Mark Rashid - gotta read him

[virtuallyhorses]

I picked up a Mark Rashid book the other day "Horses Never Lie", in the beginning I was a bit sceptical of the story-telling style of the book but I have just sped through it.

It was hard to put down and has made me really think about my riding, my horse and our relationship.

If anyone's considering NH reading, please let me give my heartiest recommendation for Mark Rashid. Reading this one book has made me reconsider many of the NH principles (of alpha horse mentality) and begin on the trail of better communication without domination.

[Kerry's Partner]

Thanks for the recommendation. I'd have been equally sceptical. The domination:avoid domination concept is very gripping - especially in relation to humans:humans because that describes how we often behave around each other. It's understandable, therefore, that as humans who ride horses, the concept fascinates us too, i.e. re humans:horses.

[Crystal Fire]

I spectated a clinic this year - it is absolutely fascinating and I've used some of the ideas I picked up with my friend's "rescues."

Thought provoking stuff...

[AmandaW]

When my little boy went in to have his tonsils out, I took 'Considering the Horse' in to read. I couldn't put it down. I had finished it by the next day!
His other two books will definitely be on my Christmas list
Amanda

[ros]

I loved his books too - they really do give you a different perspective to all this "Natural Horsemanship" stuff.

However, I was extremely disappointed when I viewed the website pictures of his clinics. There seemed to be an awful lot of huge riders on very young horses and precious little comment from Mr Rashid on the obvious unsuitability of the partnerships. It rather spoiled the dream. Maybe he should stick to writing?

[Crystal Fire]

I'm going to have a look at the wbsite. However, no, I don't think he should stick to writing books - the clinics I've watched had nothing going on that was in any way bad for the horse. I have twice now seen him explain to owners that he thought their horse had a physical problem, and give them a refund to spend on going away and sorting it out.

[virtuallyhorses]

Hi Ros,

Please explain - I've just been through about 20 of the clinic reports and there was only a couple of horses under 10 years and none of the owners looked too big for the horse (did I view a different clinc?)

Can you post the URL that you were viewing?

The only one I can see that might fit this description is "Austin, TX 02/2000 Helen and Arora" http://www.markrashid.com/CTHPicturesAustinTXHelen_0200.html - Arora is a young (5yr old) Icelandic. I'm sure all the Icelandic owners out there will tell you that they are quite capable of happily carrying adult riders and at 5 years I don't think she's too young to be beginning her ridden training.

The very first report I viewed (randomly) showed a horse that Mark identified as being sore from a poorly fitting saddle..."Austin, TX 02/2000 Amy and Rio" He loaned a more suitable saddle for the clinic and the pair look very happy. http://www.markrashid.com/CTHPicturesAustinTXAmy_0200.html

And the last one I viewed was of a young horse being longlined with just a saddle on http://www.markrashid.com/CTHPicturesFlagstaffAZDeeJustin_072000.html - this is the comment "Dee finished up the clinic by ground driving Justin with the saddle on. Since Justin is still so young, Dee is going to give him some time to continue maturing both physically and mentally - but they sure got off to a good start!" To me this indicates that Mark is certainly considering how young this horse is! (and the owner is not too big for this horse)


http://www.markrashid.com/CP_FlagstaffAZDeeOdellJustin11_072000.jpg

[ros]

The website has been changes since I originally looked at it, and there were probably twice the number of clinics reported back then.

Of the ones I flicked through again tonight I remember some of the cases. Marilyn and Prince at Rogersville didn't impress me much (after that I forgot to note the clinics, sorry). Dakota, the 2-year old Paint looked pretty immature; Walter's Scarlett, although though she was a year older than Dakota at 3, looked even more immature and I certainly wouldn't have been riding her if she were mine. But I'm afraid I would have told big fat Liz to get off 2-year old Willow there and then. Mark said she had "...trouble with impulsion..." If that doesn't say it all I don't know what does!

[KarinUS]

Reading this one book has made me reconsider many of the NH principles (of alpha horse mentality) and begin on the trail of better communication without domination.
I totally agree. I love his approach and have read a couple of his books.
I was lucky enough to have come across them right when I got my own horse. I have tried to use his approach right from the start and I feel I have a very harmonious (sp?) relationship with my horse.
I am glad you started this thread. I think a lot of people on NR would enjoy his books and philosophy.
Not only is it friendlier to the horse, I think it is also less stressful on the owner/rider.

:)

[virtuallyhorses]

Originally posted by ros
But I'm afraid I would have told big fat Liz to get off 2-year old Willow there and then.

OK, see that one now - harsh call, Willow looks pretty well built but she is only a 2 year old so I'd be inclined to agree with you on that one. Reading between the lines it sounds like you don't think that fat people should be allowed to ride (since Marilyn and Prince doesn't mention a horse's age) but that's been argued to death elsewhere, so I won't go there....

The others don't really concern me too much, the text indicates that all these horses are just being started and may only have 2 or 3 rides under their belts. Scarlett for instance has only been ridden once a week and I can't comment on whether she looks immature or not since I'm not very familiar with the foxtrotter. Dakota looks like a big strapping chap to me and the comments about getting a chiropracter before going on indicate that they are concerned for the horse's health.

I guess I'm taking the view that all these people turned up to a clinic with these young horses to ensure that they get a good start to their training and I can't condemn tha, there's nothing to indicate that these youngsters are being asked to do any more than they are capable of. At what point should they start? 6 when they're fully mature? Then you've got a 6 year unhandled horse...?

here's the links
http://www.markrashid.com/CTHPicturesFlagstaffAZShorty_072000.html

http://www.markrashid.com/CTHPicturesFlagstaffAZWalter_072000.html

http://www.markrashid.com/CTHPicturesFlagstaffAZLiz_072000.html

[ros]

No Viv - I don't think that fat people shouldn't be allowed to ride. Some of the fat people I know are very good riders indeed: others are pretty blooming awful, just like some thin people! I agree some of the pics still available are borderline and I could swing either way, and I know horses tend to be started earlier in the US than here - that's not the issue.

What I object to is very heavy people on very young horses, however well-built they appear, and I think it's dangerous for people like Mark Rashid to condone this kind of situation publicly by allowing it to happen at his own clinics. I'm afraid there are bound to be times when "considering the horse" might just mean upsetting the owner! At the end of the day, if you're very heavy (and that doesn't always mean fat) you must find a horse that will carry your weight - and no, that doesn't always mean big, but it certainly doesn't mean two years old.

I've heard the odd story from people who have attended Mark Rashid clinics that would seem to indicate that he isn't perfect and doesn't have all the answers by a long chalk - who does? However I still enjoy his books very much, and I still think he has a much nicer approach to a lot of the problems we experience - on paper at least.

[Kerry's Partner]

OK I admit I haven't read the book BUT, I admire Ros for sticking to the issue of "the horse". I'm sure it is the case that not one of us is perfect. I think it is brilliant that there are people around who can critique what goes on rather than just be critical or overly defensive - in this way progress is made imho. I've been interested and enjoyed reading the thread.

[Sue Carnell]

I've got the Mark Rashid books Sandra. Very much 'It shouldn't happen to a horse trainer' on the James Herriot sort of lines, though you're expected to learn by reading between the lines. I find some of that part a bit grating, but on the whole enjoyed the books. I found them very easy reading.

I can lend them to you when I next see you.

Have you read Horses are Made to be Horses which was written from the notes and writings of Franz Mairinger after his death? I really enjoyed that book, as a sort of intermediate book. Not so light, but you should learn, like Mark Rashid, not so heavy as the serious tomes. You might recognise some of it. ;)

Btw. I think any rider is too heavy for a two year old, so a heavy rider really is too heavy and I agree with Ros.

Sue Carnell
sue@eclipse.co.uk

[virtuallyhorses]

Good points all!

Sorry Ros, if I put you on the spot there and your point about riding style being more important than weight is a good one. Always appreciate your input.

One of the reasons I love coming to this forum is to be able to exchange ideas with people with different experiences and views (eyes) from my own. I find it really valuable to read others opinions, especially if they challenge my current thinking! (and sometimes to challenge others)

[KarlR]

Just for my 2 pence worth (about 3 cents! ;)) I really enjoyed all three books, but that last one most of all. Good (not so) common sense.

I do agree about some of the pictures though. Whilst I recognise that international values are different, I believe that the "Liz and Willow" pictures (http://www.markrashid.com/CTHPicturesFlagstaffAZLiz_072000.html) are of grave concern. 2 years is really too young, and is far too young for a rider that appears to be extremely heavy.

[ros]

Viv - no worries. There isn't always an easy way to say what you believe, I'm afraid - sometimes you know you're treading on thin ice! Wish everyone was as open-minded as you.

Karl - I think it was your fault I started reading Mark Rashid in the first place! I haven't read No. 3 yet but I still intend to :O)

[Kerry's Partner]

Thanks Sue. I'd love to read the books so would love to borrow them. I'll be sending you an update on Kerry later today.

[KarlR]

Originally posted by ros
Karl - I think it was your fault I started reading Mark Rashid in the first place! I haven't read No. 3 yet but I still intend to :O) [/B]

Uh oh! me and my big mouth! :eek:

Glad you enjoyed them anyway.

[Bebe]

Doesn't anyone else think that the long lining pics (the one posted as a pic and the others of Willow which KarlR gave the link to) are showing a practice that is incredibly dangerous? Leaving a lunge line trailing in the way that is shown in these pics would be dangerous, but to have two lines trailing so low is idiotic! It wouldn't take much for the horse to move the wrong way even without spooking and get caught up in the ropes.

Surely if these horses are wearing saddles, it wouldn't be much to either thread the ropes through the stirrups (could easily be done in the first instance) or put a roller on and use that. Surely safety of the handler and horse are all part and parcel of considering the horse?

[Kerry's Partner]

What strikes me most about the pic Bebe is that the horse looks so "down/sad" but if an opinion from someone with 2 minutes experience at long-reining is of any use at all, I agree with what you say.

[Sue Carnell]

It is ropes not lunge-lines, so they're heavier and part of the training is to teach the horses to accept ropes flapping and flicking about around their legs/hindquarters etc. Lighter lunge-lines aren't nearly so easy to control and don't fall in the same way, so would be likely to get tangled and be harder to catch up again if something did happen. If the horse does step over a rope, then it's easy to drop it lower and flick it back from under their feet, it's easy to flick around and direct it to where you want with a bit of practise. Some of the cues are given with the ropes on the hocks and lower legs too. It's a different kind of long-lining to the classical type and usually begun in an enclosed area, such as a round-pen. There should be some preparation first, accustoming the horse to standing still whilst ropes are flapped and flicked over and around him. The ropes are often held loose to begin with, to allow the trainer to walk around the horse, which helps with turns and exaggerate the aids, such as an open rein. Later they are often threaded through the stirrups.

When starting normal long-reining with lunge-lines though, I usually have the lunge-reins loose (not through stirrups) too, but I wouldn't let them drop so low and would usually start a lot nearer the horse, but to one side and with a helper. Later I'd thread them through tied stirrups, to keep them higher. Further away, I'd usually take it to double rein lunging and not long rein in the same way as with ropes.

Sue Carnell
sue@eclipse.co.uk

[Kerry's Partner]

Yes, even with just two minutes past experience I understand what you're saying Sue. I hadn't looked closely enough at the pic and I can understand your explanation, especially re the difference between ropes and conventional lines.

Thanks for the enlightenment.

[Bebe]

I long rein and lunge with ropes too (climbing rope, thanks Yann!) and still wouldn't want them flopping about like that.

I can wrap my horse in a rope and spin her out of it, if she stands on her leadrope she stops dead, etc but I still wouldn't want to long rein in a way that makes it easy to get a front leg, or even hind, caught over a rope. The horse could trip even if it didn't get upset about it. You can secure the first half of the rope out of the way without long reining or lunging on a contact. It just seems stupid not to take a very simple safety precaution, especially if these are young horses that are unused to the exercise (it's not clear if they're just new to being ridden or new to all of it). I suppose you could call me nitpicky but I'm a bit anal about safety sometimes.

[Sue Carnell]

Hi Bebe,

I think you'll find most of the 'natural' type of people work ropes in the same way as demonstrated on the Mark Rashid website, unless I saw different pics. Mike Peace did this kind of work with my horse when he did a demo at Heather's and there are plenty of pics of flapping ropes, loose looping ropes and ropes on the ground in the Parelli NH book. I don't think it's dangerous, or stupid, but personal choice, so we'll have to agree to differ I think. :)

Sue Carnell
sue@eclipse.co.uk

[Bebe]

I think we will have to agree to disagree on this point.

I don't disagree with the method of long reining, just think that one thing could be improved as a safety factor. I do have to say that I think a lot of the NH instructors forgoe some safety features, i.e. lots of them don't wear helmets. Whilst this is a personal choice for them, no horse is so well trained that you can totaly rule out a fall, trip, or other accident which could have you landing on your head.

I do a lot of NH work with my mare, she's one of the few on the yard that can be ground tied (didnt' actually have to teach her that one though), stands on command, will stand at the field gate whilst I open it and then walk through and turn around on command whilst I close it, brings herself in for breakfast and tea (and puts herself back if I open the field gate), etc, etc. She's very smart (also an alpha/dominant mare in the field) and NH type work suits her temperament as well as being the kindest way to train. Just thought I'd add that to show that I'm not an anti-NH person at all, I just disagree with some small aspects of it. That's what NH is about though, being able to take the parts you like and which suit your horse and using them, whilst keeping the others in reserve for the next horse you have to deal with in case the first ones don't work.

Amanda

[virtuallyhorses]

Kerrys Partner - I thought he looks relaxed - which is great for a young horse. His ear is still listening, in a nice relaxed way and he's heading for long-and-low. :)

I see both points of view in the 'flapping ropes' issues discussion.

On the one hand there is 'safety first' and on the other there is 'desensitisation'. The issue with always doing the 'right thing' is that the horse never gets used to any of the things that can go wrong, which I think is what many of the NH trainers are aiming for.

For instance, if I rugged up my horse the 'safe' way (as per the pony club books), I would carefully place the folded blanket over my horses withers and then unfold it along his quarters etc etc so that he wasn't alarmed by it. In truth I biff a blanket in his direction and sort it out once its hanging over his back. (I defy anyone to fold a canvas rug nicely - they weigh a ton for a start ;) )

All horses here get this sort of 'unsafe' treatment but its not an instant process, its something that is taught to young horses. Which is something that the photos can't tell us - has the horse been shown the ropes, taught what to do if a rope is tangled, how long for, what is its reaction etc etc etc

I must admit that I am equally 'unsafe' when my horse is tied, I leave him (a no no) with a longish rope while he feeds outside, he frequently gets a front leg over it BUT he knows not to panic (because we've worked on this frequently) and indeed I will often ask him to 'work it out' for himself which he is learning to do, knowing that I will help him if its too tough. (Basically he's been taught to stand still if he's stuck, and he's learning to 'pick up' a hoof, walk forward or back depending on the pressure of the rope around a leg)

Could he still get frightened and hurt himself, yes certainly and I would be devastated at my stupidity but if I don't work with this in a safe environment, his chances of panicking when this happens by accident (and I think we all agree that no matter how careful you are sometimes these things happen) are much greater aren't they?

[Bev Heron]

Could someone tell me what the differences are, if any, between Parelli and Rashid training?

I went to my first meeting of the local Parelli group last night--nice people-- and joined (only $10), even tho I don't own a horse, but I am a little put off by all the games, levels, rules, expense.

Can one be electic w/ all these NH techniques and just use them without getting ordained?

[virtuallyhorses]

In short Bev, Rashid does not believe in using the 'Alpha' Horse theory of horsemanship - which others such as Pat Parelli use.

PP & many others believe that you must become the dominant or Alpha horse in your relationship and your horse becomes the submissive, happy partner. That's what all the 'round pen' work is about - driving the horse to show that you're the leader.

Rashid believes that a) horses aren't so stupid as to believe that a human will ever be a horse, no less the Alpha horse and b) that the Alpha horse is generally so unpopular (albeit dominant) with the rest of the herd that you'd really rather not be the Alpha anyway.

Can you pick and choose - I (and many others here) say yes although PP says no - if you'd like a site that discusses being more eclectic in NH try Kicking back ranch (http://www.kbrhorse.net/pag/train.html) orNatural Horse Supply (http://www.naturalhorsesupply.com/training.shtml) - although these are basically an 'alpha horse' theory sites, KBR is closer to Mark Rashid as they have what is known as a 'learn-learn' philosophy of giving the horse choices.

[Bev Heron]

Viv -- Thanks so much for the explanation. I pasted it into my permanent files.

Yesterday I did some Parelli work with someone's horse. I was awestruck by the subtlety and interconnection of it all and impressed by the time the owner took w/ the horse to train her. I felt a thrill when the horse responded to me in the "games" but also felt uncomfortable with her being so exquisitely trained to my cues. It didn't feel natural.

I keep thinking of the stories I've read in She Rides Without Wings and Living With HorsePower! where the horse sometimes takes care of the person. I wonder if a PNH-dominated horse would ever really take care of me in an emergency, under the circumstances described in those books. Doesn't it seem that they would never learn to think for themselves or assume the leadership role in times of danger?

[Kerry's Partner]

Whilst yet again I haven't read the books (and I will admit this time this is a quite deliberate omission!!) - I would have to say that in my own experience my horse does look after me too - VERY special situations but she does do this!!!!

[Bev Heron]

Originally posted by Kerry's Partner
Whilst yet again I haven't read the books (and I will admit this time this is a quite deliberate omission!!) - I would have to say that in my own experience my horse does look after me too - VERY special situations but she does do this!!!!

KP,

Do you mean you have avoided the Mark Rashid books or the 2 I mentioned? I'd be curious to know why. I'm reading everything I can get my hands on in order to recreate a childhood that missed horses. I wonder if I should avoid certain prejudices.

Can you give an example of how your horse looks after you? And are you saying that she did this (even) given her NH training? Thanks.

[Kerry's Partner]

Thanks for your questions and I'll do my best to answer them. If I leave anything out please feel free to remind me that I've done this.

To give you some background - in my childhood I have a little bit of a horsey background - just a little bit - and all on "borrowed" ponies and horses. In my adult life (and occupation) I have been well and truly versed both in "scientific" enquiry and in "intuitive - but expert, "qualitative" enquiry.

I STARTED to read horsey stuff when I was considering buying my first horse (oh dear in middle-age or even late middle-age to some I suppose). I also started (and may well get back to it at sometime) an equine degree course. However, my own (and very subjective) view is that there is very little around at all which informs us about the "behaviour" of horses (and their riders) with the backing of real, "scientific", evidence. There are far far too many generalisations around imo - and also imo this does not at all reflect what I believe should exist since humans have owned and ridden horses for so long. We probably know more (scientifically) about most other "threatened" species in the jungle as far as I can tell.

I've tried to "study" the subject but I get so frustrated because most of what's written is either really anecdotal or just isn't referenced so people can check it out!!

SO, I decided that the study effort wasn't worth it (that's for me personally I mean). So I guess that means I that usually what I say when I post things sounds at odds with the opinions of others but I can't help that. I just, I suppose, say it as it is - in other words tell people of my experience with my own horse and cannot at all pretend to "know" anything.

It's not that I don't admire the knowledge and skill that people like Mike Peace and Rashid etc impart because of their experience - I would never ever disagree that real experts do exist because of their experience in their "subject". BUT I'm just trying to keep an open mind (which at the moment means listening and reading about the experiences of individuals and their own horses on EE since I haven't time to do anything else at the moment). I do, however believe that our equines deserve that those in a position to do so should embark on some real scientific enquiry as well.

SO, it is because of my own (and my own horse's) experience and development that I can vouch for Mike Peace and Sue Carnell and Heather - Kerry and I have experienced so much development because of our contact with them and, whilst I've tried to really "learn" more, I still feel far too inexperienced and "unread" to form any other views at the moment (the "unread" reflecting the views I expressed above about what I, personally, believe is a lack of scientific enquiry).

Oh dear I don't think I've been much help have I?

[Kerry's Partner]

Sorry I forgot to say that Kerry has NEVER had NP training. She's been helped by Mike Peace and Sue Carnell as I have. BUT, I'd say she looks after me at certain crucial times because she "WANTS" to do that. No-one has "taught" her to do this.

I suppose an example of this would be when I'm feeling particularly vulnerable and hopeless - she shows me that I'm not -by "insisting" that we do some lateral work for example (which I tell myself I cannot ask for "correctly"). So I ask and she does something truly brilliant and it makes me feel good.

I'd swear she also understands without doubt that I have a hearing deficit - she uses her body language to tell me that there are things around which I can't hear and I believe she does this deliberately.

Oh dear I guess I sound crazy again so I'll go now.

[virtuallyhorses]

Hi Bev, we sound like we're in very similar territory :) I too devour books of all sorts and have attended as many clinics and seminars as I can so that I get as diverse a range of opinions as I can. I then make up my mind based on what 'fits' with me and my horse.

I like your point regarding the horse looking after you and strangely it is something that I have been mulling over myself - how consistent is consistent ?

I have one example, the one that gave me pause first: This winter has been very wet here - mud nearly up to you knees at times. We have to traverse a steep muddy bank and pugged field to the gate. In our (me and my horse) training, I've taught my horse that when led he should follow me. He may be at any distance so long as the lead is slack but his head may not pass my shoulder (he cannot be the leader). I am very consistent with this and he is now a very polite and well mannered horse on the lead rope.

But in the paddock I have thrown these rules out. When slogging through the mud I allow him to take whatever path or position is required. On the hill he may need to 'run' ahead of me - this should be a big no-no yet it still works and he shows his respect for me even more! We never have anything but a slack rope, after he has pulled himself up the mud a few steps, he turns his head and waits for me to slog up to him. I thank him and we continue on - the same downhill. Either of us may slide but are always careful to not knock the other. Yet, I notice the other horses\owners barging\yanking\being run over as if its 'everyone for themselves' - and these are nice horses!

How can this be! I give up my Alpha position and yet gain more respect! Moreover I am inconsistent yet this causes no confusion, anywhere that walking is obtainable without struggle we return to our normal order.

When using many of the Alpha horse techniques such as round-penning I feel like I am being coarse and impolite to this horse. Although he will respond in the 'accepted' way, he does not do so because he respects me more, however using far quieter techniques which allow him choice without necessarily an immediate consequence (like a lap around me), he tends to choose what I want anyway - the only way I can describe these interactions is that this horse appreciates manners (now I sound like the wierdo ;) - that's ok I can handle it :) ) and domination does not equate to politeness.

Bev, just to clarify Rashid doesn't say you become a sook or allow your horse to 'get away with things' - I just felt that there was more subtelty and more individuality allowed for the horse. My advice for anyone is have a read and make up your own mind - taking another point of view is never wasted :)

[Bev Heron]

Viv,

Thanks for your last message and the links to Kick Back Ranch and Natural Horse Supply (http://www.naturalhorsesupply.com/training.shtml). Just when I was despairing of "ruining" my horse by trying this stuff on my own, I read the paragraph on the latter site that said,

Don’t be afraid of making mistakes. Not only does your horse learn from them, but so do you.

But I guess the question still is, can one try on one's own without going to clinics?

[ros]

I think horses do appreciate manners. I think it's unfair of humans to assume the right to be treated with respect without giving it back. That's why I like Mike Peace - he goes for the 50/50 relationship, and you CAN have an equal partnership. If it's not equal, it's not a real partnership.

I was watching a girl practising her PNH on a very screwed up horse a couple of weeks ago. She was in his face the whole time, and he was never off the hook. Any attempt on his part to get close to her was met with two or three yanks on the "Be Nice" headcollar. Then she had the nerve to say to the poor chap "learn to trust!" I'm not slagging off PNH here - just the way it's sometimes used by people who don't really understand what this stuff is all about. She expected everything and gave absolutely nothing.

As for horses looking after you, I think the classic example is horses that look after children. And don't they just! I've seen it any number of times - my own horses and other people's.

[Bev Heron]

Another wrinkle wrt my last post:

I don't own a horse. I'm about to lease "in about 4-6 weeks, when your canter is stronger, " --S.H., my teacher.

Do you suppose it's OK to try some NH w/ a leased horse? Only on the ground or under saddle, too? Will I "ruin" him for other riders? -- I'm only going to be 1/2 leasing, so presumably he'll have another frequent flier, and he's occasionally used for lessons too.

[virtuallyhorses]

I can't see what would be wrong with that. If you take the name 'natural horsemanship' out of the equation, you are simply teaching your horse something - leading, whatever you decide - how you attempt that should not be an issue.

PS My eye was caught by the 'mistakes' quote too! ;) Makes one feel so relieved doesn't it!

[Bebe]

VirtuallyHorses, I do the exact same thing with my horse in winter. I take the leadrope off and let my horse make her own way to the field gate. Without fail she will stop about 6' away from it and wait to be clipped back on before we go out. On the walk down she might be 15' in front of me, several feet behind, way out to the side of me, etc but she always waits for me at the gate. I can even put the headcollar on (without leadrope, the headcollar is her signal that I want her to come in as I often just visit her in the field without bringing her in) and she'll walk down to the gate whilst I faff about with another horses rug or something.

My horse has done a tiny bit of Parelli, some Kelly Marks type foundation work (not join-up, she doesn't need it), some clicker training and then just some stuff that we make up ourselves. I think we have an equal relationship in most things but there are times when one or other of us takes up the role of leader.

For example, if there's a big scary tractor coming at us, Bebe looks to me to take the lead and show her what to do. But, if I'm bringing her in and the rest of the herd gallop flat out at us, she takes the lead and protects me from them by shielding me as they come past and pulling faces to get them to give us a wide berth. There are other examples but those are the two that happen most frequently.

The comment about dominant horses not having many friends threw me a little. We have a dominant gelding in our field and he's never short on company. My mare is also quite dominant in the field (she yields to the gelding but none of the others) and she can pull a face and move another mare one minute, and be mutual grooming with her the next. Horses don't hold grudges like we do and from what I've seen it's quite common for a horse to be kicked by another one in one moment, and then be stood like best buds the next. Also, the kicking and fighting happens for the most part when dominance is being established. Once it is, the alpha horse doesn't have to repeat that behaviour on a regular basis. That's just my observations but it seems that the whole dominant horse thing is thrown about a lot but no-one really 100% understands it.

[HorsesNaturally]

Originally posted by ros

I was watching a girl practising her PNH on a very screwed up horse a couple of weeks ago. She was in his face the whole time, and he was never off the hook. Any attempt on his part to get close to her was met with two or three yanks on the "Be Nice" headcollar. Then she had the nerve to say to the poor chap "learn to trust!"


Ros, if she was using the "Be Nice" halter it wasn't Parelli's methods she was practising (PNH) it was most likely Monty's Methods.
On a different track is it just me or a LITTLE bit of knowledge a REALLY dangerous thing? Especially when it comes to "Natural Horse Man Ship"!

[ros]

Sorry - she seems to have done a bit of this and a bit of that, and she went to a Gary Withering (?) demo not long ago, etc. etc. etc. And the headcollar was just one of a plethora of control headcollars, I thought she said a Be Nice but it might have been something else.

Point is, yes, I think a little bit of knowledge is definitely a dangerous thing, and what I saw simply confirmed that for me. That poor little horse was trying his damndest although he was very frightened, and he just couldn't please her whatever he did.

[Sue Carnell]

Sadly that happens whatever method Ros. :(

I thought you might be talking about someone I know too, until you said 'he'. Her horse is a mare. From what I've seen so far, in most instances the common denominator is fear and it's not just the horse that's afraid. Not only that, it's the fear that inspires many of these people to try alternative/different methods and it's not usually the methods that are at fault, but the interpretation and often the hurry to get the end result, without considering the start. It wouldn't matter which method, as fearful people will often switch from one to the other without really understanding any and usually laying the blame squarely at the horse's feet, which are normally walking all over them. Fearfully, but interpreted as dominating. For some horses a little knowledge can be enough, especially if the knowledge is progressing with support, but for others it can be too much and then honesty is the best policy, I think.

Sue Carnell
sue@eclipse.co.uk

[virtuallyhorses]

Hi Bebe, yes I most often 'lead' my horse without halter or leadrope when in the paddocks too. I tend to call him to the gate 50% of the time and go meet him 50%, but we sometimes have to walk through other paddocks on the way out.

With regards to dominance I think it relates to how 'aggressive' that alpha horse is. All the horses make way for him, and its not that he's a total outcast or anything, but he's not the 'popular horse' in the paddock. All horses have a place and 'make faces' to express their opinions to others but that doesn't make them the alpha.

Yes, you're right there is no grudge held, and I'm not talking about kicking or biting as this decreases with a stable herd. However, simply by constantly making other horses yield to him, an alpha horse in effect makes them stay away. He may have a friend or friends but they are subordinate friends and must still yield to him (or her) If you're constantly getting out of the way of someone wouldn't you start avoiding him?

[ros]

That's exactly what was happening, Sue - fear interpreted as dominance. The horse was supposedly bargy, disrespectful - the object was to show him who was boss. In actual fact he was pretty traumatised - terribly tense and jumpy; he had a severe saddle phobia, but he was tense all the time and not just when the saddle appeared. At the same time he was extremely intelligent and sensitive (Section D) and deep down a very sweet horse, I think. Lovely face.

It made me angry that there was no praise for him, whatever he did. No word, no relaxation of the pressure, nothing to tell him he'd done the right thing. Just a swift pat at the end of the session, and then yet another yank on the headcollar when he took that as an invitation to move a bit closer!

His rider/handler spouted all the NH phrases with great conviction and authority - that was the most frightening thing. I really wouldn't classify what I saw as Natural Horsemanship, and it's people like this that give it a bad name.

[Bebe]

Virtuallyhorses, good point, I hadn't thought of it like that. Actually, we have a gelding in our herd that isn't alpha with anyone and spends a lot of time with his "mates" (there are 2 horses and a pony owned by the same person and they tend to roam around in a group, I've heard them referred to as the Thugs or strangely the Anoraks!). Anyway, he's not particularly liked by any of the other horses and he does seem to spend an awful lot of time moving everyone around even though he's never successfully challenged the herd leader. Even my mare will get out of his way as he can be quite nasty with his hind legs.

When he isn't moving the others around he tends to stay on the outskirts of the herd with his two stable mates. From what I've observed he has little interaction with the other horses although the two geldings he is stabled with (and form the gang) do have play sessions with the other geldings. He's lovely with people and on the ground though but is one of the few horses in the field that makes my stomach churn with dread if he has to be moved away from the gate to get my horse out.

[cvb]

with regard to "being in front=leading", I've got Klaus Ferdinand Hempfling's Dancing With Horses - he uses an approach based on Spanish training from what I can tell.

He talks about working horses from different positions around the horses (a bit like the Parelli zones on the body). And working from in front is not the only 'leadership' position, according to his approach.

If I remember right (I've loaned the book to my mother in UK, so can't check), working beside the horse is more submissive, but working from behind is also a strong position.

It makes sense to me - but you might need to see the book rather than my poor description to understand and decide for yourself. A horse has to trust you to let you into their vulnerable zone. Also if you watch horses, a dominant horse will not just lead, they will also drive other horses in front of them.

So by giving up the 'lead' position at the front, you are not necessarily giving up 'leadership', especially if the horse is still following your intent and direction (although the detailed path is one they chose themselves).

(I haven't got round to KFH's "Body Language" video yet, but its on my Christmas list ! )

[Kerry's Partner]

I do wonder whether people often make this mistake with Welshies and they are so very very sensitive and so get very very frightened bless them.

The problem may be that, when they're unsure, or frightened, people interpret their body language incorrectly - they think their body language is that of power and threat. For example, a vet took one look at my Kerry - in the first second of his approach to her in her stable) when I first bought her and his automatic statement (addressed to a trainee vet who he'd brought with him) on seeing her (and she was frightened imo) was "Well, we've got a power merchant here then haven't we". It was interesting to note by the way that the trainee vet was incredibly frightened OF Kerry - so much so that he stood about six feet OUTSIDE of her stable. I don't think anything would have persuaded him to actually go in there - yet she is SUCH a gem and so loving. All she ever wants is to KNOW that she's a good girl - and why is that I wonder. She was reportedly about 11 when I bought her!!!!!!!!

[saddlesore]

Originally posted by HorsesNaturally
On a different track is it just me or a LITTLE bit of knowledge a REALLY dangerous thing? Especially when it comes to "Natural Horse Man Ship"!
that all depends on how it is applied. people claiming to be "experts" who possess little knowledge in their "field of expertise" are really dangerous. but people with a little knowledge who realise there is so much more to learn and accept the humble fact that there are no real "experts", just people with different levels of experience, are not so dangerous...

[Kerry's Partner]

I like your name by the way!! I would agree with what you've said. I hope I fit into the category of one of those who will freely admit to not knowing but wanting to know more.

However, I think there is at least one other category of "person" about which relfects the other concerns people have mentioned. I mean those who don't know but - because they have a problem with their horse (or their relationship with their horse, or their inability (yet) to handle their horse etc. etc. etc.) and don't know how to deal with "this". They search for help and catch on to this thing called natural horsemanship and TRY to apply it "come what may" in their desperation to get things right. BUT they haven't been taught, have they, to really understand what their horse is trying to tell them????

I think that some of the problems we read about stem from this. What they are taught is probably quite OK and above board - but the teachers need to take some responsibility surely for the "inexperience" of some of their "listeners" and their poor horses.

[virtuallyhorses]

Hi CVB - I've got the KFH book too! Interesting isn't it! :)

With regard to the leading thing - notice though that being in the traditional 'lead' position beside the horse (esp the head) - ie pony club 'this is how you lead' you are not the leader.

This is the position I was indicating - understand the leader\driver positions are more dominant :)

[cvb]

Yes, I never did quite get the PC way - if you are by their shoulder you can not see through them (when you are little) and have this big head waving around in front of you. Perhaps they forget how little children can be ??

However I can see that walking out in front might be difficult for a child as well.

But somewhere in between seems to work a treat ! Our 'big' horse (compared to me as a child) was quite happy to toddle along with his head dropped to my level and next to me.

[Bev Heron]

I'm so glad to read that it's OK to walk in front of a horse. I've always been taught to lead no further forward than his eye.

Last week I had to grab a horse from a ranch 1 1/2 miles away and lead him back on a narrow forest trail. I struggled to stay at his side, but I finally I was unable to walk thru the dense brush. So I got out in front of him. He, an old schoolmaster, followed beautifully, keeping a constant distance with a slack lead rope, even going downhill.

[Crystal Fire]

Just having a read. Ros's posts made me feel so sad for a number of reasons. First, the poor horse not getting time to relax and some kindness - she obviously isn't doing Parelli, where the "friendly" game is the most important.
And - yanking it about with a pressure halter - pressure halters a complete no-no in PNH. Not used in this way in Monty methods, so she's obviously not doing that either...
I saw Gary Witheford at Equus last year and thought he looked interesting. I was told he started off as a Parelli student, but has obviously put his own slant and experience.
(Don't people realise how dangerous pressure halters are in the wrong hands??).
And finally, sad that she's obviously tried all these different people that she thinks can help her get more "natural" and missed the plot.
No wonder the words natural horsemanshipbring out such strong reactions.
Mind you, the word dressage does it to me - because of some of the things I see in ordinary yards, lessons and shows...

[mikka]

VirtuallyHorses, thanks for the Mark Rashid book referral. I've just finished it, having "sped" through it as you did (yeah, the 'aw shucks' tone is a wee obstacle). I found myself reverse-reverse anthropomorphizing. The horse-happy element will kick in once I've got the interesting human elements out of the way. His descriptions of bullying dominants made me think only of our politicians and how their leadership campaigns herd us into thoughtless subservience, and how it would be wonderful if we could choose our leaders from amongst those who passively recruit. Indeed, this book has taught me what my gut has always said - don't follow anyone who's TOO keen to lead.

[mikka]

Yikes! I've just read the post in its entirety. Sorry for going off on a tangent. Always in the clouds.

Mikka

[Peace]

I'm always amazed at what subtle creatures horses are, compared to us humans.

I think most of us, seeing a horse who can move other horses around, would say that one is the herd "leader." But, after watching Quanah's group, I'm not so sure. I think a "leader," in the wild, might be the horse who decides the herd's "well-being issues," like where the group should graze, when they should run from predators, etc.

The "dominant" gelding in Quanah's group does none of these things, because, while he can certainly move horses around, they mostly are moving as far away from him as they can get (except for one poor mare this guy likes to "capture" and keep with him). In fact, he's sometimes an outright hazard to his mates. The other day, I was waiting at the gate for his owner to leave the field, and Quanah was standing there with me. The gelding became so absorbed in moving Quanah that he almost crushed his owner between the two of them: luckily, Quanah decided to move away, but it was with a disgusted little flap of the tail that quite clearly expressed his opinion of the "dominant" horse's IQ!;)

I don't think I've picked out the real "alpha" horse in his group yet, because when this horse is not in the field, the rest of the horses are all in a little knot, mutually grooming or grazing together, and I can't see who decides when to move or change activities.

Fascinating to watch, though!:) I think I'll order a copy of "Horses Never Lie" - I really liked "Considering the Horse," but for some reason my bookstore doesn't have this latest book in stock!

[virtuallyhorses]

Originally posted by mikka
Yikes! I've just read the post in its entirety. Sorry for going off on a tangent. Always in the clouds.
Mikka

As we say here in the Antipodes 'no worries'

I think this thread has gone off on several tangents but the discussion has been so interesting and thoughtful, its one I keep coming back on to check out :)

Originally posted by mikka
...His descriptions of bullying dominants made me think only of our politicians and how their leadership campaigns herd us into thoughtless subservience...

I agree with you! In many arenas of life the only question one needs to ask to check whether someone should have something is 'do you want...? ' e.g. gun licensing laws - single question on the license form "Do you want a gun?" if the answer is yes - sorry, you are not the sort of person we want running around with a loaded weapon..... ;)

[Kerry's Partner]

Just thought I'd let you all know that, thanks to Sue loaning it to me, I've now read one of Mark Rashid's books: "A good horse is never a bad colour."

The most important thing I learned by reading it is that I'm not crazy - everything I've tried to do for my horse has been "right" and she has not been "wrong" ever!!!!!!!!!!!! I need to ask Sue about two different things in it but otherwise thank goodness for his perspective and especially for his acknowledgement in relation to "the old man" - not many people do that kind of thing these days.

The second most important thing I learned was to remember about this thing called "time" - I've never really been in a hurry - but have suffered, in the past, at the hands of those who immediately spur you on to achieve something else the very second, yes the very second, you manage to get something right for the first time. Many do this to the horses too. As a human being I'd say for goodness sake I need to feel that over and over again in order to "know" it - so what about the poor horses then?????????

[ros]

Alois Podhajsky said exactly that, Sandra - when you're training a horse, one of the most important things to keep reminding yourself is "I have time".

[Kerry's Partner]

I think you should post that quote everywhere Ros. Thank you.

[Sue Carnell]

Ah yes, but podhasky's writing isn't so easy on the eye as Mark Rashid and he's more suitable for the dressage than the NH forum. :)

I remember too Podhasky's quote that one should take the lightest aid possible and aim to make it lighter. Very true. However, I also remember interpreting that as meaning to take the lightest aid you can possibly think of and aim to make that lighter, which led me to using wishy washy, washing line reins and barely a whisper of a leg aid, with horses that simply weren't at that level and a rider (me) who certainly wasn't. It really means to take the lightest aid possible at the moment, which might be Parelli's phase 4 and aim to make that a lighter one.

I was very confused by a lot of classical stuff I read, I found it really only understandable in the parts I was already doing and totally confusing in the parts I wasn't. I think some of the NH stuff is very similar in that respect. I've seen a lot of people re-reading Tom Dorrance's stuff and only knowing what he means now that they're doing it themselves.

Sue
sue@eclipse.co.uk

[Kerry's Partner]

That's why you suggested I read Mark Rashid Sue!!!!!!!! (Still can't do smilies yet sorry).

Anyway as far as I'm concerned that's because you're a brilliant trainer - you knew what we needed and provided it for us - so thank you very much from both of us.

I'll ask you my two questions when I see you - they're about the foal almost as soon as it came into our world, and about the ..oh I can't remember - I'll have to read it again!!

[ros]

Yes, I know what you mean, Sue, but in the same vein don't you think you can make the same kind of mistakes when studying any philosophy? This is where people like you come in - to keep us on the straight and narrow ;) .

Mark Rashid is definitely readable, and Podhajsky perhaps less so: however I would argue that Podhajsky in his classical way was also just as much a Natural Horseman as Roberts, Rashid, Dorrance... I feel it's more about attitude, and I would hope no-one could criticise Podhajsky on that score?

[Kerry's Partner]

I'm not afraid of, or unable to understand "high brow" stuff - well not in my own field of expertise - which is non-horsey.

It's for this reason I often wonder - and I know you all get a bit mad at me for saying things like this - what IS "natural horsemanship"?

You see to me the relative beginner - all horsemanship should be natural. Yes I know it isn't. I'm just saying that I think it should be. AND to me, having been introduced to it by Sue, that's why Mark Rashid's book is so very important.

[Sue Carnell]

Of course you can make the same mistakes Ros, that's what I said? :eek: Lol.

No, I wouldn't agree that Podhajsky is a 'natural horseman' in the same sense. The horses at the SRS are kept gleamingly clean, aren't worked loose or in round-pens in the same way with the same understanding, or looking for the same things and they're kept stalled 24/7. In the under saddle training sense some of what they do is similar, as it's what works and what works in the best interest of horse, rider and/or eventual outcome. In that respect some of what they're looking for is similar, but it's also very different in my view.

I would say that the 'natural' horsemen and the 'classical' horsemen are looking for different things in different ways and they also promote in different ways. I don't believe it is the same, even though there are similarities. I respect them all as great horsemen (and some women), but I can't agree that they're really the same. I think the differences are greater than the similarities, especially if I was a horse.

As I've not seen anyone else saying the same thing, I'll probably now be slaughtered. :)

Sue
sue@eclipse.co.uk

[Sue Carnell]

Kerry's Partner asks: "what is Natural Horsemanship"

Well, if you're going for the copyrighted, trademarked version, it's Parelli's. :)

If you mean what I know you really mean, you know the answer I'll give you! Ask Kerry, she'll tell you and if you're asking her, you're doing it.. :D

Sue Carnell
sue@eclipse.co.uk

[Kerry's Partner]

Thank GGGGGoodness for that I was getting a bit worried you know.

Yep - as far as Kerry is concerned she is HAPPY and she tells me so. When she is troubled and has problems (which is quite different to her being a problem horse) she also tells me so.

I think that's what you mean.

Thanks from both of us.

Sandra

[ros]

Yes, sorry Sue, I think we crossed in the post!!!!!

My original intention wasn't to compare classical with "Natural". It was just Sandra's comment about time that brought the quote to mind.

I accept, of course, that the SRS horses are kept in completely UNnatural conditions - that goes without saying. However, I would still argue that *in the context of his situation and his time* Podhajsky did his best for his horses. He loved them, respected and understood them as individuals, and was humble enough to regarded them as his teachers. That MUST be a part of the philosophy of Natural Horsmanship, and it's a point of view that seems to be sadly lacking in most modern-day traditional methods of "horsemanship".

I'm sure Podhajsky understood that his horses' conditions were less than perfect, because he draws attention to the fact that they coped well with them and were obedient and, for the most part, happy and trusting despite their lot; I like to think that had he had the choice, he would have given them a far more natural lifestyle than he was in reality able to afford them. So really I would still argue that he was far closer in spirit, at least, to the Natural Horseman than some nowadays who would claim to be so. I like the chap, and titles can be such a nebulous thing.

[Kerry's Partner]

p.s. Of course I forgot to mention that if I didn't listen, Kerry would either stop telling me - or, in fact, she might get dubbed as the all too familiar "problem horse"!!!!!!

[virtuallyhorses]

Well its certainly a term that raises some people's hackles ;) I don't think that it necessarily has to be a certain type of NH, perhaps its just good horsemanship? and since many of us don't come into daily contact with good horsemen\women then we need these books\clinics\terms and methods to show us an alternative way to what I think I always compare\contrast it to, what I would term 'Pony Club' or perhaps BHS horsemanship.

To me the difference is NH is a 'conversation' between horse and rider\human whereas the PC\BHS way has always appeared to be very one-way, human tells horse what to do and any ideas or opinions offered by the horse are to be overridden.

Now before anyone gets upset, I am not saying that the official PC or BHS 'pony care' books or methods are bad in themselves. I am more contrasting to what is perhaps the harsh and loud set of that group- you know the 'kick and whack him set', won't load - whack him with a broom, won't go -boot him, don't make allowance for the horse's fears or previous training - make him do it - teach him who's boss.

[Kerry's Partner]

So well done for being originator of this, very popular, thread.

Sandra