is a mixture, depending on what the horse offers.

Why people are leery of those that come to see their horse for sale announcing that they are NH people?
Maybe because of the way they go about it, if they are some of those that take to following some NH clinicians as horse gods and are a little too intense about that?

Generally traditionally trained people won't tell you that they are, or many NH trained people won't either.;)

[equinelaw]

I think some labels are really useful. like those foundina psychology 101 book.

Positive reinforcement is giving somthing good to increase the desired behavior.

Negitive reinforcement is doing something bad until the desired behavior is reached and then stopping. This also increases desired bahviors.

Punishment is doing something bad to stop an unwanted behavior--to decrease a bahavior.

Now try and explain a training method using those labels. What are you using to get what result and how is it working?

[saultgirl]

When someone tells me how they follow PP or CA or whomever, I think I'm dealing with someone who thinks you can learn to train horses from a DVD or a book or a TV show. If horse does "A" then trainer must do "B." Which of course only works if you are scripting the training session - IRL stuff never works out like it does in the book or video.

Ok, so, is it the attitude of the people that turns you off? Do you feel the same way about someone who tells you they have read a lot of the "Sally Swift" stuff or they try to watch every George Morris clinic that they can? What if they mention Xenophon?

I don't get a lot of the unnecessary crap NH types get into such a lather over. I don't care if the little paint horse knows how to run around me in circles or whether he will stand still while I flip the end of a leadrope in his face. And why in the world must we go around poking our horses to get them to "give to pressure"? :confused: If I want mine to move over, I say "excuse me" like any civilized human, and the horse moves over.:yes:

Lol, (that made me smile because I always say "please" to my horse, too) I think that's the idea, that the horse moves over when you apply pressure, but you do have to start teaching them somewhere, don't you?

Ok, so let's touch on the "unnecessary crap". In fact, let's think about it in the EXTREME. NH person spends ALL her horsey time working/playing on the ground, doesn't EVER get around to riding. The horse is BORED to DEATH with moving over, backing up, circling, disengaging, etc. Maybe the horse is even sore in the hindquarters from doing it.

Is the extreme NH person any worse than an extreme "traditional" trainer?

[saultgirl]

I think some labels are really useful. like those foundina psychology 101 book.

Positive reinforcement is giving somthing good to increase the desired behavior.

Negitive reinforcement is doing something bad until the desired behavior is reached and then stopping. This also increases desired bahviors.

Punishment is doing something bad to stop an unwanted behavior--to decrease a bahavior.

Now try and explain a training method using those labels. What are you using to get what result and how is it working?

Here is the basis of all training. So, if someone is using positive or negative reinforcement, or punishment to shape behaviours in a horse, and they are doing so in a consistent manner with proper timing, and getting the results they want, would you(general) turn that person away as a trainer because they call themselves a "natural horseman" or a "traditional" trainer?

[saultgirl]

Generally traditionally trained people won't tell you that they are, or many NH trained people won't either.;)

I agree with this. But wouldn't it just be a natural progression of the conversation when inquiring about a horse, that you would mention what you want to do with it?

Is there a huge difference between someone who says "I find it very important to have a solid foundation on the ground before I get in the saddle" and someone who says "I play parelli games before I ride"?

If you just can't stand PP and all the $$ and marketing part of it, does that really have anything to do with the training methods or the people who use them?

**I want to say again, when I say "you" I am speaking in general.

[RHdobes563]

Okay, I'm not a horse "trainer" nor do I play one on TV. However, as a horse OWNER, I will answer with the experience of the last three horses I owned. All of them were given good foundations by other owners, whoever and however they did it.

1. Horse will not stand to be fly sprayed. I made a spraying noise (sh-sh-sh) as I brushed my mare to get used to the sound. Didn't take very long for her to get used to it.

2. Horse is difficult to catch. A little bit of grain helped with my OTTB gelding sometimes, and then occasionally, I walked him down. Funny thing was, that if I could flip a lead over his neck, he was "caught"; wouldn't try at all from that point to get away.

3. Horse nips/bites. Stopped feeding my Morgan gelding treats everytime he turned around, unlike his previous NH owner (a VERY nice woman who had him only a few months). He stopped almost immediately, and I can now give him an occasional apple (he doen't like carrots) and even hold it for him as he bites it into more managable pieces.

4. Horse won't stand still to be mounted. Lots of "ho!", "ho!", and more "ho" has worked for me. Getting angry or more forceful with my horses has/had always led to a horse LESS likely to stand still.

I ride my Morgan gelding-was-a-stallion-until-he-was-seven in an eggbutt snaffle and am happy to. Less is more to me. We are still in the 'bonding process', but I am more than thrilled with him and his "training."

[Bluehorsesjp]

Ok, so let's touch on the "unnecessary crap". In fact, let's think about it in the EXTREME. NH person spends ALL her horsey time working/playing on the ground, doesn't EVER get around to riding. The horse is BORED to DEATH with moving over, backing up, circling, disengaging, etc. Maybe the horse is even sore in the hindquarters from doing it.

Is the extreme NH person any worse than an extreme "traditional" trainer?

No I think they are on the same level. If by extreme traditional trainer you mean someone who isn't going to spare the rod and spoil the child so to speak.

And I think you touch on the gist of the problem most of us have with NH people. The "never riding sun rose out of PP's butt one morning" types.
But then that just goes to show you that everything should be done in moderation.

I will say I do use some NH techniques.
For example I have a horse that can be a bit sticky on loading sometimes. From NH I have learned to make the wrong thing hard and the right thing easy, so if he doesn't want to go forward into the trailer we go backwards down the driveway until I say stop. Then we walk forward into the trailer like a gentleman. It is simple and works for him because it reminds him that we are on my agenda, not his.
But I would also never do the turning in a tight circle, I am the one who tells you how to move your feet thing with him. It completely unhinges him, and like a NH devotee I am not looking for him to do a prefect turn on the forehand on the end of a lead rope.
I guess the bottom line is that we can all use techniques from each other, but sometimes NH devotees just think anything traditional is bad, and vise versa.

[equinelaw]

I personally would turn them away if they used the term "natural". The practioners I see that label themselves as "natural" use 100% negitive reinforcement--much like most horse training--but they do not understand what they are doing or how or why it works.

They make up "theories" and "stories" to explain it and when they do not get the desired result I have seen them resort to punishment. Pressure and pushing and all that is 100% negitive reinforcement. Most traditional training is also 100% negitive reinforcement. Then they tell me positive reinforcement is wrong. Which is pretty impossible since almost every lab animal on earth has proved it the most succesful method of all thousands of times.

I also have pratical concerns about wear and tear on the horses legs and the fact that I still cannot ride what they train. I do not need someone to teach my horse to load to stand still or anything else but to learn to be ridden willingly, relaxed and with no bucking or bolting. I don't care if THEY can ride it, they have to get it where I want to ride it.

If someone comes to me an says they train horses using a little of this and a little of that as needed I would see what they do and what results they get. I would be much more impressed with someone who bothered to read a general pshychology or learning book then someone who learned it all from a brand name trainer of any flavor. And if they can use their confidence and experience to start horses for me with no injuries and no drama and no BS and the horse is just as good for me as for them? If I ever met a NH trainer that met those qualifications I would overlook the label he/she gave herself.

I do not see many great results by anyone but Monty Roberts when it comes to Arabs and TBs and NH. They may be out there, but I have not met them. Those breeds find the bottom in the trainers faster then the trainers get to them. The trainers go away and leave the horses worse off then before they got there. I get very tired of hearing from NH people how crazy TBs are. They are just too much horse for most NH trainers.

If I were hiring a trainer for my barn I would hire someone who uses mostly positive reinforcement with occasional negitve and pushishment if really really needed. I am all for Postive reinforcement, but if a horse bites at me I will smack him and end that game.

I grew very tired of cleaning up the messes left behind by NH practioners. I would get the horse's fixed and working while hearing about how so and so was so great look how good the horse is doing! It was very hard not to scream then why are you paying me now!!!!!:mad:

Its seems more like a religion than a training method and too much dogma and
casting out of the unbelievers while making too much of the rare successes. They train the horses they can train very well, but they cannot train whatever horse is given without cheating behind the scenes and using old fashioned methods or just labeling the horse as untraibable.

I do not care is Endo himself come in to train does it right--I am open minded, but I see absolutly no differance or improvement in the new NH methods then those used by tradiional trainers. Its all negitive reinforcement no matter who you package it and it takes years to learn to do it right and talent and skill most people just can never learn.

So bascially, if anyone thinks they learned it from so and so I judge them as being less talented then people who were born with the knowhow and just refined it with education. Those are the peopel who are real trainers and their numbers are small.

[7HL]

Simply put:

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


Nothing more!

[lesson junkie]

The last 2 young horses I started got lots of work outside the arena with long lines. They were taught to "give to" the lines in a round pen by a NH style trainer with a background in racing TBs. He showed me how to be safe and effective, and helped me combine his method with my background in "traditional" forward seat training. The combination of the two is much easier on the young horses(TB filly and DW gelding)and the 50yo back yard horseman.

Some of the PP stuff is silly, but I try not to throw the baby out with the bath water. However, I have not had as much good luck using NH with my OTTB. She still needs the lounge line to settle, which I did not need with the babies. Has anyone else had this experience?

[Saidapal]

I've learned a lot in 35 years of owning horses, and in many ways I prefer the NH way of doing things, but I have no patience for the zealots, and I will not spend one dime on a gadget or wiggle a rope.

You can see the old way of starting horses in the movies...saddle them up and ride them until they submit. Same with fly spray, tie them and keep at them until they submit. Need to catch a horse, put him in a corner with as many people as you can find or throw a rope over him. Horse won't stand to be mounted....get on a quick as you can and go from there. If the horse bites you, beat the crap out of him.

In the traditional way you don't worry about if the horse is afraid or doesn't understand. You blaze right in and insist they do what your asking them to do with no regard for their feelings, and you don't worry about abuse. The idea is to get the horse to do what you want any way you can get them to do it whether they like it or not.

I had a NH guy help me start my babies, and he was wonderful. He didn't show up with gadgets. Used my halter, a long lead rope, and a round pen. That was it. First time he got on them was with a halter and a lead rope. He didn't want a bit in their mouth. They were free to run away if they wanted to. Funny thing was, they didn't run. They were more curious than anything. He had done his homework on the ground and getting on was a non event. First time I got on them was with a halter and a lead rope. Wasn't too sure about it at first, but figured what the hell. And you know what? You learn real quick if you can control your horse with a halter and a lead rope the rest is easy.

He trained the horses from the inside out. He got into their minds and showed them the right thing to do with patience and without force. Not that they got away with anything mind you. When he said go that way, you went THAT way. You could run around like an idiot if you wanted to, but you were going THAT way. It was so much fun to watch the youngsters. They would start out all defiant and fiery while he stood calmly in the center of the circle....and within a short period of time you could see the bubble over their head saying, "Why am I doing this?" He called it working them down to a walk, and it worked. They learned from the inside it was nicer to work with him and not much fun to work against him.

Traditional trainers train from the outside in. They ask, and ask, and ask until the horse finally gets it right, disciplining for wrong behavior and rewarding for right...if they are rewarded at all. Most times not being corrected was the reward.

Anyway, that's my simplistic take on it. NH (my trainers version anyway) has changed the way I do things with horses for the better. My horses are calm, trusting, and look to me as their herd leader. I have a better relationship with my horses now than I ever had doing things the traditional way.

[Nezzy]

i think what many people are bothered by is the robotic motions of the "Natural Horseman". What i mean is- instead of thinking on their own, SOME people( NOT ALL) prefer to do the exercises by number, without thought, or without noticing that their horse is submitting to them, and so they miss the signs and the horse never gets to learn what the NH was trying to teach to the horse. I am not against NH, but i also try to use other methods of teaching. it has to be mentally challenging for the horse as well. If you are going to use NH, please KNOW what you are doing, so you can recognize the submissive behavior.

I am against the training methods which are abusive, but to me, A biting horse is going to get a good smack in the mouth, no screaming, no warning. just POP. It has always worked in the past. In the herd, the top horse would use a bite or a kick to get their point across. that is what a horse understands. i highly doubt my slap or punch is going to hurt the horse badly enough to be called abuse. i also believe in the 3 second rule. If you cannot correct the behavior in 3 seconds, then don't bother.

[equinelaw]

I think thats where the confusion sets in. We in the english side of things never "broke" our horse like in an old western movie.

Without a doubt teaching rough cowboys to use sane methods is an improvement by any measure, but NH is not an improvement over the traditional methods used with english horses in civilized places for centuries.

Its mostly just the same, but the NH people compare themselves to rodeo style breaking horses and not to the traditional methods used by the other half for centruries and milenia.

If you are pulling free wild horses off the range and a few die in the training process its no loss. If you are starting the Kings prized racehorse or a gentleman's war horse and you break it you are finished and punsihed.

We who poo poo NH would never be doing anything so horrible that NH looks supirior to start with. I assume the race horse babies I see trained are done inthe same manner as they have been for hundreds of years. Nobody is hurting them or beating them or tying them up or abusing them. They are much cared for and worth too damn much $$ to lose a single one to rough handling. The humans are expendable, the horses not so much until later in life.

NH is clearly better then the "old methods of breaking the horse" but its not anything new to the rest of horsedom to use negitive reinforcement to train horses without excessive force and brutality.

It s not using speaciao horse language or insticts to get the best out of the horse. They are instinctually wired to do tricks for treats. After that they are wired to avoid pain or discomfort and lastly they are wired to do whatever is asked to avoid being beaten.

So in reality clicker training is speaking in the horse's language too. Its all int the langauge they understand becuase its all basic psychology that is the same for horse or human or fish or fruit fly. Give me good stuff and I'll do it more and give me bad stuff and I'll do it less. Annoy me enough and I'll do it just to SYTFU.

[Wellspotted]

I haven't read your entire post, MayS, but I disagree with a lot of what I did read that you wrote about traditional trainers. I don't know any who use chainshanks or harsh bits (although I have met a couple of "traditional" type riders who use what I think are harsh bits).

Saultgirl,

I'm not sure what you mean by "NH" as I was recently told on this BB that "NH" refers to Parelli and that other "alternative" people (i.e., the non-Parelli ones) aren't properly referred to as "NH". I've tended to lump them all together as "NH," however; but now I'm trying to be more accurate and use "alternative" trainers.

I only know one such "trainer." In contrast to what MayS posted--
NH motivates with removal-of-pressure. "Pressure" can be tapping,poking, kicking, threat/aggressive stance, etc. NH wraps it up in a philosophy of trying to "communicate" with the horse on horse's level.--

this particular alternative-horsemanship person does a lot of tapping and poking with his whip (which he calls a crop, but which isn't, it's a dressage whip). This, he says, is how you teach the horse to respect your space. He is a lot like Nezzy's post--he doesn't have a clue how to read the horse.

Nor does he have a horsey vocabulary. He doesn't know what to call a lunge whip, he uses "reins" and "bridle" interchangeably with "halter" and "lead rope," he does free lungeing but doesn't know what to call it, either.

Now I am seeing a lot more "traditional" horse people coming along who don't use what I was brought up to call "correct" terminology, but they do at least (more or less) know how to use traditional equipment in a traditional way.

I have heard of some "alternative" horse practitioners who want to do everything in the world with a horse but ride it; who think that being around horses is about everything in the world but being with horses. They think horses are a means to self-discovery, to learning how to relate to other humans (but not to horses), of learning how to deal with one's own (non-horse-related) issues.

The one Parelli-trained person I ever knew got kicked out of the barn where she boarded because she chased her horse around loose with a carrot stick when little kids and nonhorsey grandparents were wandering around the farm.

[Bluey]

I've learned a lot in 35 years of owning horses, and in many ways I prefer the NH way of doing things, but I have no patience for the zealots, and I will not spend one dime on a gadget or wiggle a rope.

You can see the old way of starting horses in the movies...saddle them up and ride them until they submit. Same with fly spray, tie them and keep at them until they submit. Need to catch a horse, put him in a corner with as many people as you can find or throw a rope over him. Horse won't stand to be mounted....get on a quick as you can and go from there. If the horse bites you, beat the crap out of him.

In the traditional way you don't worry about if the horse is afraid or doesn't understand. You blaze right in and insist they do what your asking them to do with no regard for their feelings, and you don't worry about abuse. The idea is to get the horse to do what you want any way you can get them to do it whether they like it or not.

I had a NH guy help me start my babies, and he was wonderful. He didn't show up with gadgets. Used my halter, a long lead rope, and a round pen. That was it. First time he got on them was with a halter and a lead rope. He didn't want a bit in their mouth. They were free to run away if they wanted to. Funny thing was, they didn't run. They were more curious than anything. He had done his homework on the ground and getting on was a non event. First time I got on them was with a halter and a lead rope. Wasn't too sure about it at first, but figured what the hell. And you know what? You learn real quick if you can control your horse with a halter and a lead rope the rest is easy.

He trained the horses from the inside out. He got into their minds and showed them the right thing to do with patience and without force. Not that they got away with anything mind you. When he said go that way, you went THAT way. You could run around like an idiot if you wanted to, but you were going THAT way. It was so much fun to watch the youngsters. They would start out all defiant and fiery while he stood calmly in the center of the circle....and within a short period of time you could see the bubble over their head saying, "Why am I doing this?" He called it working them down to a walk, and it worked. They learned from the inside it was nicer to work with him and not much fun to work against him.

Traditional trainers train from the outside in. They ask, and ask, and ask until the horse finally gets it right, disciplining for wrong behavior and rewarding for right...if they are rewarded at all. Most times not being corrected was the reward.

Anyway, that's my simplistic take on it. NH (my trainers version anyway) has changed the way I do things with horses for the better. My horses are calm, trusting, and look to me as their herd leader. I have a better relationship with my horses now than I ever had doing things the traditional way.


Again, I beg to disagree, strongly, with your idea of what old time trainers did.
That is what the NH propaganda works on, saying things like that, to make themselves seem superior, kinder, etc.

Don't fall for it, read and study how people really did things, don't point at the movies, that also most of them were showing how the movie director thought things should be done, not how they really happened.

Sure, many people in the wild west were people that didn't know any better and did the best they could manage, most living very tough lives and treating themselves, their families and animals rough.
Then, they were others that had more sense and were kinder to all.
That is the nature of people, some are just better than others, always has been.

We started our race colts by getting on and off in the barn, bareback and with a halter and rode them like that for a day or two in the barn, then in the yard around the barns and house and cattle pens, then some colts we took like that for their first ride or two in the canyons, then added a saddle, which by then was a non event and a hackamore and after a few weeks a snaffle.


That was long before NH ever existed.

[Saidapal]

Again, I beg to disagree, strongly, with your idea of what old time trainers did.
That is what the NH propaganda works on, saying things like that, to make themselves seem superior, kinder, etc.

Don't fall for it, read and study how people really did things, don't point at the movies, that also most of them were showing how the movie director thought things should be done, not how they really happened.



Oh, please Bluey, I haven't fallen for anything. I'm a dressage rider by preference, and have always looked down on anybody who ever used anything but a snaffle bit on their horses. Always thought it was cruel when I saw those long shanked bits and people hauling on their horses heads, and still do. Always thought instead of getting a stronger bit...learn to ride! I've always considered myself a purist when it comes to training horses. Less is more, get the best results with as little as possible. Klimke is my hero, and God know he didn't use gadgets. His book on Ahleriche helped me tremendously with my TB mare who was difficult to ride on a good day.

BUT, the guy who started my horses showed me a way of getting through to them I had never understood before. And like me being a purist, he looks down his nose at the PP's. I wish I had known what I know now 20 years ago, because I would have been able to get a lot further than I did with my mare.

You have to take what you need from them, use traditional when appropriate, and treat each horse like an individual. I can sit here and say if I had sent my WB gelding to a dressage professional to start, it is very possible and more than likely they would have blown his mind. He is sensitive and has a bully streak which I'm sure would have been tackled instead of sculpted. Training him from the inside out has turned him into a calm trusting soul, who, even though he still tries to bully, backs down quickly, does the horsey shrug, and moves on. He is a joy to ride instead of a terror, and I owe it all the trainer who helped me get him started.

[Bluey]

Oh, please Bluey, I haven't fallen for anything. I'm a dressage rider by preference, and have always looked down on anybody who ever used anything but a snaffle bit on their horses. Always thought it was cruel when I saw those long shanked bits and people hauling on their horses heads, and still do. Always thought instead of getting a stronger bit...learn to ride! I've always considered myself a purist when it comes to training horses. Less is more, get the best results with as little as possible. Klimke is my hero, and God know he didn't use gadgets. His book on Ahleriche helped me tremendously with my TB mare who was difficult to ride on a good day.

BUT, the guy who started my horses showed me a way of getting through to them I had never understood before. And like me being a purist, he looks down his nose at the PP's. I wish I had known what I know now 20 years ago, because I would have been able to get a lot further than I did with my mare.

You have to take what you need from them, use traditional when appropriate, and treat each horse like an individual. I can sit here and say if I had sent my WB gelding to a dressage professional to start, it is very possible and more than likely they would have blown his mind. He is sensitive and has a bully streak which I'm sure would have been tackled instead of sculpted. Training him from the inside out has turned him into a calm trusting soul, who, even though he still tries to bully, backs down quickly, does the horsey shrug, and moves on. He is a joy to ride instead of a terror, and I owe it all the trainer who helped me get him started.


All of us wish we had know 20 years ago what we know today, that is life and it is good and hope those today, that have all this information at hand, use it and get us even further along.

As for some long bits, you ought to recognize that it is not what you put on a horse's mouth, or head, or if you even put something on it's head, that means a horse and rider are working well together, without abuse to the horse.
Many of those with what you may call "big bits" may have the horses trained so well they only carry that bit, never is even used.
Then they may be others that hang on a snaffle for dear life, the horse's head way in the air, mouth open wide.
It is what the rider does with it's aids, not the bit, or type of saddle, or gadgets, that may produce good results.

You really think that only an NH trainer could have started your horse?
Do you think that the trainer you used, if he had learned under a traditional trainer, would not also have been a good trainer?
Do you really think you are the only one with such a horse, that traditional trainers have not also had many such horses and got along with them fine, thank you?
That is assuming much.

We really don't need to bash some to make others seem so good.:no:

[Saidapal]

My intention was never to bash anybody. Like you I was trying to make a point.

You sound like somebody who is totally against anything that even resembles NH, and I think that's too bad. I have been able to learn from many different disciplines not just my own, and I also been able to pass on things I've learned to people who don't ride the same way I do.

I think we are going to have to agree to disagree because this discussion is going to go around and around with no end in sight, so I'm done.

[Bluey]

My intention was never to bash anybody. Like you I was trying to make a point.

You sound like somebody who is totally against anything that even resembles NH, and I think that's too bad. I have been able to learn from many different disciplines not just my own, and I also been able to pass on things I've learned to people who don't ride the same way I do.

I think we are going to have to agree to disagree because this discussion is going to go around and around with no end in sight, so I'm done.

Well, I am not against NH, in fact, I worked with some of them several years ago and have followed with great interest how they are evolving.

I had great fun learning the seven games, as did the horse I took to learn those with.
I have not had a chance to use those again, because I have easier ways to get the same results, that bring forth less resistences from the horses.

What I am getting at is that I have seen good and bad horsemen in EVERY place, discipline and kind of training.
I will keep insisting that it is the person, not the name of what they do, that can be good or bad at it.

[lesson junkie]

Bluey-when you get a young horse that's not started yet, do you start with the lounge line or do you use the round pen? Are there things that you learned from NH that you incorporate with traditional methods?

[JessandLoki]

I think it's absolutely silly to bunch thousands of years of methods and theories into two categories, lol. I also think it's silly that they call it "Natural" horsemanship. Um. No. It's not any more natural, nothing we do with horses is natural in any way-it doesn't mean they're unhappy or we're animal abusers.

That being said, I've had the wonderful oppurunity to see how horses behave in groups during turnout. Head honcho wants to go get a drink, lower ranked horse is in his way, what happens? Warning, ears back, head thrusted out, and then application biting, kicking, squealing. That's precisely what horses are taught to respond to from their dams from the moment they hit the ground, yes?

I think the best training method is common sense-naturally that includes flexibility and patience. No two horses will respond to the same exact thing. If my horse starts head-butting me, pushing me around, will I give him a swat on the neck or chest? YES. I will. He's bullying me, all 1100 pounds of him, I need to let him know in a way he understands that he is NOT allowed to push me around no matter how badly he wants dinner. Simply unacceptable. Now. As far as the flyspray question, my horse came to me with that issue. It was cured in about two weeks and never did I smack him, why would I? That would simply reinforce his icky feelings about the flyspray. Instead, I just followed him and kept spraying until he came to a stop. He realized that, alas, there was no escape, and decided he would comply. If he's being a rude pig on the way to the pasture, then I'll give him one warning and bring him back to a nice walk and a firm "hey". If he does it again, he's stopped and backed up.

If I have a horse rear with me then you know that they're going to get a swat between the poll with my hand-that's too dangerous for me and equally for them to fool around with. If I suspect a physical issue, I'll stay at a walk(provided it's not severe) for a bit, dismount, and give the vet a call. If it's a temper tantrum, they continue to work until they begin to respond nicely and then it's done and they're ended on a good note.


TBQH, I think the only proper way to label training is through the typical(good vs bad) good training produces a happy healthy horse(cannot be done through abuse, obviously that'll only produce a ridiculously sour horse) that is doing it's job, whereas bad either gets nothing accomplished at all(or worsens the issue) or gets the results through a method that is stressful and abusive or not honest(giving a little illegal cocktail before a show, for instance).

That being said, I don't discriminate-good is good, bad is bad.

[tkhawk]

I didn't grow up here so I do not know about western methods then. But the few western folks I have had experience with-ranchers and such folks seemed to be pretty nice to their horses. Generally they were quieter and I know none of them were NH-but their horses were very well behaved , nice and quite. They brought along their young stock pretty slowly. I assumed western was more like that-now my experience is limited as I only knew/observed three folks close enough to know what they do when people are not there and watching. But I guess I am surprised when I keep reading in the old days people started and treated their horses like broncs. I am thinking if you have to work your horse long and hard, day in and day out and often alone-you would need to have some sort of bond with your horse??

[Bluey]

Bluey-when you get a young horse that's not started yet, do you start with the lounge line or do you use the round pen? Are there things that you learned from NH that you incorporate with traditional methods?

I can start a horse whichever way the barn I am working in wants.
I don't work them free, but where I can have some control with a long lead rope, that they have learned to respond to, to keep them from acting up if they were to get scared.
That is how we started feral horses, when I was a teenager and the designated test pilot, almost 50 years ago
I get on my soap box when I see people work so hard to get that first saddle on a horse and then turn him loose to buck, "so they get used to it".

Why not ease them out, so they understand that whatever is new there is no reason to panic?
You surely did prepare them for it before so carefully.
Why take chances if it still will set one off, which it should not if you did it right?
Why let them loose and shoo them on, where something CAN set them off?
Then you ARE teaching them what? To buck when first saddled.
Sure, most will eventually get over it, but why teach a horse that is not going to be a rodeo bronc to buck, ever?

I would not say that I start them longing, although have started plenty like that, where that was expected.
Others just managed them with a long lead rope on the ground a little and if they seem amenable, get on and off many times, from both sides, from a bench, since I am 4'11" and was 98 lbs then and could have vaulted on easily, but it was better for them to learn to stand by the bench and so I could get on them without scrambling up there, some of those race colts were rather large, even when young.
Someone was holding their heads at first and then ride them around, wallowing all over them, so they understand about a person moving up there and that it is ok.

Really, starting one to get on and go on, turn and stop is easy, stealing a ride with most horses the first few times.

The interesting part is later, once they gain confidence and start having opinions, when you have to gently put them at ease and direct them, without causing them to resist, so they want to cooperate with you.

The only time I had a disagreement on what to do with a colt I was starting for a BNT, we had a bad accident, that no one could have foreseen.
My worry, that the colt was not ready to do what we were doing, at least not with me on him, if something was to happen, was right.

I learned after that to never, ever compromise, always do what I think is right and if it doesn't seem right, change what we are doing to make it right.

What is right for any one colt? Whatever THAT colt needs, every one responds a little different, that is why starting colts is so much fun.

[saultgirl]

When I typed my original post, after reading the thread on whether to allow a "NH" person look at a sale horse, I was REALLY suprised at the number of posters who were adamant that the seller should not allow them to see the horse for that reason only. I was shocked, really.

I'm thinking, holy crap, what do they think natural horsemanship "students/trainers" are doing to their horses?

I set out the original examples hoping some suggestions for dealing with these common issues would reveal some common ground between methods. I have grown up around "traditional methods" and studied "natural horsemanship" within the last few years. And I have seen a lot of these training methods overlap! I really don't think they are light years apart from each other.

I try to keep an open mind. I have a rope halter; it's in my tackbox next to my draw reins. :eek: Everyone can teach you something.

** and YIKES, I must be really in the dark since I was just informed by wellspotted that "Natural Horsemanship" people are only Parelli followers and there is another "alternative" horsemanship group that would like to be distinguished from Parelli followers???

[Tilly]

1. Horse will not stand to be fly sprayed.

2. Horse is difficult to catch.

3. Horse nips/bites.

4. Horse won't stand still to be mounted.


I consider myself to be traditional, but I don't use big bits [all my horses go in a french link]. I do believe that some horses need a stud chain for a while, for their and my safety, until they have better manners. I'm not impressed at all by NH. That said, I know that NH works for some people and that's fine. I just wouldn't use it myself.

1. It depends on if the horse won't stand because he's excited [i.e., he'll be going outside], or if he's scared. If he's excited, than a firm tug on the lead rope and a 'ho'. If he still dances around, then another one, but I don't blame him for being excited. As soon as he stands still, even for a second, he gets a pet and 'good boy'.
If he's scared, than I talk quietly and soothingly, pet his neck, and start flyspraying his legs. If he tries to move away than I put pressure on the leadrope until he stops. I would expect him to still dance around, but if he does it in a very small area and is respectful than I'd let it slide.

2. Put him in a smaller turnout.;) I don't pasture any of my horses, so this would not be an issue. Also, they all know that when they come inside, they get cookies and/or grain, so they come right up.

3. If he bites at me or actually makes contact, a hard smack on the neck. Not a 'come to jesus' moment, more of a 'don't bite me' moment. If he makes contact, I'll say loudly 'don't bite'.
I own a pony that bites. Believe me, she isn't traumatized by any of this, and she doesn't bite hardly at all anymore. I'll never be able to completely remove it, when we bought her at six it was already well set in.

4. It depends on if he's excited, or being a pain. If he's excited then we stand next to it, he gets pets and a quiet 'it's okay, you're fine'. I step up onto the mounting block, keep talking to him and petting him. If he tries to leave, than he gets a half halt until he stops. If he swings away, I get down, push his butt back to where it's supposed to be, and then get on. I don't care if he walks off after I've got one foot in the stirrup, with the excitable ones, it's best to let some things slide.
If he's being a butt, than he is expected to stand their quietly while I get on. If he walks off before I'm on, I make him back up to where he's supposed to be. If he swings away, than I put him back where he should be. If he walks off as I'm getting on, I make him back up until we're next to the mounting block again.

[BumbleBee]

I didn't grow up here so I do not know about western methods then. But the few western folks I have had experience with-ranchers and such folks seemed to be pretty nice to their horses. Generally they were quieter and I know none of them were NH-but their horses were very well behaved , nice and quite. They brought along their young stock pretty slowly. I assumed western was more like that-now my experience is limited as I only knew/observed three folks close enough to know what they do when people are not there and watching. But I guess I am surprised when I keep reading in the old days people started and treated their horses like broncs. I am thinking if you have to work your horse long and hard, day in and day out and often alone-you would need to have some sort of bond with your horse??

No you have the accurate picture. NH folks would like to think Traditional and western trainers are rough but it just ain't so. Marketing!

[Thomas_1]

Now I'm a traditional classical trainer and whilst I'm sure many will disagree I think I train using what I would define as "natural horsemanship" which happens to be totally and utterly traditional.

However to me natural horsemanship has nothing whatsoever to do with the likes of parelli, pony boy, et al. That's just marketing and selling!

Rather though its understanding what a horse is and respecting the way it behaves and working with its natural attributes to train it for what you want to do in partnership. Its understanding not just what you do but why and why what you do will illicit certain responses and reactions both in terms of behaviour and dynamic or mechanical action.

Its not just ground work because that is just the basics.... but extends to correct ridden and driven work and enables the handler/rider/driver to work with empathy and understanding and without force.

It requires a pragmatic approach and an acknowledgement that horses come in all sorts of types with preferred behaviours and dispositions and they may don't have push buttons and haven't read the book about the step by step approach of what always works.

It also requires an understanding that horses don't have human emotions and behaviours - they're horses: they don't lie, trick, deceive, love, like and dislike

It takes a long time to acquire and is a practical skill that must be practiced under good supervision to be acquired well. You can't learn it well or effectively as you go along with a horse making mistakes. And being a practical skill you can't learn it from books and videos though they might give you a theoretical understanding presuming they are extranrdinarily well written.

Personally I think that good old fashioned classical equitation ticks all the boxes.

To suggest that traditional training methods absolutely implies force and compulsion and punishment and correction demonstrates a total failure to understand classical equitation. Such examples are nothing to do with training nor horsemanship. And furthermore I actually think that horses that give in and become cowed and accept such behaviour do themselves and their species a disservice by becoming accepting of such behaviour.

In terms of answering the questions of how I'd train a horse for the specific circumstances described by the OP, if you use the search facility, I think you'll find all those have been covere in that previously I've posted advice re every one of them .

[findeight]

Truth is, the two, so called NH and so called Traditional go hand in hand. As they always have since Alexander the Great reportedly turned the horse around so it could not see it's shadow...and no way was he the first to stop and think about why the horse behaves like it does.

There are also good trainers and bad trainers and those in the middle. There are bullies and molly coddlers and those in the middle.

And there are a whole lot of instant experts who pick up a book and decide they know how ALL traditional trainers do it. A whole lot of smart and charismatic marketers who repackage and remarket theories that are ancient except for the addition of special tools. A whole lot of people with more money then sense looking for easy answers and solutions to all problems.
Always be too many that are my way or the highway that refuse to see the bigger picture in favor of touting the "only" way.

There is no such thing as a be all, end all training program that solves all problems and works for every horse and every human.

On a personal note, I do detest those that proclaim that they only ride any horse in a snaffle and ride every single one in a snaffle and those that don't are far less a horseman then they. Myopic.

[BumbleBee]

Truth is, the two, so called NH and so called Traditional go hand in hand. As they always have since Alexander the Great reportedly turned the horse around so it could not see it's shadow...and no way was he the first to stop and think about why the horse behaves like it does.

There are also good trainers and bad trainers and those in the middle. There are bullies and molly coddlers and those in the middle.

And there are a whole lot of instant experts who pick up a book and decide they know how ALL traditional trainers do it. A whole lot of smart and charismatic marketers who repackage and remarket theories that are ancient except for the addition of special tools. A whole lot of people with more money then sense looking for easy answers and solutions to all problems.
Always be too many that are my way or the highway that refuse to see the bigger picture in favor of touting the "only" way.

There is no such thing as a be all, end all training program that solves all problems and works for every horse and every human.

On a personal note, I do detest those that proclaim that they only ride any horse in a snaffle and ride every single one in a snaffle and those that don't are far less a horseman then they. Myopic.

Can I get an AMEN?!

[magicteetango]

I think horse sense comes down to horse sense, like Bluey said. She learned the 7 games, but had easier ways of accomplishing the same thing. Most people who've been around horses a long time and know how to read a horse, are using a mix. Most people know if a horse is being tough to catch, don't make eye contact and non chalantly walk over to it.

If a horse won't stand to be sprayed for me, sorry, yes I keep doing it until they realise that A. it's no big deal, and B. Throwing a fit won't get you out of it. I don't smack on them, yank their faces, or yell. I just keep going about my business until they go "Oh, well, whatever not so bad."

Unfortunately I think a lot of people that are really into NH are novices. I'm not the most experienced myself, but it breaks it down so easily for them that they latch onto it, and go from there. But you can't make up for experience or sense with a video tape. That's what gets it a bad rap. Only NH trainer I've liked is Monty Roberts, Clinton Anderson's okay but like Equinelaw said, how much of it is training and how much is running a horse down? I have Thoroughbreds also, and there's not really a "running them down".

Why divide into two camps, just use what works best, and do good by the horses. Beyond that, who really cares? We all love horses, and the inexperienced NH addicts are the same as the ones that eat up every word their wanna be BNT says. They're the same person, just different exposure.

[equinelaw]

I care because I am jealous, envious and bitter that marketing became more important then experience and substence.

When I see threads how the NH trainer had horse X for 3 months and never rode it, even though it was already started under saddle, I cringe. Thats taking $$ out a decent horseman's hands and doing no good for anyone involved. The decent horseman has to go work at the BP station and the useless one make sit that much harder to find a good trainer for the rest of us.

When I see it in real life I am even more stabby and crabby:mad:

Thats what makes me bother to post and whine about it.

[magicteetango]

I just don't see it as an NH thing, I see it as a bad trainer thing. Although I guess you're right, I've seen it more with NH. There are people that take advantage of people like that no matter the discipline, and in every business not just horse related. I didn't mean the thread is pointless =)

[equinelaw]

I wasn't implying you did. I'm sorry if it came out that way:eek:

I was just really being honest about why it puts my teeth on edge. I suck at marketing and if I could suckwer people into giving me all their cash I could be rich!

Where Thomas lives they have rules and guidlines and testing. He can afford to do things right.

I just think too much hype makes the good ones go broke and get out of the business. I can't compete with a hunky mystical pony boy or a hunky austrailian cowboy or a hunky. . wait. . do we see a pattern?

[magicteetango]

Sorry, EquineLaw, I needed more coffee!

I think that may be the only reason I've watched Clinton Anderson, I'm not going to lie. He can really fill out a pair of wranglers... :winkgrin:

[findeight]

I just don't see it as an NH thing, I see it as a bad trainer thing. Although I guess you're right, I've seen it more with NH. There are people that take advantage of people like that no matter the discipline, and in every business not just horse related. I didn't mean the thread is pointless =)

Speaking of bad trainers...

Go google MR and settle in for alot of surprising reading if you don't already know.

I am old and cranky anymore and hate to see the same sham perptuated and embellished again and again and again.

[magicteetango]

Oh wow, nevermind... I had NO idea!

[BumbleBee]

Oh wow, nevermind... I had NO idea!

Most people don't know about MR. I should say most NH people don't know about him. I tried to tell our resident Parelli person about him as she was just starting to wax poetic about MR. She just didn't believe me. I don't lie but for her the world of NH had no room for the reality that her gurus may just be scum bags.

[magicteetango]

I was shocked, all I'd done was read his book and found it helpful (the back guide part) and down to earth. Oh my GOD I had no idea... lol.

[TouchMeKnot]

I thought the NH spectrum included Ray Hunt and John Lyons. I haven't read all of Ray Hunt's materials, but what I have read is commonsense, no-force horsemanship. I've studied John Lyons fairly extensively, and his materials are also common sense. The core of his methodology is conditioned response, which we all use whether we realize it or not. I liked that he wrote his materials for amateurs working alone, so he gave advice and guidelines to keep the horse calm. His materials were sensible in that they broke things down into baby steps, and told you to continue to break things down until you could get to something the horse could understand. He teachings about "giving to the bit" were some of the clearest I've ever read. And he also gave great attention to putting the horse in a situation to get the answer to a cue correct, so that you don't just use cue-reward, you intelligently set the horse up so he is just one thought away and physically one step away from the behavior or maneuver you desire. I don't think either John Lyons and Ray Hunt sell sensationalism as other NH trainers do; they simply give their methodologies and give you a base to work with. And I don't think that "conditioned response" spans the entire spectrum of the interaction between horse and handler, but I think it is a solid way of teaching desired behavior. My understanding of true NH at its core is that it is handling the horse without force and teaching desired behavior through conditioned response.

I don't do Parelli, Roberts, or Pony Boy, but I do use the round pen and I can get "inside the horse's head," as someone else mentioned. I've had a round pen for about 12 years now, and it is amazing what you can accomplish in a round pen. Don't sell it short if all you've done is ride. I've been grounded with a serious eye injury, and I've learned enough to write a book on the sensitivities of horses to eye contact, focus, and body language in the round pen. I've raised several colts and started them all in a round pen. And for the record, I had traditional teachers that used a pen (actually a square pen).

As for the original questions, I think that both my traditional trainers and what I've read on "real" NH horsemen would do the same thing. Break it into parts and condition the horse to handle it.

For fly spray, we teach weanlings how to accept fly spray. We start by just spraying around them, letting them hear the noise. We spray in front of their faces (sideways where the spray doesn't get on them). We let them smell the spray and the bottle. We spray the legs first and then move up to the body. We show all our young colts so they are routinely sprayed with conditioners, show sheen and fly spray, and they all accept it.

None of my horses are really hard to catch. I think you could work this issue in the round pen by doing exercises that build trust and teach the horse to move away from you and come to you on cue and on release of "pressure." Round pen training is an extremely effective place in teaching your horse to move away from you and come to you on his own; it keeps the horse in a confined space while you teach him desired behavior.

For the horse that nips and bites, I think both NH and discplined traditional trainers would tell you to handle your horse in a way that he doesn't have an opportunity to nip/bite, and don't set yourself up in a situation that you can get bit. My traditional trainers taught me to NEVER feed a horse by hand or touch the horse around the mouth, which tends to make them more nippy. I blatantly break that rule and feed carrots, unless I have a horse in training, in which case I put treats in their feed bowls and pet their foreheads only and not around the mouth. I do have a horse that bites without warning, and I handle her more carefully and am more alert around her. I try not to let myself get in a situation where I'll get bit, like reaching out quickly to pet her side and surprising her. I move very slowly with her because she is hot and volatile, and I halter her and hold her nose steady and away from me or tie her if she needs to be medicated or examined or fly sprayed. However, if she does bite, and it is an angry, deliberate bite that actually injures me, she gets a hard pop in the mouth.

For mounting, several barns I've used tie the horses to the wall to condition the horse to stand still during mounting and until the rider is settled and ready to go. You can gradually move to just facing a wall or fence, and then start mounting a short distance away from the fence/wall, and move to where the horse is conditioned to stand still. We also learned exercises to flap the horse on his sides with the stirrups and a bump the horse with our knees in different places on his belly while tied or held to get him ready to accept a rider that bumps him or flaps stirrups against him while mounting.

[goeslikestink]

Now I'm a traditional classical trainer and whilst I'm sure many will disagree I think I train using what I would define as "natural horsemanship" which happens to be totally and utterly traditional.

However to me natural horsemanship has nothing whatsoever to do with the likes of parelli, pony boy, et al. That's just marketing and selling!

Rather though its understanding what a horse is and respecting the way it behaves and working with its natural attributes to train it for what you want to do in partnership. Its understanding not just what you do but why and why what you do will illicit certain responses and reactions both in terms of behaviour and dynamic or mechanical action.

Its not just ground work because that is just the basics.... but extends to correct ridden and driven work and enables the handler/rider/driver to work with empathy and understanding and without force.

It requires a pragmatic approach and an acknowledgement that horses come in all sorts of types with preferred behaviours and dispositions and they may don't have push buttons and haven't read the book about the step by step approach of what always works.

It also requires an understanding that horses don't have human emotions and behaviours - they're horses: they don't lie, trick, deceive, love, like and dislike

It takes a long time to acquire and is a practical skill that must be practiced under good supervision to be acquired well. You can't learn it well or effectively as you go along with a horse making mistakes. And being a practical skill you can't learn it from books and videos though they might give you a theoretical understanding presuming they are extranrdinarily well written.

Personally I think that good old fashioned classical equitation ticks all the boxes.

To suggest that traditional training methods absolutely implies force and compulsion and punishment and correction demonstrates a total failure to understand classical equitation. Such examples are nothing to do with training nor horsemanship. And furthermore I actually think that horses that give in and become cowed and accept such behaviour do themselves and their species a disservice by becoming accepting of such behaviour.

In terms of answering the questions of how I'd train a horse for the specific circumstances described by the OP, if you use the search facility, I think you'll find all those have been covere in that previously I've posted advice re every one of them .


i have to say that i also trian simular to thomas and agree with what hes says
its not what you do its how you do it and apply the training

the op - is making generalisations of typical common problems which are all very basic

what people fail to understand is that equines are all individuals same to are people
they fail to understand that when ridden with a trianer

thats there are 3 personalites going on -- you the rider, the horse and the trianer
and how one approaches those problems listed depends on depth on knowledge
and how to correct correctly so no re occurance

[Bluey]

---"For mounting, several barns I've used tie the horses to the wall to condition the horse to stand still during mounting and until the rider is settled and ready to go. You can gradually move to just facing a wall or fence, and then start mounting a short distance away from the fence/wall, and move to where the horse is conditioned to stand still. We also learned exercises to flap the horse on his sides with the stirrups and a bump the horse with our knees in different places on his belly while tied or held to get him ready to accept a rider that bumps him or flaps stirrups against him while mounting."---

I like much of what you say, but find this extremely dangerous.

Tying a horse while doing things around it, with care, is ok, although I like to teach them to stand there and let us do what we want without them moving first, before tying them.

To tie them to get on, you may get by that for many times, but that one time something really sets the horse off and he scrambles pulling back, you are in serious trouble, may find yourself under a horse that is walking all over you, before you can get away.

Teach one to stand there, before getting on, is absolutely much safer, really.
Some people tell me they do that and I consider it playing russian roulette, because that is an accident waiting to happen.
Just a general warning, for people to think about what they do very hard, before putting themselves where they may easily end up in trouble and find other ways to approach that situation.

[angtomczak]

First, I want to say that I really like how you posed the initial question. I think all of us understand that horse training, just like any other topic in the universe, cannot be put into buckets and called black and white; but we can use examples to lead (lively) discussion.

I think just like a good human parent, you should have all kinds of ideas for training. Anyone who has had more than one child knows that you even though your kids have the same bloodlines, they have to be trained very differently. One child will quickly respond to a stern "no", the other needs a swat on the rear-end, and one will do anything for a treat.

(I think) A great horseman is one who is always learning and studying and adapting, extremely patient and always consistent, and really listens to their animal!



BTW, I've never joined a BB or done anything like this, but I started reading these forums and just love ya'll!:lol:

[Wellspotted]

Originally posted by angtomczak:

First, I want to say that I really like how you posed the initial question. I think all of us understand that horse training, just like any other topic in the universe, cannot be put into buckets and called black and white; but we can use examples to lead (lively) discussion.

I think just like a good human parent, you should have all kinds of ideas for training. Anyone who has had more than one child knows that you even though your kids have the same bloodlines, they have to be trained very differently. One child will quickly respond to a stern "no", the other needs a swat on the rear-end, and one will do anything for a treat.

(I think) A great horseman is one who is always learning and studying and adapting, extremely patient and always consistent, and really listens to their animal!

Now THAT I will give an Amen!

It is like human society in recent years--some people want a hard and fast rule for dealing with every person in every situation. Doesn't work. Different situations and different people call for different ways of doing things.

Would like to add--

What about Chris Irwin? I have not seen his name mentioned here, yet he is an NH/alternative person, isn't he?
What is thought of his philosophy/system?

[twofatponies]

Just one observation regarding "NH people who never ride their horses but just do groundwork" (as is often said).

I can list a half dozen people off the top of my head who have warmbloods, at dressage barns, with no NH in sight, and never ride their horses. They just lunge them, groom them, and feed them treats. Why?

They are middle-aged or elderly folks who want to be able to show and ride a big fancy warmblood, but the reality is they are intimidated, lack riding and training skills, are afraid of being injured, etc. Lunging allows them to feel like they are spending quality time with their horse in a useful way, without risking a fall. They are too proud to admit they really need a placid, Steady Eddie to enjoy.

Sad? Maybe. But no harm done, really. Some of them ride during their once a week lessons, at a walk or maybe a little trot. Some of them don't even ride then, they just watch the trainer ride.

Trainer gets paid, horse gets cared for, owner feels proud of his fancy horse.

[tkhawk]

I did read Chris irwin's book-it was pretty good. But apart from that can't say much about him. Although I think he does offer training levels -gold buckle level or some such and so on-which to me -just me-is a turn off. But I am not a great fan of standardized tests and procedures in "regular" life either-so that is where I am coming from.
Something like dressage is different, because the standards are not based on an individual, but based on techniques over centuries. The trainer is the one who has to confirm to the existing standard. Of course you do have issues like Rolkur etc. but these kind of standards where each trainer seems to have his own set of standards and people have to learn and adapt that style to get ahead-again apart from his book I know nothing about him-but in general, I just think people are too diverse to follow one person's way of doing things.. That techniques may help-but just me with my horses, I found the best way is to learn to trust yourself-then you can evaluate what works or not for you...

[Jacobi]

Speaking of bad trainers...

Go google MR and settle in for alot of surprising reading if you don't already know.

I am old and cranky anymore and hate to see the same sham perptuated and embellished again and again and again.

Might want to clarify who the initials are. Although this person was mentioned earlier in the thread and I should have twigged, I initially jumped to a WRONG conclusion trying to come up with a NR style (more or less) trainer with those initials. Suffice it to say that I now realize that you did NOT mean Mark Rashid. Carry on.

I subscribe to the view that a good horseman is a good horseman. Certainly there are a lot of people out there making a good living off of convincing inexperienced horse owners that they have the magic formula and everyone else is FOS. But, ultimately, the proof is in the pudding. If I see a trainer, whose horses are mostly quiet, well mannered, and perform well(at whatever job that horse has) and the horses appear healthy and happy, well, that would be a successful trainer. For myself, I mind my own business, do my own thing with my horses, choose the people who work with me and my horses carefully and utilize a combination of techniques learned over many years and from many talented people. And if something isn't working well with a particular horse, I evaluate that and try to figure out another technique that might work better for that particular animal, or figure out what I might be doing wrong that the original technique isn't working the way it has with others.

[twofatponies]

I subscribe to the view that a good horseman is a good horseman. Certainly there are a lot of people out there making a good living off of convincing inexperienced horse owners that they have the magic formula and everyone else is FOS. But, ultimately, the proof is in the pudding. If I see a trainer, whose horses are mostly quiet, well mannered, and perform well(at whatever job that horse has) and the horses appear healthy and happy, well, that would be a successful trainer. For myself, I mind my own business, do my own thing with my horses, choose the people who work with me and my horses carefully and utilize a combination of techniques learned over many years and from many talented people. And if something isn't working well with a particular horse, I evaluate that and try to figure out another technique that might work better for that particular animal, or figure out what I might be doing wrong that the original technique isn't working the way it has with others.

I like the way you put it. I try to do the same.

[Trevelyan96]

Well... I'm not a trainer... but I've had all sorts of horses with all types of histories and have found that different horses can react differently to training methods.

1. Had a mare once that only responded to positive reinforcement, and would fight to the death if you got physical with her. *FORMER* trainer beat the living crap out of her to make her 'submit'. Took 8 hours to get her on the trailer one day... and the end result was a gash in the mare's leg from the battle. I used Louise Serio's method on her... walk her up as far as she'd go... praise... back her... reward every inch of progressive movement to the trailer... eventually, the mare got on the trailer, and was calm. Granted... she never became a perfect loader, but really... all beating the horse accomplished was to further convince the mare that the trailer was a torture chamber. And she was a smart one. Whenever we returned home with the other 2, she'd walk right up on to that trailer on her own and wait for her treat. ARGHHHHHH.....My geldings... on the other hand... neither of whom are the least bit afraid of the trailer, but hesitate when I'm only trying to load one and leave the other behind... a stern yank on the lead does the trick. So I guess its all about knowing whether the behaviour is rooted in fear, pain, or disobedience.

2. Standing still for fly spray... my 7 year old hates it... but he also hates to be groomed, etc., so I think the problem is probably a skin sensitivity issue. I usually just start on the less sensitive areas, lower legs, chest, with lots of 'good boy's. By the end of summer... he'll stand, quivering... but of course we start the cycle over again come spring. Maybe I should just spary him with water through the winter???? If I put a shank on him and yelled at him... that would probably just reinforce his opinion that being sprayed is torture.

3. Biting.... 7 year old nipped me as a 3 year old and got a good slap. He's never tried it again. He takes his treats like a perfect little gentleman.

So.... does this make me a NH, or traditional? Frankly.... I don't care. I have nice, calm, gentle horses that I've had since they were young, and I've taken on problem horses that are less of a problem when they leave me., and isn't that's what its supposed to be about? I'm only 4'11", and 110lbs, so I'm pretty much forced to acknowledge that getting into a battle with a 1,000 animal will just get me hurt. Tact is what usually works, whether with people and animals.

[LuvMyTB]

1.Horse won't stand still for flyspray First, I would start with water so I didn't waste all of my flyspray. :lol: Then I would let her smell the bottle, rub the bottle on her neck, legs etc. Then I would spray the bottle near her but not on her. Then I would start spraying her legs and shoulders. If she moved away, I would continue to follow and spray her legs, and would quit spraying when she quit moving. Rinse and repeat.

Traditional training: Shank, cross tie, yell "HO" repeatedly.

2.Horse is hard to catch. Variety of things, starting with teaching hindquarter disengagement in a round pen. Then a variety of things--"catching" all the other horses in pasture first to pique horse's curiosity, using a rope or stick/whip to "send" them away if they run from me, walking them down--Parelli's "catching" game is kind of a combination of all that. I have used all of the above as my mare used to be EXTREMELY hard to catch....

Traditional training: Turn horse out alone or in a smaller paddock so catching isn't an issue.

3. Horse nips or bites. First I would try to figure out WHY the horse is nipping or biting. Is it a aggressive during feeding issue? Ticklish? Playful? Then I would respond appropriately, ie stopping hand-feeding, taking a stick/whip into the stall and keeping horse out of my space, etc etc. Personally my mare used to try to bite during grooming. I would continue to brush her and if she swung at me, she'd hit the end of my wooden brush. She's also try to bite during tacking up as she was extremely girthy. I fixed this by attaching the girth on the right, standing on the left and pulling the girth back and forth under her belly as if I was going to buckle it up. Any time she swung at me she hit my elbow or a wooden brush. When she put her ears forward and stopped swinging, I stopped messing with the girth.

Traditional training: Repeated smacking around the face, nose, and neck. Yelling "QUIT" repeatedly. Shanking.

4. Horse won't stand still during mounting. Yet another issue I have personal experience with! :lol: I fixed this by putting my left foot in the stirrup and standing "up and down" about 1000000 times. Basically desensitized her to feeling the need to move off when she felt my foot in the stirrup. At this point, if she does it, I will make her move her feet a bit and then bring her back. I don't have to do it often.

Traditional training: Yank on reins. Get someone to hold horse for you.

OP, I use Parelli methods and they have done wonders for my mare and I. I am not a novice--I rode "traditional" h/j for 15 years before I started Parelli. The mare I described above is a 15 year old OTTB mare who had had poor training every day of her life, starting at the track, continuing throughout her career as a jumper and ending the day I got her. I ride my mare 4-5 times a week and we are currently working on lateral and vertical flexion under saddle, and balancing through turns (difficult for a one-sided TB).

Why do I point these things out? Because the stereotypes out there are that all Parelli "followers" are middle-aged novice women who can't or won't ride their horses, that when Parelli-ites DO ride it's only at a walk and they don't know anything about the basic priniciples of riding, and that OTTBs or even TBs in general do not respond well to any type of Parelli/NH training.

[pines4equines]

I taught my horses the word fly spray. I sprayed them whenever the bugs were incredibly bad, they learned the sound of the spritzer, smell of fly spray and me saying "fly spray!" means a good thing, immediate relief from bugs if it's only for a second or two.

I have to say everything I learned I learned from The Dog Whisperer!

I should come up with The Pines4equines Horse Psychology Center so everyone can bring their horses and pour money into my pockets. I could even have a gift shop with "important" tools needed by all! And, Pines4equines Horse Psychology Center T-shirts...

[Trevelyan96]

Speaking of bad trainers...

Go google MR and settle in for alot of surprising reading if you don't already know.

I am old and cranky anymore and hate to see the same sham perptuated and embellished again and again and again.

I pretty much knew he was a fraud after reading in his book about all the thoroughbreds he's supposedly worked with. Who in the hell doesn't know that Native Dancer is NOT the sire of Northern Dancer?

[Denali6298]

I think once people started marketing and coining the term "NH" every Tom, Dick & Harry went "hey I can do that!!" All it is is horse sense. If your around them enough you usually can figure out what is going on.

[Wellspotted]

I do NOT luv LuvMyTB's post. :no:

I take exception to the methods labeled "Traditional training" being so labeled. I got the impression that what was meant was "the only traditional training method."

There is more than one "traditional" training method. The methods described in LuvMyTB's post may be those of one traditional method, but certainly not of any sole traditional method. It would have seemed clearer, and more objective (to me) to have those methods so labeled, e.g.,

"One traditional method" or "A traditional method" or "the method used in one tradition". As it stands, I inferred that LuvMyTB was implying that there is only one traditional method.

Such is not the case.

It is not a matter of "traditional" methods vs. "NH" or "alternative" or "nontraditional" methods. There is more than one tradition, and each probably has its own methods.

[FrenchLink]

I don't love LuvMyTB's post either. In fact, I don't love it some much I've come out of lurkdom.

If that is how she "trained" before she drank the koolaid it's probably a good thing for the horses in her care that she did indeed drink that koolaid.

Personally, I never needed to purchase a bunch of gimicks and DVD's to know that I should not beat my horses. I do NOT subscribe to the NH cult, I never have, I never will. I learned by doing and watching over many years, and with luck will continue to learn for the rest of my life. Sorry, I don't routinely shank, yell at, or smack my horses to get them to do what I want them to do.

It is quite easy to train a horse using "traditional" methods patiently and easily without causing a horse a great amount of stress. In fact, most trainers I know and have worked with manage to do it. I can't tell you how many 3 year olds I've gotten on for their first ride under saddle without any issue other than some minor back humping... and not a bit of chasing them around a round pen with a stick in my hand in tiny circles for hours to tire them out first, either.

[Wellspotted]

Welcome, FrenchLink. :)

[FrenchLink]

Thank YOU! :D

[Zen and Horses]

I'll chime in a say LoveMyTB's post is pretty darned funny. Don't take too much offense with it folks. She expresses what a LOT of people have experienced. If you don't have experience with the "shank, smack it, yell at it, then get the groom to fix your problem for you" system of training, then you're in for some FUN!!

I was a bit curious for a decade or two how it could be that you could get a horse to piaffe but not be able to get it to stand at the mounting block. Or why it was that some trainers could not catch their own horse in a field or in a stall, but the horse would come to the groom (or perhaps some stranger they didn't know.) Then I figured it out !! There are a lot of BULLIES and flat out A**HOLES making a 'living' as Horse "Trainers!!" But, when you are young, naive, an amateur, or just glassy eyed and overwhelmed by the wonder and beauty of the animals, you just don't know what else to the believe other than that the professional Horse "Trainer" knows what they are doing. If you are smart enough to have figured this out sooner rather than later, then CONGRATULATIONS !! For some folks, it takes a lot of time to figure out that JERKS and BULLIES are pretenders to the throne.

(Not to change the subject to politics, but Who REALLY knew that W was going to leave us with such a mess..... Sometimes it's only in hindsight that you see how wrong you were to put your trust in a person)

[tkhawk]

I saw this link of Fugly
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZCHcF-Er7U

I think maybe people think this is traditional horsemanship?? I learnt English and now that I only trail ride, I am drifting western as it seems to gell with what I am doing. While I have seen a lot of abuse in traditional methods, I think it has nothing to do with "traditional" methods. Just the person doing it is a @#$%# . People are people and good ones will be good no matter what.
I just find it difficult to buy that NH came and saved horses from evil people. I am sure if you look closely enough there must be just as many abusers in NH as there are in traditional methods...

[Parelligirl82]

I am an avid Parelli follower, but am also open minded to other methods of "training". I don't down others who don't choose to follow the NH way. If it works for you and your horse, and you can honestly say that you have preserved the diginity of your horse, more power to ya!

NH gave me what I was looking for, something I could not find in the "traditional" trainers.

And I ride my horses all the time ;)

[Guilherme]

Go read Xenophon.

G.

P.S. After you read him then answer the question, "is he a Natural Horseman or a Traditional Horseman?" Remember that he wrote about 2300 years ago. ;)

[LuvMyTB]

I'll chime in a say LoveMyTB's post is pretty darned funny. Don't take too much offense with it folks. She expresses what a LOT of people have experienced. If you don't have experience with the "shank, smack it, yell at it, then get the groom to fix your problem for you" system of training, then you're in for some FUN!!

I was a bit curious for a decade or two how it could be that you could get a horse to piaffe but not be able to get it to stand at the mounting block. Or why it was that some trainers could not catch their own horse in a field or in a stall, but the horse would come to the groom (or perhaps some stranger they didn't know.) Then I figured it out !! There are a lot of BULLIES and flat out A**HOLES making a 'living' as Horse "Trainers!!" But, when you are young, naive, an amateur, or just glassy eyed and overwhelmed by the wonder and beauty of the animals, you just don't know what else to the believe other than that the professional Horse "Trainer" knows what they are doing. If you are smart enough to have figured this out sooner rather than later, then CONGRATULATIONS !! For some folks, it takes a lot of time to figure out that JERKS and BULLIES are pretenders to the throne.

(Not to change the subject to politics, but Who REALLY knew that W was going to leave us with such a mess..... Sometimes it's only in hindsight that you see how wrong you were to put your trust in a person)


Thanks, Zen--I was trying to be a bit tongue-in-cheek, but I guess I should've clarified that. :)

To those that didn't love my post--it was supposed to be a bit funny, but yes, it WAS a bit pathetic too. Why? Because the "traditional" methods I listed were the methods I was taught. As Zen said, I idolized my trainers and did what they did.

I grew up in h/j barns and, like it or not, that is how I was taught to handle horses. I was young, I didn't know any better, and until I grew up, got my own horse and got out of h/j barns, I truly didn't know there was any other way.

When I did get my mare, I very quickly realized that the "horsemanship" I knew was not going to work with this horse; not surprisingly, it made her much, much worse. Someone at my boarding barn suggested Parelli, I tried it, and it worked. End of story.

And Frenchlink, not to worry, I have never been nor will I ever be a horse trainer, so I was not shank/smack/slap training a barnful of horses in my "traditional" life. And yes, I am a KoolAid drinker but not to worry, I don't try to force others to drink it. I like to keep it all for myself. :lol:

[Parelligirl82]

And yes, I am a KoolAid drinker but not to worry, I don't try to force others to drink it. I like to keep it all for myself. :lol:


Amen!

[Trevelyan96]

Thanks, Zen--I was trying to be a bit tongue-in-cheek, but I guess I should've clarified that. :)

To those that didn't love my post--it was supposed to be a bit funny, but yes, it WAS a bit pathetic too. Why? Because the "traditional" methods I listed were the methods I was taught. As Zen said, I idolized my trainers and did what they did.

I grew up in h/j barns and, like it or not, that is how I was taught to handle horses. I was young, I didn't know any better, and until I grew up, got my own horse and got out of h/j barns, I truly didn't know there was any other way.

When I did get my mare, I very quickly realized that the "horsemanship" I knew was not going to work with this horse; not surprisingly, it made her much, much worse. Someone at my boarding barn suggested Parelli, I tried it, and it worked. End of story.

And Frenchlink, not to worry, I have never been nor will I ever be a horse trainer, so I was not shank/smack/slap training a barnful of horses in my "traditional" life. And yes, I am a KoolAid drinker but not to worry, I don't try to force others to drink it. I like to keep it all for myself. :lol:

LuvMyTB, I can totally sympathize. Some people just don't get 'irony', and are ready to take offense, so don't take it personally. I pretty much could relate to your first post, as I've had a big 'A' H/J trainer beat the hell out of my mare, a really excellent british event rider beat the hell out of my gelding (OK, she was a good rider, but I don't consider her a good horseperson" and watched a 'highly respected' event trainer grab a pony by the reins and jerk his head all over the place for running out on a jump. There are just too damn many people out there who think that 'punishing' a horse will teach it anything. I heard a trainer once ask her students if they knew the difference between a 'correction', a 'discipline' and a 'punishment'. Her point was to teach the students that a horse just doesn't understand the concept of 'punishment'. All it does is create a sour horse. We need more trainers out there who understand this, whether traditional or NH.

[LuvMyTB]

LuvMyTB, I can totally sympathize. Some people just don't get 'irony', and are ready to take offense, so don't take it personally. I pretty much could relate to your first post, as I've had a big 'A' H/J trainer beat the hell out of my mare, a really excellent british event rider beat the hell out of my gelding (OK, she was a good rider, but I don't consider her a good horseperson" and watched a 'highly respected' event trainer grab a pony by the reins and jerk his head all over the place for running out on a jump. There are just too damn many people out there who think that 'punishing' a horse will teach it anything. I heard a trainer once ask her students if they knew the difference between a 'correction', a 'discipline' and a 'punishment'. Her point was to teach the students that a horse just doesn't understand the concept of 'punishment'. All it does is create a sour horse. We need more trainers out there who understand this, whether traditional or NH.

LOL Trevelyan--I didn't take it personally. I've been around this board long enough to know that if you're going to post on an NH/Parelli thread in SUPPORT of NH, you're very likely going to take a beating!

I agree 100% with your post. One of my earliest riding memories is an instructor getting really irritated with me because I didn't want to use the stick on the pony I was riding--I was probably 9 or 10 and I didn't want to hit the pony; I thought it was mean.

The instructor grabbed the pony's reins under the chin in one hand, took my crop in her other hand, and whaled on him while he ran in circles around her. While I was still sitting on him. :eek:

[Parelligirl82]

The instructor grabbed the pony's reins under the chin in one hand, took my crop in her other hand, and whaled on him while he ran in circles around her. While I was still sitting on him. :eek:

And I think this is the majority of what horse people have gotten with going to the 'traditional" trainer.

[pAin't_Misbehavin']

And I think this is the majority of what horse people have gotten with going to the 'traditional" trainer.

That was not an "instructor" or a "trainer" - LuvMyTB describes a bully who needed a good whipping herself. Which I reckon she'd have gotten if she tried that technique with an adult and so she had to confine herself to beating up on children's ponies.

I started out my adult riding lessons with a horrible screaming toad of a woman who was also rough on her horses - so I left. I don't consider her "traditional" or NH - she's just a loser who's not very good at what she does. Sadly, almost all her students are children - whose parents drop them off and drive away - and they may think her way is the "traditional" way things are done. But it's not true.:no:

I certainly don't consider those kinds of methods traditional.

[Tamara in TN]

Also, feel free to add how you THINK the "other trainer" would deal with it, if you are more familiar with one than the other.

I have no idea how English trainers do anything...:)


1. Horse will not stand to be fly sprayed.

a good trainer would determine why?? and go from there...no wacking or whooping or chaining or twitching fixes the why of that..


2. Horse is difficult to catch.

determine why...fix it based on why....mostly on the notion that humans really are nice to be around...

3. Horse nips/bites.

why....fix based on why

4. Horse won't stand still to be mounted.

see above....


Would anyone like to discuss this?

it seems all the answers I read thru the thread were based on immediate fixes and compliance because to not comply was totally inconveinant for the handler...it's like popping a horse for jerking away from a farrier...or beating him for not getting in the trailer because you were already in a hurry....it does nothing to fix the underlay of the problem...

and the underlays are much more subtle than the end explosion:)

best

[Wellspotted]

Originally posted by Zen and Horses:

I was a bit curious for a decade or two how it could be that you could get a horse to piaffe but not be able to get it to stand at the mounting block. Or why it was that some trainers could not catch their own horse in a field or in a stall, but the horse would come to the groom (or perhaps some stranger they didn't know.) Then I figured it out !! There are a lot of BULLIES and flat out A**HOLES making a 'living' as Horse "Trainers!!" But, when you are young, naive, an amateur, or just glassy eyed and overwhelmed by the wonder and beauty of the animals, you just don't know what else to the believe other than that the professional Horse "Trainer" knows what they are doing. If you are smart enough to have figured this out sooner rather than later, then CONGRATULATIONS !! For some folks, it takes a lot of time to figure out that JERKS and BULLIES are pretenders to the throne.

Your post really got to me. It puts into words feelings I have had about an experience that was very close to me, seeing non-horsey people entering the world of horses and being completely taken in by such a "trainer" as you describe. Not so much a bully as a jerk, but much more of a "people" person than a horse person, and therefore able to pull the wool over some people's eyes (or should I say, the synthetic fleece). When I was around to observe it was all too close to me for me to put it into words; I just felt the mess. I am away from it now, reluctantly, and was interested to read your post.

I also like your name. I started thinking that way back when I was learning the basics of what I later learned was dressage--at a hunter/jumper barn!

LuvMyTB--

Admittedly irony can be difficult to convey on a computer. I wish there were an "irony" smiley.
Would you be willing to share the lemon-lime Kool-Aid? I have virtually horse-shaped ice cubes.

[saultgirl]

... and not a bit of chasing them around a round pen with a stick in my hand in tiny circles for hours to tire them out first, either.


Is this how you perceive the training methods used for "natural horsemanship", that the horses are chased around in circles "for hours", to tire them out, and THAT'S how progress is made? That the idea is to make the horses so tired that they submit? Do you feel that this is done in a manner differently than traditional lunging? Do you feel the same way about traditional lunging?

I'm not talking about books or videos or whatever, I'm trying to focus on the training methods used by different people and the theories behind them.

[goeslikestink]

as a trainer i dont lunge for hours and hours no point to it and not many trianers would
if bhs aprroved or proven back ground
the art of training a horse is to understand each indivual horse or client
as i said three personalities not just one, if you and the horse then there are two..
but a horse will only re-act how you act

the horse only learns good or bad from people

read the above quoted by tamra in tn - for exsample all those problems are handling problems that the owner has not rectified as being done by herself-- how she acts the horse re- acts

[Tamara in TN]

Is this how you perceive the training methods used for "natural horsemanship", that the horses are chased around in circles "for hours", to tire them out, and THAT'S how progress is made? That the idea is to make the horses so tired that they submit?

ummmmm pretty much:) I loved Lyons first video back in the early 1990's...LOVED.....and his main idea was always...move his feet and control his movement so that he knows you are the alpha AND standing still for you is less tiresome than moving...


that was a wonderful base idea founded long before Mr JL...the downside was that unless you are already a horseperson you cannot "get" that moving from an alpha is not the sum whole and total...

and non horse folks never knew how to stop the animal with their body...they sent off the wrong signals and ruined a bunch of horses in the process...

I knew real cowboys who lunged but more the vaquero ways and they knew when and how to stop...

John Lyons opened the floodgate for the rest...sadly....


on the "English " scene I grew up around saddleseat and gaited and heavy harness and such...I knew what a rig was to set a head properly before I could drive:) and I drove draft teams since I was 14 to wagons or raking hay and spreading manure and dragging logs...no lunging there either...

but I had never REALLY understood the dressagy/hunter end of lunging til I saw Jeannie Loriston-Clarke on video..." brilliant and wow" :D:D was all I could say.........wanna know how many I have seen since then that make me say "wow"?? ummmmm maybe one...

maybe



best

[LuvMyTB]

Your post really got to me. It puts into words feelings I have had about an experience that was very close to me, seeing non-horsey people entering the world of horses and being completely taken in by such a "trainer" as you describe. Not so much a bully as a jerk, but much more of a "people" person than a horse person, and therefore able to pull the wool over some people's eyes (or should I say, the synthetic fleece). When I was around to observe it was all too close to me for me to put it into words; I just felt the mess. I am away from it now, reluctantly, and was interested to read your post.

I also like your name. I started thinking that way back when I was learning the basics of what I later learned was dressage--at a hunter/jumper barn!

LuvMyTB--

Admittedly irony can be difficult to convey on a computer. I wish there were an "irony" smiley.
Would you be willing to share the lemon-lime Kool-Aid? I have virtually horse-shaped ice cubes.

YES! I just made a fresh batch, it's ice-cold!

*pours Kool-Aid, passes to Wellspotted*

Enjoy! :D

[Zen and Horses]

Your post really got to me. It puts into words feelings I have had about an experience that was very close to me, seeing non-horsey people entering the world of horses and being completely taken in by such a "trainer" as you describe. Not so much a bully as a jerk, but much more of a "people" person than a horse person, and therefore able to pull the wool over some people's eyes (or should I say, the synthetic fleece). When I was around to observe it was all too close to me for me to put it into words; I just felt the mess. I am away from it now, reluctantly, and was interested to read your post.

Admittedly irony can be difficult to convey on a computer. I wish there were an "irony" smiley.



WOW ! Bonus points for me. Thanks for the feedback. I've run amock a few times here on COTH when trying to express some of my experiences in this industry. So I'm glad I can commiserate on this topic.

And I whole heartedly support your wish for an "irony' smiley !! I need one too !!

[twofatponies]

Is this how you perceive the training methods used for "natural horsemanship", that the horses are chased around in circles "for hours", to tire them out, and THAT'S how progress is made? That the idea is to make the horses so tired that they submit? Do you feel that this is done in a manner differently than traditional lunging? *Do you feel the same way about traditional lunging? *
.

I think your last question is pretty interesting. Bad or unskilled trainers do the same useless or counterproductive things no matter what style of training they pretend to apply, no?

stink's comment about BHS qualified people is another interesting point - I think perhaps one of the biggest weirdnesses with NH is that it has been marketed as a "do it yourself" technique. Which means lots of people with no talent or foundation for horse training will try to style themselves as trainers, and the marketed items will try to oversimplify and generalize techniques.

The best horse people I know either grew up in families of horse trainers or went through rigourous European schools. Some of them are still better trainers than others, but all of them can read a horse and have a huge base of knowledge for analyzing and problem and fixing it.

[pAin't_Misbehavin']

Is this how you perceive the training methods used for "natural horsemanship", that the horses are chased around in circles "for hours", to tire them out, and THAT'S how progress is made? That the idea is to make the horses so tired that they submit? Do you feel that this is done in a manner differently than traditional lunging? Do you feel the same way about traditional lunging? .

Not for hours, no. But I find the insistence on round-penning from NH folks pretty off-putting. I don't like traditional lunging either, let me hasten to add. I think it's asking for joint problems to make a horse run around in little circles. On ground that gets harder and harder packed.

Although I know plenty of people who lunge to tire their horses (which seems kind of counter-productive to me) before riding, most of the NH people I know round-pen as a technique for either a) flooding the horse with frightening stimuli in an effort to de-sensitize it; or b) free-lunging to teach the horse to respond to voice commands. Since I don't believe in flooding (horses are curious enough that it seems useless to me) and I don't use voice commands for the gaits, I don't see the point. But I find a lot of NH people harp on round-penning to the point of being tiresome.

[saultgirl]

I think your last question is pretty interesting. Bad or unskilled trainers do the same useless or counterproductive things no matter what style of training they pretend to apply, no?

stink's comment about BHS qualified people is another interesting point - I think perhaps one of the biggest weirdnesses with NH is that it has been marketed as a "do it yourself" technique. Which means lots of people with no talent or foundation for horse training will try to style themselves as trainers, and the marketed items will try to oversimplify and generalize techniques.

The best horse people I know either grew up in families of horse trainers or went through rigourous European schools. Some of them are still better trainers than others, but all of them can read a horse and have a huge base of knowledge for analyzing and problem and fixing it.

By the way, what is BHS?

As far as your point about the "do-it-yourself" marketing, I personally find that a "do-it-yourself" attitude is not what is being encouraged. Rather, I find that the idea is "You may be doing something different from the people around you, and that is ok. You may be doing something differently than you were originally taught, and that is ok."

This is my interpretation.

I dunno, seems like we're supposed to be on the same team here, folks.... if no one is getting hurt (more than usual;) ) and everyone is enjoying their horses, why do people need to be so down on what others are doing? It's one thing to say "that's not for me"....

[Fancy That]

Having done both "styles" of riding and training...I prefer to just look at the commonality.

I think these apply to both styles or, all good horse training:

"Give the horse a good deal"
"Make the right way easy, the wrong way difficult"
"Horse respects handler/rider/trainer"
"Reward the right effort/try"

I think, no matter what style you ride or train - these philosophies hold true.

Good trainers, no matter which style or discipline, want what's best for the horse. A good trainer never intends to hurt or overly stress a horse. A good trainer wants a horse IN HARMONY, as a WILLING PARTNER. Whether that's reining, dressage, h/j, driving, eventing, etc.

Let's just look at what all the different methods of GOOD TRAINING have in common, versus the differences:)

[saultgirl]

Although I know plenty of people who lunge to tire their horses (which seems kind of counter-productive to me) before riding, most of the NH people I know round-pen as a technique for either a) flooding the horse with frightening stimuli in an effort to de-sensitize it; or b) free-lunging to teach the horse to respond to voice commands. Since I don't believe in flooding (horses are curious enough that it seems useless to me) and I don't use voice commands for the gaits, I don't see the point. But I find a lot of NH people harp on round-penning to the point of being tiresome.

Well, flooding and voice commands have nothing to do with the NH stuff I've learned... I would consider "flooding" to be a a really "anti-NH" practice, in fact, and most NH'rs move their horses with their bodies, and don't use voice commands at all! The people using voice commands are usually the traditional people who lunge.

I think we need to be careful about making judgements about what others are doing, when we don't know the theories, or even what they are attempting to do. From your description I would say you were not looking at NH people, and also that you don't have a good concept of what it is all about.

I had someone say to me "There was a lady at my barn who did Parelli. She just kept hitting her horse in the face all the time." !!! Do you really think that's the idea? Do you really think that's a Parelli problem?

Someone also said to me once - "You don't want to ride dressage, it's nothing but kicking and pulling. They crank their horses' face down into a frame and kick and whip until they have nowhere to go but up."

And other "Western pleasure horses are all trained by tying their heads way down so that they can't move." And when I was horse shopping? "Don't buy anything trained in Western Pleasure. Their hocks are all ruined."

Hmmmmm.... how interesting.

[findeight]

Far as lunging versus round pen?

IME about the same thing when done CORRECTLY and can be used to vent excess energy. Nothing wrong with working some edge off a goosey colt and getting their attention before trying to teach them anything.

For those that have been stabled or near or back in the barns when some NH practioners were preparing for an exhibition, you already know they are interchangeable with those folks regardless of what they say.

[saultgirl]

Having done both "styles" of riding and training...I prefer to just look at the commonality.

I think these apply to both styles or, all good horse training:

"Give the horse a good deal"
"Make the right way easy, the wrong way difficult"
"Horse respects handler/rider/trainer"
"Reward the right effort/try"

I think, no matter what style you ride or train - these philosophies hold true.

Good trainers, no matter which style or discipline, want what's best for the horse. A good trainer never intends to hurt or overly stress a horse. A good trainer wants a horse IN HARMONY, as a WILLING PARTNER. Whether that's reining, dressage, h/j, driving, eventing, etc.

Let's just look at what all the different methods of GOOD TRAINING have in common, versus the differences:)

This is kind of what I was getting at, but it seemed to really crash and burn, no? I was really hoping to find common ground, but everyone seems to want to jump at the extremes in different directions.

[pAin't_Misbehavin']

Well, flooding and voice commands have nothing to do with the NH stuff I've learned... I would consider "flooding" to be a a really "anti-NH" practice, in fact, and most NH'rs move their horses with their bodies, and don't use voice commands at all! The people using voice commands are usually the traditional people who lunge.

I think we need to be careful about making judgements about what others are doing, when we don't know the theories, or even what they are attempting to do. From your description I would say you were not looking at NH people, and also that you don't have a good concept of what it is all about.

I had someone say to me "There was a lady at my barn who did Parelli. She just kept hitting her horse in the face all the time." !!! Do you really think that's the idea? Do you really think that's a Parelli problem?
.

Oh, I know exactly what the NH folks are doing, because they can't resist explaining it to me every step of the way. And I have no idea what you'd call NH, but the people I've seen using flooding techniques with a round pen are Monty Roberts, Kelly Marks, Clinton Anderson and Pat Parelli. All of whom market themselves as NH.

As for hitting horses in the face, yes, I've seen both PP and CA advocate flipping lead ropes into horses' faces. I can see where someone without much practical know-how might be encouraged to hit her horse in the face by these people.

And I don't feel I need to be careful about making judgments when I've been asked for my opinion.

[saultgirl]

Oh, I know exactly what the NH folks are doing, because they can't resist explaining it to me every step of the way. And I have no idea what you'd call NH, but the people I've seen using flooding techniques with a round pen are Monty Roberts, Kelly Marks, Clinton Anderson and Pat Parelli. All of whom market themselves as NH.



I beleive you mentioned in an earlier post that you don't believe in "flooding" techniques, can you please explain what "flooding" means to you, and what the theory is?

What would one of the above-named trainers use a flooding technique for, and what kind of technique would you use in it's place?

[tkhawk]

This was a nice spoof. But I must say that horse is very well behaved.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foH4eTovuZU

[pAin't_Misbehavin']

I beleive you mentioned in an earlier post that you don't believe in "flooding" techniques, can you please explain what "flooding" means to you, and what the theory is?

What would one of the above-named trainers use a flooding technique for, and what kind of technique would you use in it's place?

Flooding is a training technique in which an animal is forced into close proximity with a frightening stimulus from which it cannot escape until released. It is used to desensitize animals to stimuli that provoke a fearful reaction.

For example, suppose your horse is afraid of umbrellas, and you, horse, and umbrella go into the roundpen together. That's flooding - the horse is in close proximity to something he finds frightening, and he can't get away from it until someone lets him out of the round pen.

I think horses are curious enough that most of them don't require flooding to accomplish de-sensitization. If you just leave an umbrella in the pasture, or stand in the field holding one, eventually the horse will creep over, check it out, bite it, etc. Much less drama. But hard to sell DVDs with techniques like that.;)

[creseida]

The best trainers are the ones that are flexible and will try different techniques to work with the individual horse. The worst ones are the ones that try to fit the horse to their techniques.

I remember listening to Monty Roberts talking to folks about their horses. He would go on and on about "Join Up" and no matter what the person said their problem was, his solution was "Join Up". That discredited him in my mind right there. He had one tool in his box.

In my personal experience, the NH folks tend to be less flexible in their training techniques. They will keep pounding away using the same tool to teach a horse something, like loading on a trailer. If what they're doing isn't working, they still keep trying.

Horses are individuals. They won't all fit into a mold. If you're not willing to keep an open mind about training and different techniques, whether they are so-called traditional or so-called NH, then your tool box will be inadequate for the task.

[Beverley]

Flooding is a training technique in which an animal is forced into close proximity with a frightening stimulus from which it cannot escape until released. It is used to desensitize animals to stimuli that provoke a fearful reaction.


Here's a beef I have. Things that a whole lot of us anonymous but successful horsepeople have been doing for DECADES (if not millennia) gets given a spiffy new name and maybe some spiffy accessories to enhance the training experience and voila, suddenly it is a brand new training technique. BS, people! All it is is a new MARKETING technique. ALL of the things that Parelli, Roberts et all are making their millions on are NOTHING MORE than successful things they have seen good horsemen do over time. As a result, I have always been both amused and miffed that the whole 'natural horsemanship movement' is greeted as new solutions to old problems. Again, it's just packaging, these guys aren't geniuses they have just borrowed judiciously from other trainers- something that any succesful horseman can do if they are paying attention.

[MSP]

Good training has no label and would fall under "traditional", really NH has come to mean gimmicks and marketing "program" training. The issue most would have with professed NH trainers is that many are probably beginners that own a CD.

In general the techniques used by NH trainers are traditional methods given stupid irritating names (sorry I started thinking about Parelli).

Good training is being able to find what works best with each horse. I might try something on a horse that worked on another horse but if I found it didn't work I would try something different.

1. Horse will not stand to be fly sprayed.

2. Horse is difficult to catch.

3. Horse nips/bites.

4. Horse won't stand still to be mounted.



These items are things owners should teach their horses. Not what I would think of hiring a pro to deal with.

I have no idea what Parelli would do but I would:

1. just spray them and follow them around. I don't care if they hold still and eventually after getting sprayed 100 times they get used to it. If it bothers me I tell them to stand. (stand is something that has to be taught)

2. I think this has more to do with the person that is trying to do the catching. I have been told a horse is hard to catch and had no problem and visa versa. This is something I make part of a normal daily routine and before you know it all my horses come when called.

3. For an average horse I would ping them on the muzzle with my fingers. That worked great for a TB but then came the QH! I had to use positive reenforcement to calm my QH from biting. I tell her no then ask her to put her head down and relax and then she is rewarded.

4. Back to training the horse to stand! Ask for stand by saying "stand", if they move return them to the spot you asked them to stand in and say stand again. After a time reward them for standing. Practice the stand and gradually lengthen the time you make them stand.

So I don't know, would I be considered NH or traditional?

[TouchMeKnot]

Flooding is a training technique in which an animal is forced into close proximity with a frightening stimulus from which it cannot escape until released. It is used to desensitize animals to stimuli that provoke a fearful reaction.

For example, suppose your horse is afraid of umbrellas, and you, horse, and umbrella go into the roundpen together. That's flooding - the horse is in close proximity to something he finds frightening, and he can't get away from it until someone lets him out of the round pen.

I think horses are curious enough that most of them don't require flooding to accomplish de-sensitization. If you just leave an umbrella in the pasture, or stand in the field holding one, eventually the horse will creep over, check it out, bite it, etc. Much less drama. But hard to sell DVDs with techniques like that.;)

I've never heard of flooding until now, but want to comment on de-sensitization that is preached excessively. I have done de-sensitization techniques for my young halter colts at the farm. And I have found that the horse will investigate something left in his pasture or something I lead him up to. But just because he accepts an umbrella opening and closing near him when he's in his round pen at home or in his pasture doesn't mean he'll accept it at the show. When we get to the showgrounds, and he's away from home, and there is all that high energy of competitors warming up, and horses whinneying as they arrive in big trucks, flags flapping and people moving in every direction, the colts go on overload and mental meltdown, and the slightest thing can set them off UNLESS you've adjusted your de-sensitization work to include building trust in the handler. A horse accepting a scary object by himself in his pasture is not sufficient training.

I work to show my horses scary objects and do it gradually, but they have to learn to trust me and focus on me to work them past a scary object. This is something that gets lost in the translation of de-sensitization. If you never take your horses off their home grounds, you'll never know how much he will focus and trust you; and when there is a golf cart driving rapidly and closely up on one side of him, a baby stroller on the other, and a kid with a balloon walking directly toward his face, is he going to trust his instinct to flee away from these scary things or is he going focus on me and let me guide him safely through?

I see a lot of people that think, oh, I have a problem, let me do some more de-sensitizing; however, they've totally missed the component that the horse needs to build trust in you, not just overcome his fear of objects. As one trainer said, you'll never be able to expose the horse to everything at home that he will encounter at the show, so you need to work on building trust and focus. Some of that work takes place at home, and some of it takes place at the showgrounds. When we have a horse go on mental meltdown where he doesn't show well, we try to still stay at the showgrounds to teach him to calm down while being immersed in all the noise and activity of the showgrounds. I have one mare that it took forever to get her to stand tied to the trailer at the showgrounds. If someone rode up behind the trailer, she would PANIC and break the tie snap or her halter or both even though I could get her to stand tied to the trailer at home.

I've also learned from working with a couple of volatile, high-motor show horses that it isn't a good idea to put a high-energy horse in contact with a scary object without an escape route if the horse panics. You can get yourself hurt that way. My round pen is large and leaves me a lot of room that I can provide an escape route. It serves me well to give the horse a way to escape without going on top of me and gives me a more accurate indicator that the horse is accepting the object of his own will and the lesson is actually being learned.

[Fancy That]

This was a nice spoof. But I must say that horse is very well behaved.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foH4eTovuZU

OMG, that was hilarious. I have nothing against NH, but just the stuff that guy was doing and the absolute NON-reaction of his horse......too funny!

The trumpet-playing, flag-waving while riding was cracking me up!

And I LOVE his horse! I want it :) Looks like an overgrown Morgan to me :)

[saultgirl]

Flooding is a training technique in which an animal is forced into close proximity with a frightening stimulus from which it cannot escape until released. It is used to desensitize animals to stimuli that provoke a fearful reaction.

For example, suppose your horse is afraid of umbrellas, and you, horse, and umbrella go into the roundpen together. That's flooding - the horse is in close proximity to something he finds frightening, and he can't get away from it until someone lets him out of the round pen.

I think horses are curious enough that most of them don't require flooding to accomplish de-sensitization. If you just leave an umbrella in the pasture, or stand in the field holding one, eventually the horse will creep over, check it out, bite it, etc. Much less drama. But hard to sell DVDs with techniques like that.;)

The reason I asked, is because I associate "flooding" with old-fashioned, cowboy-style "sacking out".... (i.e. I am going to waive this umbrella all around you even if you are doing backflips to try to get away) which causes a huge amount of anxiety and stress in an animal, and I would therefore consider this to be a less humane practice. Does it get the job done? Yes... if it doesn't cause trauma.

I have found that NH techniques in regards to desensitizing focus around "approach and retreat" methods, with one of the goals being to keep the horse in a good frame of mind throughout the process. I think of this as being very different from flooding. I would also consider this to be a more humane approach to desensitizing a horse to a particular object.

[Fancy That]

The reason I asked, is because I associate "flooding" with old-fashioned, cowboy-style "sacking out".... (i.e. I am going to waive this umbrella all around you even if you are doing backflips to try to get away) which causes a huge amount of anxiety and stress in an animal, and I would therefore consider this to be a less humane practice. Does it get the job done? Yes... if it doesn't cause trauma.

I have found that NH techniques in regards to desensitizing focus around "approach and retreat" methods, with one of the goals being to keep the horse in a good frame of mind throughout the process. I think of this as being very different from flooding. I would also consider this to be a more humane approach to desensitizing a horse to a particular object.

========
Agree with Saulty :)

I've always associated the Approach/Retreat methodology with good horsemanship (I try not to use the term 'natural horsemanship') Not "flooding"

The moment BEFORE you feel the horse is going to move (ie - get so worried it will move), you retreat. This gives it confidence that what you are doing isn't going to hurt and is nothing to be worried about.

[Parelligirl82]

Hmmmmm.... how interesting.



How Interesting ;)

[MassageLady]

I think perhaps one of the biggest weirdnesses with NH is that it has been marketed as a "do it yourself" technique. Which means lots of people with no talent or foundation for horse training will try to style themselves as trainers, and the marketed items will try to oversimplify and generalize techniques.
I agree, and then they like to tell everyone else how horribly they treat their horses.
IMO there is only good training and bad training. Any other label is just to sell a product, nothing more.

[7HL]

As usual some find these threads as a chance to pick on a particular trainer or person that uses natural horsemanship. Some want to make it out to be more then it really is. Some want to turn it into a discussion about marketing, which it is not. For some, it's about fear of a label.

It would be the same as someone saying that all that ride dressage are rich, snobby, stuck up and generally have a stick up their butt. While that may be true of some, it is a generalization.

What I truly believe natural horsemanship is, can be best summed up as follows:

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

Nothing more!

Just because some bastardize a term for their own purpose, doesn't make them right or correct. And that is on both sides of this discussion. There is good and bad in all methods of training.

[MaresNest]

When someone tells me how they follow PP or CA or whomever, I think I'm dealing with someone who thinks you can learn to train horses from a DVD or a book or a TV show.

Agreed. That's not to say that there aren't worthwhile things about NH, nor that there aren't bad 'traditional' trainers. But I am skeptical of NH because its adherents seem to be largely preoccupied with gadgets and gimmicks.

I think you have to judge training methods by their effectiveness and sensitivity to the needs of the horse. You have to take each situation on an individual basis.

[MelantheLLC]

I went to two John Lyons clinics (3 days each) 25 years ago, and it saved both me and my horse.

Yeah, I was a novice; it was the first horse I'd owned. But I'd taken lessons (English) off and on all my life, and several years of "dressage" lessons which consisted of "move him forward! Get his head down!" And my horse, under this lovely regime, began to rear.

You can call this whatever kind of training that you like. But it was typical at all the barns I'd been at. And that was not a small number by the time I was in my 30's. The instructor just said, "Do this," and did not give you the tools or the reason for it "beyond that's how you do it. That's how everyone does it. That's how it's always been done by the people who know."

Lesson horses could be forced. I found out my horse couldn't. So I became afraid of him.

So I ended up at this JL clinic. I've never seen or done any of the other NH guys. But I'll say watching JL work with a youngster was the most amazing and touching thing I've ever seen.

Those of you who think it's just "running a horse until it's tired," just know that you are simply misinterpreting what you've seen, the same way someone who isn't conversant with your methods might misinterpret something they saw you do without having it explained to them.

I saw a 3 year old colt who'd never been away from home go from frantic and frightened to secure and attentive in about an hour and a half. Was it running? Yeah, it ran--it was scared of the whole situation. And it learned that JL could help it figure out how to stop running.

In addition, JL explained exactly how he helped it do that. He explained his body language and the horse's. He mentioned things nobody had ever mentioned before in all those years of lessons I'd had at all those different barns. He was aware of the tiniest motion of the colt's ears as it flicked toward him and away while the horse was still running and calling. He knew how to place himself to suggest to the colt that it consider its options and begin to think instead of run in panic. He noted and explained these things to the audience, and he noted and explained the colt's reaction.

Those are good things to teach people. Maybe those of you fortunate enough to have been "born" with the talent, or to have had years of talented and clear instruction, can claim that the flick of an ear is obvious--but it's my experience that a "talented" horseperson can rarely explain with much clarity what it is that they are actually doing and reading in terms of horses.

JL was pretty good at it. He certainly gave me a whole new view of my horse and started me on a journey of educating myself in body language and behavioral training. It wasn't easy and it wasn't simple, but if I'm any sort of a horseperson now it's more due to him than to the 8 or 10 different lesson instructors who just had me trot around and around at their bidding for years.

BTW, I was just re-reading JL's first book, and in his first chapter he says that the round pen is a tool that's only used for a limited time. He talks about using it for 3 to 5 DAYS, and possibly coming back to it if you have certain specific issues you are working on. He talks about all the hours and years that are put into a horse that is dependable and fully trained, and how there aren't any short cuts to that.

Whatever you call the kind of work he does, by no means is it just running a horse in circles to tire it out, any more than dressage is trotting a horse in circles just to make perfect circles.

When I had nobody around, including the so-called professionals, who could do a decent job of helping me figure out how to deal with my horse, I was lucky to stumble across this education.

[Horseman614]

Having exposure in the English and Western world is invaulable in this discussion. Unfortunately it appears not many folks posting here feel this way. The NH group is not as bad as it is being portrayed, and the English group is not as good as they are portraying themselves. The groupies to PP and the rest are idiots, we can all agree to that. But the basic principles of horsemanship spoken about by Tom Dorrance and Ray Hunt are excellent methods of horsemanship. The marketing gurus of PP and the rest make me just as sick as they make you. Interestingly enough, I have watched them at times and found I can learn from anyone. Sometimes I learn that I will never try that with my horse because it is silly or non productive. I have had the exact same experience with English clinics I have attended. I have used specific techniques from both sides I have learned at clinics and used them with my horses with great success. They good part is there are more ways to accomplish the same thing. As one gentleman in an above post wrote, it all depends on what the horse needs. I have found some techniques work well on some horses but do not work at all on other horses. Sometimes you have to find another way. I have ridden English with the RCMP, I have ridden western with Al Dunning. Both have something that they can offer me.

I haven't consumed the cool aid. But I don't ignore the water trough.

One thing that some of these posts say that does bother me is that they would never spend so much time on the ground with their horse. They prefer to ride. I love to ride too. In the clinics I have taught, I watch magnificient warmbloods walk into the arena, or should I say drag their owner in. Then they can't stop their horse, or have him get around other horses, because he has never been socialized. He kicks - he bites and has zero manners. After about 15 years of teaching, and a lifetime of watching /seeing this, I would love to see the English folks spend a little more time on the ground and teach their horses some manners.

One last thing in this rant. I enjoy horses. If I can learn from someone, anyone, something to help me with my horse, then my horse will be better off and so will I. As a teacher, you must accept the path of being a student.

[M. O'Connor]

A good trainer is a good trainer, whether NH or traditional.

But I don't know any traditional trainers who have "branded" and marketed their their methods to the extent that some NH trainers have. Nor do I know any traditional trainers who have been able to convince the general public that their leadrope works better than anyone else's leadrope, or that after thousands of years of human interaction with the equine, that they have discovered pressure points on a horse's face and facets to a horse's nature that no one else ever has.

I have never used force to convince a jittery horse who is afraid of flyspray to stand still for it. It is very natural for some horses to enjoy a good game of "chase" before allowing themselves to be caught, but I've never thought of coining a phrase to market the methods I use to catch one of these creatures.

Many truly great trainers know there are other ways to get to Rome, and that theirs may not work on every horse.

Many NH brands are successful only because there are people out there who will pay money to learn "new" methods that are, in actuality, based on thousands of years of history and knowledge that went into developing the art of classical horsemanship. If anyone doubts this, just read Xenophon.

There isn't really anything new about NH, other than the marketing.

[tkhawk]

I went to two John Lyons clinics (3 days each) 25 years ago, and it saved both me and my horse.

Yeah, I was a novice; it was the first horse I'd owned. But I'd taken lessons (English) off and on all my life, and several years of "dressage" lessons which consisted of "move him forward! Get his head down!" And my horse, under this lovely regime, began to rear.

You can call this whatever kind of training that you like. But it was typical at all the barns I'd been at. And that was not a small number by the time I was in my 30's. The instructor just said, "Do this," and did not give you the tools or the reason for it "beyond that's how you do it. That's how everyone does it. That's how it's always been done by the people who know."

Lesson horses could be forced. I found out my horse couldn't. So I became afraid of him.

So I ended up at this JL clinic. I've never seen or done any of the other NH guys. But I'll say watching JL work with a youngster was the most amazing and touching thing I've ever seen.

Those of you who think it's just "running a horse until it's tired," just know that you are simply misinterpreting what you've seen, the same way someone who isn't conversant with your methods might misinterpret something they saw you do without having it explained to them.

I saw a 3 year old colt who'd never been away from home go from frantic and frightened to secure and attentive in about an hour and a half. Was it running? Yeah, it ran--it was scared of the whole situation. And it learned that JL could help it figure out how to stop running.

In addition, JL explained exactly how he helped it do that. He explained his body language and the horse's. He mentioned things nobody had ever mentioned before in all those years of lessons I'd had at all those different barns. He was aware of the tiniest motion of the colt's ears as it flicked toward him and away while the horse was still running and calling. He knew how to place himself to suggest to the colt that it consider its options and begin to think instead of run in panic. He noted and explained these things to the audience, and he noted and explained the colt's reaction.

Those are good things to teach people. Maybe those of you fortunate enough to have been "born" with the talent, or to have had years of talented and clear instruction, can claim that the flick of an ear is obvious--but it's my experience that a "talented" horseperson can rarely explain with much clarity what it is that they are actually doing and reading in terms of horses.

JL was pretty good at it. He certainly gave me a whole new view of my horse and started me on a journey of educating myself in body language and behavioral training. It wasn't easy and it wasn't simple, but if I'm any sort of a horseperson now it's more due to him than to the 8 or 10 different lesson instructors who just had me trot around and around at their bidding for years.

BTW, I was just re-reading JL's first book, and in his first chapter he says that the round pen is a tool that's only used for a limited time. He talks about using it for 3 to 5 DAYS, and possibly coming back to it if you have certain specific issues you are working on. He talks about all the hours and years that are put into a horse that is dependable and fully trained, and how there aren't any short cuts to that.

Whatever you call the kind of work he does, by no means is it just running a horse in circles to tire it out, any more than dressage is trotting a horse in circles just to make perfect circles.

When I had nobody around, including the so-called professionals, who could do a decent job of helping me figure out how to deal with my horse, I was lucky to stumble across this education.

Any good trainer or horseperson can do the same with a 3yr old unruly colt.

I understand what you are saying. I started off English lessons-in the ring. Seat, posting, diagonals, exercises etc. While I did get a good background on horse behaviour-not much you can cover in an hour lesson-it was mostly about me. But I grew up with cows in India-so at least I knew big animals-their behaviours-though vastly different fom horses.

What John Lyons says-or at least as you described it is just common sense. Any good rancher who grew up with them and in a nice way-there are same whackos there-will know that stuff. My mustang is with a trainer-he does some NH stuff. But he grew up riding horses and picked up stuff along the way and just has a lot of tool kits.

Each horse is different-if you focus on outside signals alone -flick of an ear, pinned ears, it won't work. What each horse is going to do after it flicks an ear-is very different.Every horse brings something slightly different to the table-so Lyons who may have decades with horses can tell you stuff and sell you DVDs, books-the only way you can get it is by experiencing it and getting a feel for it yourself. It is good-it expands your awareness. Exposes you to different ideas. I personally like Mark Rashid and the Dorrances and even Linda Kohanov-very unique and different perspective. But you know ultimately you have to figure out your personality and the horse and go from there. NH or traditional-good horsemanship is good horsemanship. I think NH probably brings in more clients-it adds a certain amount of mystique and magic to it. I mean instead of saying -Yeah I grew up with horses, been riding all my life-I can do it in my sleep, NH makes it some great thing. They did train horses to go to war and in the chaos, not only trained the horse to fight, but also maintained control of the horse-now that is training...

[DLee]

Labels don't work for me. I am neither. I am both.

I pick and choose and use what works best for me and my beliefs in training.

[Ambrey]

Every good trainer I know uses NH methods, whether s/he'll admit them or not- most of them are very logical and based on sound learning theory.

I think people have issue with those who think it's fundamentally different from the way all good trainers work.

But note, I'm defining "good" trainers by my own subjective standards- trainers who choose reinforcement (either positive or negative) over punishment. I don't like trainers who depend on punishment to train. I really don't like them. I think most trainers use some, and all trainers use negative reinforcement (application of an unpleasant stimulus that will go away when the horse does what is asked of it) but pure punishment bothers me and I prefer to see it used as little as possible.

[findeight]

And I think this is the majority of what horse people have gotten with going to the 'traditional" trainer.


Oh, I just cannot resist here...and only 45 minutes until I don't have to be on call for work and can go do other things...anyway..

This quote was in response to another posters description of an earlier "instructor/trainer" grabbing the Pony's head and whipping it around repeatedly in a tight circle hanging on the reins with the kid still aboard.

How dare you equate what "most horse people have gotten out of traditional training" with this crap?

Do not presume to include me in this sweeping pronouncment of what "everybody" goes through.

That is what always sets these threads going, assumptions and generalities about what "everybody" else does. On both sides.

Carry on.

[NancyM]

After reading the thread about whether to let a NH person come to see a horse for sale, and a few other threads on this topic, I'm suprised at how some people are so vehemently opposed to "Natural Horsemanship" training methods.

I think we should compare "NH" and "traditional methods" in a few specific scenarios to see just how different they are. How would a NH trainer deal with these issues and how would a traditional trainer deal with these issues? Also, feel free to add how you THINK the "other trainer" would deal with it, if you are more familiar with one than the other.

1. Horse will not stand to be fly sprayed.

2. Horse is difficult to catch.

3. Horse nips/bites.

4. Horse won't stand still to be mounted.

Would anyone like to discuss this?

OK, I don't have time right now to read all the responses here already, I just wanted to say that Natural Horsemanship IS Traditional Horsemanship. Everything else is a shortcut. It is not the fault of good horsemanship that some gurus have promoted and marketed it, and made money out of showing people how to do it in an easy stepwise fashion, making it easy to understand and learn. The fact that they have done this just makes true horsemen jealous that they didn't think of it first. The fact that the "movement" has so many "followers" (read: religion), just proves that there are problems and "holes" in the system that you are referring to as "traditional" (non-natural?) Is non-natural simply "beat the horse until it gives up"?

Natural horsemanship has a simple base, none of which is in dispute as to whether it is a good idea or whether it works...

-Use the horse's natural responses to relationships and pressure to advantage in your training.
-Show the horse what you want him to do before asking him to do it.
-Use only as much pressure as necessary to gain a response.
-Notice the try, reward for the right behaviour.
-Keep emotion, anger, fear, confusion out of horse training.
-Train in a stepwise fashion, building on what has gone before.
-Look for recognized signs of acceptance and understanding of each step before moving on to the next step.

Does anybody who trains horses regularly want to argue with any of this stuff? Whether or not they call themselves "natural" or not? "Natural" is a marketing phrase, used in advertising, to gain clients for horse trainers. Works, too. Whether or not the trainer has any skill or is training what you want your horse to learn is yet to be determined, and has little to do with the marketing.

[equineartworks]

Labels don't work for me. I am neither. I am both.

I pick and choose and use what works best for me and my beliefs in training.

Me too...and what is best for the horse (dog, cat, bird, etc) I am with. Training is a lifelong commitment to your partner, so I think we owe it to ourselves to learn and evaluate new and old methods. Then take what works for you and leave the rest.

The extremists you find in all training styles just make it more difficult to weed out the fruit bats.

But this really has been discussed to death here with some pretty funny and not so funny arguments for all styles. Moving on now... :)

[mp]

I was a bit curious for a decade or two how it could be that you could get a horse to piaffe but not be able to get it to stand at the mounting block. Or why it was that some trainers could not catch their own horse in a field or in a stall, but the horse would come to the groom (or perhaps some stranger they didn't know.) Then I figured it out !! There are a lot of BULLIES and flat out A**HOLES making a 'living' as Horse "Trainers!!"

And some "show" trainers simply focus on what the horse does under saddle and in the ring because that's what's important to their clients. As long as the other behavior isn't out and out dangerous, they just view it as a quirk and don't take the time to fix it.

I've never heard of a client firing a trainer because his horse wouldn't stand to be tacked up. But I know of several trainers who lost clients because the horse wasn't pinned champion.

[katarine]

I just wanted to say that Natural Horsemanship IS Traditional Horsemanship. Everything else is a shortcut. It is not the fault of good horsemanship that some gurus have promoted and marketed it, and made money out of showing people how to do it in an easy stepwise fashion, making it easy to understand and learn. The fact that they have done this just makes true horsemen jealous that they didn't think of it first. The fact that the "movement" has so many "followers" (read: religion), just proves that there are problems and "holes" in the system that you are referring to as "traditional" (non-natural?) Is non-natural simply "beat the horse until it gives up"?

Natural horsemanship has a simple base, none of which is in dispute as to whether it is a good idea or whether it works...

-Use the horse's natural responses to relationships and pressure to advantage in your training.
-Use only as much pressure as necessary to gain a response.
-Notice the try, reward for the right behaviour.
-Keep emotion, anger, fear, confusion out of horse training.
-Train in a stepwise fashion, building on what has gone before.
-Look for recognized signs of acceptance and understanding of each step before moving on to the next step.

Does anybody who trains horses regularly want to argue with any of this stuff? Whether or not they call themselves "natural" or not? "Natural" is a marketing phrase, used in advertising, to gain clients for horse trainers. Works, too. Whether or not the trainer has any skill or is training what you want your horse to learn is yet to be determined, and has little to do with the marketing.

Emphasis mine, I agree on the first point, disagree on the second...I don't think good quality horsemanship can be learned solely from books, DVDs, etc. You need good eyes on the ground, and good people to offer insight and suggestions in real time. You also need a willingness inside yourself to consider ALL information, and realize each horse is an individual, and that just because you read the chapter 4 times, you aren't necessarily ready to move on to the next chapter. What bothers me about all the DVDs , shows, etc...is the notion that if you'll follow these 7 steps, you're set. What isn't conveyed is your horse may figure it out LOONNNNG before you do, get bored and cranky, and move on without you ;) lacking real life in person horsemen and women, those folks can really get in a pickle with their ponies. THAT is what bothers me about the whole shrinkwrapped training package. So, there are good horsemen that are bothered- because it's not the best way to learn this stuff. No more than you can really learn to fly in just a simulator or video game or books. You need real time with a real instructor, before you take off ;)

[Ambrey]

You also need a willingness inside yourself to consider ALL information, and realize each horse is an individual, and that just because you read the chapter 4 times, you aren't necessarily ready to move on to the next chapter.

And that if your read the chapter 4 times and it's still not working, it might be because it's just not the right way for your horse ;)

I think what these programs have to offer is that they give people a starting point to go out there and do something. However, if someone then chooses not to learn by the trial and error of that doing and adapt the program to fit himself and his horse, he hasn't learned much.

[rainechyldes]

I think mostly my issue with so called 'NH" is; most of them tend to imply that no one has ever thought of any of this stuff before they did, and that so called traditional training is cruel and unusual punishment- and anyone who uses traditional training isn't horse 'aware'.

Both of which are incredibly false statements.

Someof the basic ideals in NH is what I called for years common sense. It's not new and shiny, it's old old stuff, but prettied up with expensive and colorful new equipment and then added to with extra things like games etc that people with horse knowledge and common sense start rolling their eyes at.

All in all the :NH: is pure marketing as it exists in it's niche. That's really all it is.
I do bow to their marketing skills- pure genius.

I am not an NH trainer.

But this is how I do the 3 listed in the orginal post.

1. Fly spray
Horse is nervous about fly spray, I generally hold the horse, don't tie them, have my spray bottle and a cloth. I get as close and spray as much as I can while verbally soothing the horse. Once I can't get any farther, I grab the cloth, spray into the cloth and finish wiping down the horse. *** Since to my mind - the main goal is to get fly spray on the horse yes?***
Eventually they all learn to stand- since it's never a dramatic episode.

NH? No.. common sense.

2. Nippy horse.
I rarely have this issue, as I was taught many many years ago to never hand feed a horse treats unless I was wearing gloves. thus the horse doesn't 'smell' my flesh and assume it means treat. NH- no ..more common sense.
If I do have a nippy horse, I usually tend to let my elbow do the talking.
I position my elbow up, and when they turn to nip they 9 times out of 10 smack themselves, I do nothing- totally passive. They soon give up.
NH?...no.. common sense.

3. Horse won't stand still to be mounted.
A little tougher, but hardly mind boggling.
2 people. One holds the horse, the other one gets on.
Spend an hour getting on and off said horse, they are so gd bored by that time, they stand like a statue.
NH? ..no..common sense.

It's not rocket science.

[Guilherme]

NH is a label that, if it ever had a meaning, has long since lost it in the confusion of the marketplace.

I've never had much "heartburn" with Lyons. He seems to be the most level headed of the Gaggle of Gurus. The most "out there" is Tellingston-Jones. Most of the rest fall between them.

The "partnership" model bothers me as it presumes much from the horse. Personsally I don't think horses want to do anything besides breed, eat, and schmooze with their own kind. The idea that a horse "wants" to work is just not real. Most of the "touchy feely" stuff seems to come from people that can't accept the idea that they are going to impose their will, for their own purposes, onto one of God's creatures. So they "make up" stuff to salve their unnecessarily guilty consciences. This is just silly to me.

My horse is my servant. I am its master. This does not mean I ignore or neglect its needs, but my needs and desires are primary. Of course if I want to be successful with the horse I must keep it sound and healthy. This means good husbandry and good riding practices. I decide the 5Ws of the day; the horse provides the brawn to accomplish those goals.

NH from the horse's point of view is an oxymoron. If we are going to take that view into account (and I do) then I must consider it an oxymoron, too.

G.

[Equilibrium]

Labels don't work for me. I am neither. I am both.

I pick and choose and use what works best for me and my beliefs in training.


This is a very good statement. And as always, different things work for different horses.

I don't have any uncatchable horses myself because they're happy to see us. Horses can also help other horses in dealing with people.
I don't do punishment for any horse.

But at the same time I have a mare who is viscious, and really deliberate in trying to hurt you when she wants. I don't sugar coat anything where she is concerned. Had the mare since she was 8 months of age so she has NEVER been abused or mishandled. As soon as baby was born, she changed.

Terri

[rainechyldes]

Someone posted a good point.

That a lot of people say they prefer to 'not ' spend time on the ground working the horse.

Ok - here's where it gets foggy.

Traditional by this I mean classical training has a TON of groundwork.

So. I think this discussion is flawed somewhat here.

Someone like me, who was taught by classical riders/trainers, does a lot of ground work with horses. I am what I consider a traditional trainer, not an NH.

Someone who doesn't do groundwork - isn't a traditional trainer in the way that I would define it at all.

I think we need (for those into labels) a different label for trainers who don't do any groundwork:)

[Sandy M]

I'll chime in a say LoveMyTB's post is pretty darned funny. Don't take too much offense with it folks. She expresses what a LOT of people have experienced. If you don't have experience with the "shank, smack it, yell at it, then get the groom to fix your problem for you" system of training, then you're in for some FUN!!




See, this is so strange to me. Oh, I KNOW there are some godawful trainers out there. But I've been riding since I was around 9 years old, which would have been circa 1954. From the up/down instructors when I was a kid, to H/J trainers to eventing trainers to dressage trainers now, I never encountered, personally, ANY trainer who did the "shank it, smack it, yell at it, etc." routine. Did I disagree with standing martingales with the H/J trainer, yup, and it was my horse, so no standing. Trainer disagreed, but didn't "fire" me as a client. Did one dressage trainer want me to put drawreins on my horse. Yup. But I disagreed and said that if I couldn't ride the horse horse correctly into the bridle, it was my problem, not the horse's. Trainer disagreed (not the trainer I have now, by the way), but again, I wasn't "fired" as a client, and neither standing martingales nor drawreins, though they can be abused, are abusive in and of themselves, nor did I consider those trainers abusive. I don't doubt these people exist but for one thing, if I saw a trainer doing stuff like that, that would be the last day I would work with such a trainer and I don't understand why even a novice would accept that sort of behavior. When I was a horse-crazy kid - and well beyond! - well, heck I still am a horse crazy kid - I read every fiction and NON-fiction book in the library about horses and horse-training. Even that self-education was sufficient for me to say, "No, that's not right" and walk away.

[Alexie]

good point SandyM.

In my experience people who follow NH tend to assume everyone else doesn't do groundwork

that's not true, we just don't blether on about it to the point of tedium.

most good NH vids I've seen have had the same basic sound horsemanship techniques I've seen used by traditional trainers, just because they don't use the same exercises doesn't mean the principles are not the same.

[tkhawk]

Someone posted a good point.

That a lot of people say they prefer to 'not ' spend time on the ground working the horse.

Ok - here's where it gets foggy.

Traditional by this I mean classical training has a TON of groundwork.

So. I think this discussion is flawed somewhat here.

Someone like me, who was taught by classical riders/trainers, does a lot of ground work with horses. I am what I consider a traditional trainer, not an NH.

Someone who doesn't do groundwork - isn't a traditional trainer in the way that I would define it at all.

I think we need (for those into labels) a different label for trainers who don't do any groundwork:)

Well I think that is because a lot of people, myself included, started off with horses as adults. So we start off with broke to death horses and then work our way up. But are never involved in the actual training-well everytime you are riding, you are training-but as in from the start to where the horse is at.

That is what happened to me with my mustang. I have ridden some difficult horses, but all were trained. So all the stuff that they pulled-was more just testing me and trying to see what they can get away with. But they knew what I was asking, just didn't want to comply.
My mustang was 6yrs, captured at 1,not halter broke, can't touch him-so forget his feet. He also got the better of three other trainers and remained a wild and untrained colt-terrified and extremely defensive and smart as nails.I suddenly realized-wow I have no clue to get it done safely. But that was my "horse sense" telling me that. That if I pushed him, he could hurt me-not because he is mean-he is sweet-but just because where he is at in his training.

So if I were to strictly interpret my experience, without looking around -then classical training only is ridden work. But just in today's format where you get a lesson a week or whatever, what can you do. Most people who take lessons as adults, don't go an apprentice with the trainer, watching them bring along a young horse-they sit astride the finished product. Then you get a horse-my mare taught me to really ride -she is just one of those types that the only thing that will work is to become still and work from that stillness. Anything else and she will match your energy 10 times over! My mustang is teaching me some very interesting stuff.

So just wondering, if that is the issue-as most adults start off on school horses and then along the way get a difficult horse . It becomes your horse now-no trainer to tune it up , suddenly you have a whole host of issues. If you lucked out and got a packer-great. But you get a few difficult horses-it can be an interesting journey-add the fact that they can cause severe physical harm or worse-makes it frightening. As an adult, you also have no context to relate to something. If you grew up on a giant ranch with a hundred horses or more -you might laugh at stuff. But if your only experience is taking years of lessons on a well schooled horse and then get a difficult horse-suddenly your knowledge base doesn't cover it. So NH might seem quite attratictive from that perspective .

[XenophonKnows]

And some "show" trainers simply focus on what the horse does under saddle and in the ring because that's what's important to their clients. As long as the other behavior isn't out and out dangerous, they just view it as a quirk and don't take the time to fix it.

I've never heard of a client firing a trainer because his horse wouldn't stand to be tacked up. But I know of several trainers who lost clients because the horse wasn't pinned champion.


Ah yes !! I would love to hear some other ideas on this topic. My argument goes like this..... "the market does, very strongly, favor McDonalds over another, theoretical, 'fast food' restaurant that may serve sprouts and asparagus on whole grain organic flat bread." In other words, people WANT crap. Cheap crap. Cheap crap they can get quickly and easily. They want to be satiated and satisfied with a "Dollar Menu." They do not want to hear "The Horsemanship Journey takes a Lifetime...." (One wonders, really, that it took some horseman so long to join in with the rest of the culture.)

Does anyone want to tell me I am wrong ?? I think I am right, but MUCH MORE IMPORTANTLY I would love to hear ideas of how to deal with this mentality on a daily basis within the horse industry.

We are swimming (uh - drowning really) in a 'you can have it now, your way' culture that is drenched in marketing, marketing, marketing, marketing, advertising, you get the idea.

I totally blame the consumer culture for creating the pressure that makes personality and prizes the most valueable assets of a Horse Trainer's business. But WHAT to do about it.......

[rainechyldes]

So just wondering, if that is the issue-as most adults start off on school horses and then along the way get a difficult horse . It becomes your horse now-no trainer to tune it up , suddenly you have a whole host of issues. If you lucked out and got a packer-great. But you get a few difficult horses-it can be an interesting journey-add the fact that they can cause severe physical harm or worse-makes it frightening. As an adult, you also have no context to relate to something. If you grew up on a giant ranch with a hundred horses or more -you might laugh at stuff. But if your only experience is taking years of lessons on a well schooled horse and then get a difficult horse-suddenly your knowledge base doesn't cover it. So NH might seem quite attractive from that perspective .

Oh I think that's more then entirely possible. From a coaches point of view as well, there is no way they should even be considering putting any student, adult or otherwise on anything but a finished horse to learn. So I can see where the thought process comes from that they don't learn anything but the 'riding' aspect of horses, thus NH seems like a new trend in horsemanship to them- but..it really isn't.




Way way back - my first riding lesson consisted of spending an hour cleaning tack - I still remember this. I was flabberghasted. But it was the way my first trainer taught. Riding was the perk , not the given. Now when I look back- I realize how incredibly lucky I was to have her as my first trainer. She is to this day what I consider a classical trainer. Everything she teaches are skills that have been around forever and a day.

I've spent hours learning how to lunge a horse correctly, in a riding lesson! Did I complain? No, I found it intensely interesting, another 'skill' I don't think is taught often enough. I have friends who don't know how to lunge a horse- (other then assuming it's just supposed to run in circles- not that it's actually meant to be -- an intense schooling exercise.)

Nowadays I'm sure if such happened to a COTH member, they'd be on here flaming the trainer. Most do wish to get on and ride NOW - not later. We aren't interested in the long haul. rather a culture of instance gratification to be sure, and I feel that is perhaps the biggest failing - not so much the argument between traditional/classical and/or NH knowledge.

[Rena]

What I truly believe natural horsemanship is, can be best summed up as follows:
Julie Goodnight
"Natural horsemanship (NH) simply means that we know and understand the horse's instinctive and herd behaviors and that we use that information to develop a willing partnership and communicate with the horse and in a way that he understands."

Nothing more!
Just because some bastardize a term for their own purpose, doesn't make them right or correct.

Julie Goodnight's quote is factually wrong.

Natural Horsemanship was Pat Parelli's trademark business name. Parelli, the salesman, who barely mentions that he learned the principles of "his" method from Ray Hunt. And R.Hunt acknowledges Tom Dorrance as his mentor and would not be caught dead using NH as a name for anything.

We need a new name for methods who differ from traditional riding.

I reached the conclusion that there are new and better insights into the animal mind -- there are additions, new insights, new scientific results, improving upon traditional horsemanship (and I am not dissing traditional horsemanship -- its systemic, proven approach to horses is vastly superior to some of the haphazard "new" training out there). Nevertheless, we humans are learning more about being humble and acknowledging we are not the only intelligent species.

A historical view at animal training in conjunction with human attitudes towards science, and our world, would be of value -- we'd all learn something. But only if our sources are accurate.

As to "Natural Horsemanship," .. it's PARELLI's (former) business name .. it's gotten out of hand, it's used indiscriminately to mean absolutely nothing except that someone may be using a rope halter, (poorly at that.)

Certainly, terms change over time. Parelli advertized A LOT in the early days, full page ads in any magazine I saw. His business name caught on, overshadowing the true masters who never advertised at all. (people found them by word of mouth.)

In considering changes to traditional training, it is helpful to consider the wonderful, real, and great progress humanity's made in even studying animal intelligence. But Parelli is maybe a footnote in al that .. Parelli gets a whole chapter in a historical look at salesmanship and marketting.

Just to set things in historical perspective,

rena

[rainechyldes]

Does anyone want to tell me I am wrong ?? I think I am right, but MUCH MORE IMPORTANTLY I would love to hear ideas of how to deal with this mentality on a daily basis within the horse industry.

I can't give you too many ways on how to combat it, other then what I know.
I train - but I am not a coach. I train your horse not the rider. However I also demand that owners do attend training sessions, I am not interested in training horses and then blithely handing over the reins to an owner who has no idea what has been done, and how to continue the horses education.

Another reason why my training program is limited to 3 horses at a time here. I expect owners to be here once a week and 'help' train their horse. Sometimes the owners are beginners/novices and I explain clearly as I work the horse whats happening, why I react as I do, etc, and then I ask them to try it.
old school - yep.
Some people have removed their horses because of my style, and that's ok too. Different strokes for different folks. But year in, year out the people who are happy owners after and know how to function with issues that may arise, far outweigh the ones who dislike my style.

[Horseman614]

I commented yesterday about the riders who have an English background either hunter jumper, dressage or cross country, who showed up at training with a horse that they cannot control. They cannot stand next to their horse with him not trying to walk away, bump into them, run them over, etc etc etc. I certainly do not think that this is the picture I see from all English background riders as I also believe in many of the principles of that are taught in classical riding techniques.

Interstingly enough, this is a response to one of the specific responses on this thread, and not a criticism of the type of riding one person or another does.

Specifically and unfortunately we all are branded as one of these or one of those, and it was the bashing of NH folks I was reading last night that made me write in the first place. I tried to remain nuetral but add to the discussion in a positive way. Today you might think I am leaning the NH direction. I strictly am not. I believe in training.... learning....oh- by the way, Watch this the next time you are at an english show. A rider gets off her horse outide the show ring and yells at mom to grab her horse, and tell her he ( the horse) needs food. He is then tied to the trailer with his head stuck into a hay bag. If he ate last night and he will eat tonight, he will be fine all day.

I ride for 8-10 hrs at a time at work once or twice a week, I ride for pleasure in the mountains of Wyoming. I ride hunting all fall season. I gather cows and use my horse at brandings when I need to. My horses work for a living and they like having a job. I am no better than anyone on this forum and no less. I have owned and ridden a pre-St.George qualified dressage horse until he died at 21. I will be forever in his debt for what lessons he taught me.

[rainechyldes]

I commented yesterday about the riders who have an English background either hunter jumper, dressage or cross country, who showed up at training with a horse that they cannot control. They cannot stand next to their horse with him not trying to walk away, bump into them, run them over, etc etc etc. I certainly do not think that this is the picture I see from all English background riders as I also believe in many of the principles of that are taught in classical riding techniques.

I think you nailed it right there.
It's not which is better classical/traditional NH.. etc.

The skill missing is plain ole horsemanship in any of these perhaps now a days.

How to teach the rider & the horse as a unit outside the ring.
How to stand quietly, how to stand still when a rider is mounting.
How to manage your horse when there aren't ribbons on the line.
etc..etc..etc..

[Foxtrot's]

You can only train if you are true to yourself - I'm a quiet, fairly passive person. I move around the horses steadily and am a quiet seated rider. Then along comes a Parelli wannabe - swooshing the rope all over the place, telling me I need a something or other to make the colt lead, telling me to get behind him a certain way. It is against my DNA
to rush or hurry a horse. No wonder my horses were confused. This person can ride the sluggish horses, I can quiet a hot horse, we are just not a match around horses.

But I have learned a lot from the likes of Hunt and Dorrance and have their books. I have not purchased a single piece of Parelli-type equipment nor have I felt I needed it. The horsemen I respect are just that, horsemen, who put the horse's interests first and don't have a label. Klimke comes to mind.

[Pely]

Another difference:

The NH person will spend the entire time talking about how wonderful they are and how wonderful their methods are while working with the horse. The entire process will be very much like an infomercial, and usually requires an audience of adoring middle aged women. ( and yes, I have seen this over and over)

The traditional or classical dressage trainer will quietly work with the horse while staying fully focused on the horse, and then talk with the owner about what they have done with the horse after the session.

[twofatponies]

Ah yes !! I would love to hear some other ideas on this topic. My argument goes like this..... "the market does, very strongly, favor McDonalds over another, theoretical, 'fast food' restaurant that may serve sprouts and asparagus on whole grain organic flat bread." In other words, people WANT crap. Cheap crap. Cheap crap they can get quickly and easily. They want to be satiated and satisfied with a "Dollar Menu." They do not want to hear "The Horsemanship Journey takes a Lifetime...." (One wonders, really, that it took some horseman so long to join in with the rest of the culture.)

Does anyone want to tell me I am wrong ?? I think I am right, but MUCH MORE IMPORTANTLY I would love to hear ideas of how to deal with this mentality on a daily basis within the horse industry.

We are swimming (uh - drowning really) in a 'you can have it now, your way' culture that is drenched in marketing, marketing, marketing, marketing, advertising, you get the idea.

I totally blame the consumer culture for creating the pressure that makes personality and prizes the most valueable assets of a Horse Trainer's business. But WHAT to do about it.......

I think it's just part of human nature - people are at different places in their lives, have different needs. You can't "fix" that. It's like being horrified that not everyone wants to go to college. Imagine if every last person on the planet had a PhD in Philosophy! Who would farm? Who would fix cars? Who would make shoes? Who would sell groceries?

There are folks who are driven by competitive needs to win, to have status by having fancy horses, by the desire for their horse to be their friend, or to have a horse that just does a job, and even some people who's relationship to the horse is sadly just about wanting to dominate something. You can't fix that. Even if you "fix" one person, there's another one born every second to take their place... :D

[Guilherme]

Another difference:

The NH person will spend the entire time talking about how wonderful they are and how wonderful their methods are while working with the horse. The entire process will be very much like an infomercial, and usually requires an audience of adoring middle aged women. ( and yes, I have seen this over and over)

The traditional or classical dressage trainer will quietly work with the horse while staying fully focused on the horse, and then talk with the owner about what they have done with the horse after the session.

Not always. :)

We engaged a guy a couple of years back who was very classical in his approach. As he worked the horse in our presence on the ground or under saddle (no real audience) he explained what he was doing if he could, but sometimes when dealing with a problem he'd go 100% to the problem then explain afterwards. He dealt the what the horse was presenting at any given moment and worked to get what he wanted, with commentary as appropriate.

I sometimes wonder if the "100% always on the horse and talk later" is just as much "schtick" as the constant running commentary. ;)

G.

[tkhawk]

Watch this the next time you are at an english show. A rider gets off her horse outide the show ring and yells at mom to grab her horse, and tell her he ( the horse) needs food. He is then tied to the trailer with his head stuck into a hay bag. If he ate last night and he will eat tonight, he will be fine all day.



That is just bad parenting though. I got into horses as an adult. But if I were a kid and my mom had to pay for lessons, shows and then give up her weekend to drive me and the horse to a show and I had the audacity to come out of the ring and yell and give her the reins-lets just say she would have made sure I never ever do that again.:winkgrin: That is there everywhere with the soccer moms/dads-people just spoil their kids rotten. Just almost a 180 from a generation or two ago when kids had to work and pull in their fair share from a very young age.

But one thing you have to admit is the Parelli genuis of marketing. To take something as horsemanship that has been around for centuries if not millenia and turn it around, brand it and become a millionare is no small feat. There are probably tons of people who ride better than them-but they sure know how to package it, appeal to a broad market, sell it-even in this market, they seem to be relatively unaffected..Pure genuis-purely on a marketing case today-not looking at the horses. As someone who runs a small business-and finally, finally-I seem to have cleared that initial phase and it looks like it can serve as an alternative to my job-that part of the Parellis is a good case study. Weather that model is good for the horses or your soul -that is a whole another can of worms!:p

[Ambrey]

Why should a horse have to starve all day because he'll survive it? I would survive it too, but I wouldn't particularly enjoy it. That's not natural horsemanship, it's just not caring whether your horse is happy or not.

[tkhawk]

Well I was just responding to the part where kids are a bit condescending to the parents-something I observe even back in India. Times are changing.Yeah-mine are as close to free feed as they get in the current barn.

[Ambrey]

But like you said, that has nothing to do with horsemanship ;) The only part of that whole comment that was horsemanship related had to do with mom letting the horse eat, as though giving the horse hay through the day (a practice proven to be good for the horse's health) is "spoiling" it.

[foursocks]

oh- by the way, Watch this the next time you are at an english show. A rider gets off her horse outide the show ring and yells at mom to grab her horse, and tell her he ( the horse) needs food. He is then tied to the trailer with his head stuck into a hay bag. If he ate last night and he will eat tonight, he will be fine all day.

Um, except that (as Ambrey notes) having something moving through its gut is good for a horse, since that is what their systems are designed to do. It's not spoiling the horse to keep it on a healthy eating program, particularly at a stressful event like a show. And the horse isn't going to think: "Heh heh- I'm so spoiled I can do ANYTHING!" It's going to think: "Oh, look- hay. Chew chew chew..."

My horse works for his living, too, but since I live in Maryland and don't own a ranch, and happen to have riding as my fun hobby, not my livelihood, he does it by going over large jumps, keeping me sane and making me laugh. What's wrong with that? :confused:

[XenophonKnows]

There are folks who are driven by competitive needs to win, to have status by having fancy horses, by the desire for their horse to be their friend, or to have a horse that just does a job, and even some people who's relationship to the horse is sadly just about wanting to dominate something. You can't fix that. Even if you "fix" one person, there's another one born every second to take their place... :D


Sorry, I think I was unclear. I do not want to 'fix' people, but I do want to know how to 'deal with' these people. Should you just let the over indulgent owner of the over weight 17hh show hunter drag her down the aisle ? What do you say to the undisciplined young horse owner who literally RUINS her young horse (to the point where she has to GIVE it away) with her ignorance, over indulgence, and lack of leadership as regards the horse ? What do you say to the owner who makes her horse sore with over blanketing (so many blankets the poor animal can't lift his neck !) ? The other boarder who insists on feeding your horse 'treats,' even after you have told them NOT to AND posted a sign on the horses stall ??

I could go on, of course, but you will often be branded MEAN for not allowing hand feeding, or not going along with the person who is undisciplined with their horse. Even to the point that the horse is dangerous to everyone in the area because it is so spoiled. (Saw a horse pitch a fit, scare itself, and break loose from the cross ties the other day because it felt it was due a treat and owner's pockets were empty:o)

These people are everywhere, so it is not really reasonable to just keep moving from barn to barn. DEATH or serious maiming is the only think that wake some people up. (Seriously, loosing a finger was not enough to reform a person I knew :()

So, if anyone out there is a professional diplomat, what do do with owners, trainers, grooms, etc. doing things so badly they endanger the public good ?