can anyone define "natural"

[donkeywoman]

I am totally puzzled as to why "natural horsemanship" is so called. Can anyone tell me?

I am honestly interested. Where and how did it acquire its name? - it is clearly no more natural than any other man-made system for training and using horses.

As soon as a horse is kept in captivity, its living conditions are, by definition UN natural, and as soon as it is accustomed to these conditions, its behaviour is unnatural, too.

Perhaps it ought to be renamed alternative horsemanship, or New-Age horsemanship, or something that gives a less misleading impression, but still differentiates it from the conventional horsemanship still written about in textbooks.

Explanations, anyone?

[chev]

Not sure I agree with all of what you say.

If we take Natural Horsemanship in it's broadest sense, it would be a system of training that utilises the horse's own language and behaviour systems. It does depend on how 'traditional' horsemanship is defined, but if we take the oldest, crudest methods of training and class them as traditional, then I don't think anyone could say that traditional horsemanship is no different (I'm thinking along the lines of the old methods of tying a horse up to saddle for the first time and so on).

I don't think that modern domestic horses behave less naturally than their feral counterparts, neccessarily. Obviously a horse that's stabled 24/7, unable to socialise for most of that time, and fed high amounts of cereal because it's in hard work is going to show more stereotypic behaviour, and be more susceptible to stress. But that's not unnatural behaviour. It's absolutel;y natural in reaction to those conditions.

Horses that live near-natural lives, out in herds most of the time, in bigger fields, generally exhibit very 'natural' behaviour. Most of mine live out all year, in herds, on very little in teh way of concentrated feed. Ok, so it doesn't compare exactly to living feral lives on the mountains, but it's near enough that their behaviour is pretty much identical to that observed in feral herds.

I think people are coming to realise that the nearer to that type of existance a horse's life is, the happier and more 'normal' they are. It follows, then, to try and keep training in teh same vein. Again, it's never going to be a natural process in the purist form; but we can make communication (which really forms the basis of all training) as near to natural as we can. Use the horse's own natural behaviour and reactions to get the behaviour you want, and you'll have more success than trying to 'master' the horse, and force him into it.

So... it stands to reason to call this way of thinking natural horsemanship. Other names include Intelligent Horsemanship - same kind of idea, same way of thinking. You could just as easily call it Humane Horsemanship, or Thinking Horsemanship, or any number of other labels.

I don't see it as so different to any branch of horsemanship that employs the same kind of theory - even what most people would call 'traditional' BHS training in the UK can actually be just as humane, natural, intelligent and so on depending on the person using it. I have a traditional instructor who is as 'savvy' as any NH practitioner. The term NH simply makes it clear (in theory) that the practitioner is prepared to communicate effectively, I guess.

Neither Alternative nor New Age really cover what this is. I think, in all honesty, that if you want to avoid confusion or semantics altogether, it should really be called Common Sense Horsemanship. That really sums it up.

[donkeywoman]

I have no intention of debating how DIFFERENT it is to any other form of horsemanship, that is not a concern or interest of mine. I am interested in how it got its name, when it is clearly neither more not less natural than any other type of horsemanship.

There is no way that anyone can even imagine that a human deliberately getting on to a horse's back is natural for the horse, and it is even less natural for the horse when we make ourselves comfortable by attaching things upon it for us to sit on, around it to ensure our security and behind it to pull us and our goods where we desire.

It is not natural for a horse to be gelded, to eat processed or preserved foods, to live on a limited acreage, to receive veterinary attention or to be groomed other than by herd members.

Despite this, it is still called natural horsemanship.

You said: Obviously a horse that's stabled 24/7, unable to socialise for most of that time, and fed high amounts of cereal because it's in hard work is going to show more stereotypic behaviour, and be more susceptible to stress. But that's not unnatural behaviour. It's absolutel;y natural in reaction to those conditions.

I know it's not unnatural in reaction to those conditions. But those conditions are in themselves profoundly unnatural - and increasingly, in any case, what used to be classified as mere stereotypies resulting from "unnatural conditions" are being found to have a physiological basis.


You said: Most of mine ...but it's near enough that their behaviour is pretty much identical to that observed in feral herds.

Sorry, wrong. Just for starters, do they have freedom for seasonal movement over many dozens of miles; does the stallion of the main herd have mares stolen by an interloper from a roving bachelor band, and eventually get driven from his mares and forced to join the bachelor band himself? What happens when they are attacked by large predators? What happens to the youngsters, both colts and fillies when they reach adolescence or sexual maturity? Is any parasite management carried out, or any foot care?

Just a few of the aspects which make even extensive horsekeeping profoundly unnatural.

The fact that mankind is managing horses - ie that horsemanship exists as a practice at all - is in itself unnatural. It is as if those who coined the phrase "natural horsemanship" had decided that they would now be the arbiters of what is and isn't natural, symbolically placing themselves above Mother Nature and redefining the meaning of words.

I agree that commonsense horse management is probably a better term than natural horsemanship, but would be concerned that selfcongratulatory, and implies that the generations who went before us were lacking in commonsense.

[Cheko]

Very interesting post Donkeywoman and well worth indepth thinking about.

[virtuallyhorses]

Hi Donkeywoman, to answer one of your questions. Natural Horse-man-ship the phrase was coined by Pat Parelli. It is the name of his starter book and has been picked up to describe all similar types of working with horses.

If you like I can grab his book and give you his reasons for coining the phrase.

[Drummers mum]

I think the subject of how natural, natural is has been debated to exhaustion but I beg to differ with you over when it is clearly neither more not less natural than any other type of horsemanship.
I believe myself to be a natural horse women and I keep my pony barefoot, he has 24 hour turnout, is not clipped and I do my utmost to keep his life as close to natural as I can (but I do ride him and that isn't natural)

I think the term probably came about to label the new ideals that were being seen towards horse ownership. In the past, the horse was a slave, used as a beast of burden but as a nation of animal lovers things soon had to change!

[eeyore]

i see "natural horsemanship" as creating the most natural living style for a horse as possible, except of course without setting them free into the wild!

soo that would include, rugless, shoeless, no hard-feed, a herd to live with, etc!

i would love to be able to supply all that but i admit we're only barefoot :o

[Naturally]

The history behind the term "natural horsemanship" is described by Dr RM Miller and Rick Lamb in their book, The Revolution in Horsemanship, and what it means to mankind as....

This is a little long, but please read on to the end.

Talking about the Californian Stockmen....

"He considered the horse a partner,a thinking and feeling creature that was a psychologically delicate as it was physically storng. The challenge and joy he found in riding came not from dominating a larger species but from building a relationship and taking it to the highest levels of finesse. Whether he realised it or not, he was an important link to the great horsemen of the past.

These men had no intention of starting a relvolution, of changing the world, or even of changing anyone else's mind. The stockmen had work to do and being good horsemen made it easier. They loved their horses and, for the sake of the horse, were willing to share what they had leanred with those who showed real interest.

It was when their philosophies and methods fell into the hands of gifted teachers and entrepreneurs in the 1980's that the revolution in horsemanship begain earnest: It was then that clinics began introducing these techniqes to the public, and systems of teaching that blended these techniques seamlessly with those of the great nonviolet horseman of the past began to emerge.

At the time, this way of working with horses had no particular name but it was easily distinguished from others by its commitment to seeeing the world through the horse's eyes, to using the nature of the hrose rather than fighting it, and to communicating with the hrose in ways he insticintively understood. Thus, one of its early students are young rodeo cowboy-turned-horse trainer, with horse savvy and a gift of the gab that would eventually take this approach to the far corners of the Earth, dubbed it "natural" horsemanship. The name stuck.

Purists may argue the accuracy of the term, claiming that nothing man does with a horse is truly natural for either of them. It matters not. Natural Horsemanship is the name by which the sytem of principles and techniques that revolutionized horsemanship is best known around the world today."


At a brilliant book and all people interested in Natural Horsemanship should read it.

Sorry for any typo's btw

[Mehitabel]

I agree that commonsense horse management is probably a better term than natural horsemanship, but would be concerned that selfcongratulatory, and implies that the generations who went before us were lacking in commonsense.


see, i find that many proponents of'NH" imply exactly that. i remember when monty roberts first got big in the UK, if i had a pound for every person who came up to me and said (i was breaking in ponies and rehabbing problem or abused ones at the time) 'so, everyone who diesn't do monty roberts beats their horses into submission, huh? you must be realy cruel', or words to that effect, i'd be rich.

i think we need to keep in mind the way a horse is designed - psychological need to chew, mental health problems caused by excessive stabling, need for company, etc, and make sure that we are informed by them. i'm not remotely interested in being called 'natural', i am 'traditional" and perfectly happy with it. doing my traditional exmans all this was taught, as was body language, workign with the horse and not against it, etc etc etc.

i do think that people need to realise that traditional does not always equal stabling all the tine for the hell of it, pumping full of cereal and hard feed, riding harshly and being full of gadgets. that's just bad management, whatever it's called.

[Francis Burton]

Naturally - thanks for taking the time to type that all in - very interesting!

Nothing to take issue with at all (it's not like me to take issue, is it? :rolleyes: ), except that it kind of implies the sparks of a different kind of horsemanship were started in and were unique to the States. I think they probably caught fire there, but embers have been quietly glowing in this country for decades.

[Naturally]

Yes, this was reffering to having started in the 70's, so that is 3.5 decades ago now, but the book itself refers right back to Xenaphon. It's fascinating. The very next chapter goes onto American vs. European, but it is more talking about riding styles.

[Francis Burton]

Does the book mention any British natural trainers? (Either way, it sound like I need to read it. :) )

[chev]

You said: Most of mine ...but it's near enough that their behaviour is pretty much identical to that observed in feral herds.

Sorry, wrong. Just for starters, do they have freedom for seasonal movement over many dozens of miles; does the stallion of the main herd have mares stolen by an interloper from a roving bachelor band, and eventually get driven from his mares and forced to join the bachelor band himself? What happens when they are attacked by large predators? What happens to the youngsters, both colts and fillies when they reach adolescence or sexual maturity? Is any parasite management carried out, or any foot care?

No - not over many miles (unless we're talking about the hill ponies, for example - who do indeed have many miles over which to roam. So there are in fact plenty of domestictaed ponies in teh UK who still have the freedom to roam) but they do have many acres. Yes, I realise there is a big difference; but the behaviour observed, even over smaller distances, is more than just similar to that observed in herds that travel miles.

Parasite management is not a behaviour. Ok, it's not strictly natural either, (although it does occur in feral herds; the way they graze over many miles does, in fact, control parasites to a large extent) but I don't think that natural really needs to mean an absolute carbon copy of a feral horse's life.

I agree that commonsense horse management is probably a better term than natural horsemanship, but would be concerned that selfcongratulatory, and implies that the generations who went before us were lacking in commonsense.

Which just highlights the whole difficulty with naming branches of horsemanship. 'Intelligent Horsemanship' - does that then imply the rest of us are as thick as mud when it comes to horsemanship? 'Alternative' - the problem there, is to what? 'New Age' - just implies that everything else is old hat, and this is something new - which to be honest, I really don't think it is.

I think the important thing to realise is that it is nothing new. Calling it common sense would only imply that those who went before us lacked that if it was something new. Calling it natural is only a problem when you start to define natural as having to encompass everything that is natural - so ending up on the 'riding itself is not natural' path.

And if I'm honest, the person I most respect when it comes to horses, who uses no violence or coersion to speak of, and who teaches everything from the point of view of how I can help the horse, has as traditional a background as anyone could. Her opinion is that she doesn't really care what people call her methods; a horse doesn't give a toss what you call the method you use to communicate, only that you understand him.

[Wally]

Worms still infect wild hill ponies, Some of the wild ones I have taken in and wormed have had poos which would make your hair stand on end. Ascarids like telegraph poles! :eek: and lots of them.

Ferral/wild horses die from bad feet and teeth, FULL STOP.

I get tired of the evangelical OTT manner by which some converts to "natural horsemanship" whether it be Pat Parelli, Strasser, Monty Roberts or whoever, I get tired of the hard sell and the marketing.

If I am going to ask a horse to do my bidding the least I can do is treat him as an individual. If he's happy without shoes fine, if not shoe him appropriately. If he hangs about asking to come into the shed let him in, and if he shoots in and dozes off who am I to argue that it is against his nature, if he's happy and relaxed so am I.

If he likes being out, but is feeling the cold, get him a rug. If his teeth hurt him rasp them, keep his worms under control. Give him as much out door space as you can manage (to my mind the most imortant)

There are lots of symbiotic relationships in nature, man and animals have lots, who is to say it is unnatural, the fact it goes on on the planet Earth must mean nature has intended it?????? There are Honey badgers and some birds who exploit each other.

Next time I am battling my way up into the hill, in a force 12, with the wind and rain taking the skin off my face, to look for some ponies/sheep/cows, to take them foor or to show them back down the hill to food and shelter, ask your self

WHO IS EXPLOITING WHOM????? There is nothing natural about me scrambling about in the hill in a storm, my natural environment is in the house in front of the fire with a large whisky (my staple diet) in my hand! :rolleyes: ;) ;)

[StephA]

Brilliant post Wally!! My thought exactly but just didnt know how to put it. You did it for me!!

WHO IS EXPLOITING WHOM????? There is nothing natural about me scrambling about in the hill in a storm, my natural environment is in the house in front of the fire with a large whisky (my staple diet) in my hand!

LOVE it!!

S x

[hApPiNeSs]

Yep, good post Wally. :D

My pony is out all the time, and although it is natural, she is thouroughly miserable in the dead of winter without her rug on.

I think natural horsemanship is about understanding your horses needs, whatever they may be, so the way he is kept is natural for HIM, not just a certain method of horse management

[LindaAd]

I agree, that's a brilliant picture you paint, Wally, and your horses are very lucky.

The point that people are making is that keeping horses will never be natural, and natural isn't necessarily best. I'm sure my toothless old Tristan, rejected long ago by the herd, wouldn't thank me for turning him out rugless to starve naturally.

But it's just one of these expressions you can't really unpick. Like Organic Farming. You couldn't possibly have inorganic farming, but everyone knows roughly what the expression means even though it would be impossible to provide a definition.

Whether or not Pat Parelli invented the expression natural horsemanship, he certainly doesn't own it, and a quick look round the internet shows that it's used in a whole range of ways that have nothing to do with Parelli.

I get the feeling that maybe these methods emerged in the US as a reaction against the rough methods that cowboys used - Naturally suggests something like that in her post, and so does Monty Roberts in his writing. I think a lot of them do. But here in the UK there's a long, long tradition of working with horses as partners - Drummer's Mum said <<In the past, the horse was a slave, used as a beast of burden but as a nation of animal lovers things soon had to change>> but that's not strictly true:
Look at the history of racing, of hunting, of farm horses, even pit ponies and so on - kindness to horses and "horseman's secret" methods have been around for as long as anyone can remember. Indeed, I can remember as a child in pony club, a very long time ago, being taught to put the pony's comfort before your own ...

Linda

[hackedoff]

As others have said -for me it's allowing for as much normal horse behaviours within the boundaries of human safety and the necessities of having a horse that is fit to ride. It's the rejection of management and handling/training of the horse that has as its priority human convenience and ego.
I too live as 'naturally' as possible in that I eat a clean diet, exercise and avoid unecessary medications but I dont live in a cave or hunt my prey with a spear! Same with ned- a warm stable and a cosy rug can be very welcome on occasions.

[Harry Hobbes]

I get the feeling that maybe these methods emerged in the US as a reaction against the rough methods that cowboys used... Actually, what emerged is the marketing of successful methods to the area of greatest demand (i.e., area of greatest need).

These modern methods were (with few exceptions) derived in the USA BY cowboys as a response to the unknowledgeable methods used by non-cowboys. In other words, cowboys (like Roberts, the Dorrance brothers, Hunt, et al) and rodeo bronc riders (like Parelli, Reis, Josh Lyons, et al) are leveraging their working knowledge derived from the cowboy culture, and making a lot of money selling the methods derived from the cowboy culture to non-cowboys. Trace the origins of the current natural horsemanship craze, and one encounters cowboys of one flavor or another as the source of the progressive methods promoted today.

The fact is that natural horsemanship finds such a large market today because the of the very large percentage of horse ownership has shifted to non-cowboys relative to decades past; that is, it found and area of demand (need) with non-cowboys, and that is where the demand is being served.

In those decades past, it was not profitable to market something that people (i.e., cowboys and ranchers) already knew how to do (and to a large extent, still know how to do). This is also why the commercial natural horsemen are not doing the bulk of their business with today's real cowboys and ranchers - that market already has the know-how. To substantiate this fact, review the commercial natural horsemen Internet-based schedules, and you'll find that for the most part, they are not spending their time in Roundup, Montana; Miles City, Montana; or Lovell, Wyoming. They are taking their product to non-cowboys in the cities. (This is not to disregard the use of professional natural horsemen in training the remudas of such outfits as the 6666; but I suspect that those efforts are more akin to implementing quality assurance into the development of the remuda in an efficient manner.)

Today the total number of horses owned/used by cowboys pales in comparison to the total number owned/used and broken by non-cowboys. (Yes, I wrote "broken"; "colt-starting" - the natural horsemanship term - is derived from cowboys.)

The commercial natural horseman are selling solutions (i.e., their methods), and the demand for their solutions are found where the greatest problems exist; and that ain't with cowboys.

If one spends a little time around the traditional (i.e., the real) cowboy and ranch culture, one will find that to a very great extent, cowboys take much better care of their horses, and train them better relative to non-cowboys; they have to: the horse is the partner in their livelihood. Notwithstanding the pervasive disinformation, prejudice, and outright propaganda to the contrary, by and large their horses are treated better, raised healthier, worked healthier, have fewer problems, and are allowed to be horses. It is a joy to be around ranch (cowboy) horses; not so stabled horses.

Despite the pervasive campaign of cultural cleansing directed against cowboys, ranchers, and Western (Ranching/Rodeo) Culture, cowboys and ranchers remain the most effective current model of partnering between the horse and man. Parelli, Brannaman, and many others learned this "at the knee" of a cowboy.

If you appreciate the product (natural horsemanship methods), why not appreciate the producers?

Best regards,
Harry

[chev]

Thanks Harry. That's cleared up a few misconceptions I had about cowboy culture (courtesy, I admit, of Monty Roberts) and the idea of it being traditional.

Certainly in the UK traditional horsemanship is not by definition cruel, abusive or unthinking. I second what Linda has to say about Pony Club teachings, and also add that although my background is almost exclusively BHS and Pony Club, one of the things that we were taught as being most important was that we think about things from teh horse's point of view. I remember also being taught rudimentary 'horse language' by a BHS instructor during backing; the whole process was taken at the horse's pace, and we were shown what signs to look for and how to help the horse along the way.

Certainly there have been terrible things done here in the name of horsemanship in the past (thinking of the kind of treatment that Anna Sewell wrote in protest about) but even then, it was not the only way - there have always been horsemen who worked with the horse, not against it.

When Monty Roberts brought join-up to the UK, I'd never seen that done. We had, however, been using aspects of 'Natural Horsemanship' for years in other guises - moving a horse's feet for control, walking down a horse that wouldn't catch, and so on.

I think that's what really bugs the people who were already treating horses with compassion, thinking things through, working in partnership - using natural methods, in fact, but for the fact that they weren't labelled - when the whole NH method is re-introduced, but with a fresh new label, new packaging, and we're told that our traditional methods are not NH. It's not about not appreciating the people who've brought this to everyone; more that there are a huge number of people who have been doing this for years already, and who do feel insulted by the way some NH followers treat them.

[hackedoff]

there are a huge number of people who have been doing this for years already, and who do feel insulted by the way some NH followers treat them.
aah, but I've always said - I have never insulted anyone whose opinion I care for ;)

[chev]

aah, but I've always said - I have never insulted anyone whose opinion I care for ;)

I like that! :D :D

[nix]

Andy Beck's horse behaviour site has some quite good articles on "horse whispering" origins and "natural horsemanship" :) . http://www.equine-behavior.com

[Yann]

Let's not forget that despite all the good practice 'new' or 'old' with horses that there's still a world of ignorance and misunderstanding out there. You don't have to go very far or look very hard to find it. Go to a local show for example.

NH is just a convenient catch all term, most people who fall under the umbrella wouldn't tend to use it to describe what they do anyway. I do think that how good a traditional education you get depends very much on how good a traditional horse person is doing the teaching. I certainly didn't have a clue about body language or the importance of being able to move the feet on the ground until I started to read books and websites.

As has been pointed out it isn't natural per se, other than in the fact that you're trying to train and work with the horse's instinctive behaviour rather than disregarding it and giving the horse human attributes it doesn't possess.

NH training and NH horse husbandry are two different things as well, though a lot of people confuse the two. Nothing wrong with any of it so long as the horse doesn't suffer. But none of it is truly natural as has been pointed out. I can't see we'd ever actually want it to be would we?

[Shiny McShine]

I am totally puzzled as to why "natural horsemanship" is so called. Can anyone tell me?

I am honestly interested. Where and how did it acquire its name? - it is clearly no more natural than any other man-made system for training and using horses.

As soon as a horse is kept in captivity, its living conditions are, by definition UN natural, and as soon as it is accustomed to these conditions, its behaviour is unnatural, too.

Perhaps it ought to be renamed alternative horsemanship, or New-Age horsemanship, or something that gives a less misleading impression, but still differentiates it from the conventional horsemanship still written about in textbooks.

Explanations, anyone?

If we are talking definitions of words here then I would suggest you pick up a dictionary as your first line of action. Natural has more than one definition. You may be suprised that "natural" can refer to things that are derived from nature, though they may not be COMPLETELY natural. Which is what one may argue "Natural Horsemanship" to be.


Regards,
Shiny.

[chev]

I do think that how good a traditional education you get depends very much on how good a traditional horse person is doing the teaching. I certainly didn't have a clue about body language or the importance of being able to move the feet on the ground until I started to read books and websites.

Absolutely. But the same is true of NH too.

Monty had an NH trainer work with her yearlling... and we all know what happened there. It took a 'traditional' breeder with no training or qualifications other than years of working with his cobs to straighten out the issues she was left with.

NH teaching does not neccessarily mean you'll get a good education.

[LindaAd]

If we are talking definitions of words here then I would suggest you pick up a dictionary as your first line of action. Natural has more than one definition. You may be suprised that "natural" can refer to things that are derived from nature, though they may not be COMPLETELY natural. Which is what one may argue "Natural Horsemanship" to be.


I think you can probably assume that most of us are familiar with the dictionary or everyday meaning of the word, Shiny - that's why the discussion started. As far as I'm concerned the expression "natural horsemanship" is just a label now for a certain approach, but it's all about words really. After all, the tradional - or "unnatural"? - methods all relied on horses' willingness to co-operate, to respect a leader, and to move away from pressure, even if those things weren't made explicit.

And it's already been said, more than once, once you keep horses and ride them, it's unnatural. It isn't natural for horses to be kept in confined spaces, fed out of buckets and ridden ... After all, a bridle is unnatural - why should a nosband be more natural than a bit? Why should trimming feet be more natural than putting on shoes?

And, just following this line of thought, although keeping horses and asking them to work for us isn't natural if you think of how wild horses live, when you think that this is what horses have been bred for over thousands of years, maybe it's all natural after all?

Linda

[chev]

And, just following this line of thought, although keeping horses and asking them to work for us isn't natural if you think of how wild horses live, when you think that this is what horses have been bred for over thousands of years, maybe it's all natural after all?

Linda

When you consider the differences between today's mainly man-made, domesticated horse, and what was truly the original wild horse, that's a very good point.

[Yann]

Absolutely. But the same is true of NH too.

Monty had an NH trainer work with her yearlling... and we all know what happened there. It took a 'traditional' breeder with no training or qualifications other than years of working with his cobs to straighten out the issues she was left with.

NH teaching does not neccessarily mean you'll get a good education.

Quite so, we're into the ideas vs. what people do with them thing again. Just because something is 'NH' doesn't necessarily mean it's going to be kinder or more sympathetic, even if you'd generally hope and expect that it might be :D