Dominance in training

[Francis Burton]

I am posting this because I believe there are still issues in relation to the place of dominance in NH training (not just Parelli) which haven't been fully explored. I also wanted to respond to the suggestion that I hadn't encountered aggressive horses, a point which is relevant to the discussion.

If moderators feel that it is inappropriate to continue a closed thread in this way, I can reword my message so as not to refer to the previous thread or to Parelli (the latter seems to be an aggravating factor in such threads). It would be disappointing if no discussion of dominance and its use was permitted on this forum. In any case, I strive, as I believe Jacquie has, to be polite and constructive, and to avoid snide, inflammatory or ad hominem remarks.

Perhaps they inherited the problems like I did? I took on TB because no one else would - I wanted to give him a final chance.
Fair enough, thanks for clarifying.

If you re-read my post you'll note that I didn't describe most horses as life threating, I said most PNH supporters had similar problems with their horses as I did. It was only when I attempted the passive leadership approach it became life threatening.
So do you think the passive leadership approach doesn't work, or was it your application (or interpretation) of it that didn't work? Would Mark Rashid have failed with your horse?

I hope your good fortune continues and you never have to experience an aggressive or very dominant horse because if you did it would probably change your whole outlook (as it did mine) on the alpha method of NH. ;)
But I have experienced many aggressive (for various reasons) and dominant horses over the years - some (a minority) of the stallions I have worked with were like that. In fact, if I had only ever had to deal with relatively unaggressive, submissive horses I may not have come to realise the limitations of approaches based on the concept of dominance! You see, I used to believe in the whole dominance story, long before Pat Parelli was widely known in UK, mainly because I had read about the dominance hierarchy in the ethology literature and all seemed very logical and relevant. That primed me to look out for it and to keep it in mind when interacting with horses. Over time the aggressive, confrontational element became progressively less as I discovered that it could actually cause undesirable behaviour and was making developing good relationships harder than it needed to be. The more I developed a feel, the more it felt as if I was going against the grain when I emulated dominance. At one stage this element had virtually disappeared from my repertoire, although I still used certain manoevres -- such as getting a horse to be still and relaxed while resting his chin on my shoulder, using measured restraint -- which I naively described as "dominating gently". (That was the phrase I actually used.) I now understand that this had nothing to do with social dominance, that it was teaching the horse something else entirely. Since then I have debunked the myth of dominance, as promulgated by large parts of NH, to my own satisfaction at least. I don't think I would go back now. Why would I, when what I do works so well for me?

I'm not saying that PNH doesn't work, because clearly it does. But I worry about the cost of its success. I wonder whether it succeeds in spite of playing dominance games rather than because of them; and I wonder whether some parts may be right for the wrong reasons. However, I also admit my knowledge and understanding of PNH is likely to be far from complete. (I only recently read through the older L1 and L2 pack booklets. Aside from the emphasis on dominance, there was much to admire - clearly the programme has been well thought out with great attention to detail.)

I would be very interested to see how Pat Parelli (and PNH) deals with aggressive stallions. It seems to me that if the principle of dominance is followed to the letter, it could lead to some extremely dangerous situations. What happens if a stallion fights back? Is the conflict/pressure escalated until he eventually gives up and backs down? How is the relationship mended afterwards? How is liking restored (assuming it existed before and is not considered irrelevant)?

[cvb]

Francis

I didn't wade in to the previous conversation as it was active enough without me :p

But I do wonder how much a discussion like this requires a very detailed in depth understanding of both principles and practice (on a wide range of approaches) when most of us are fumbling in the fog with just what we ourselves practice ?

For example, the number of people I have talked to, observed etc who see natural horsemanship as the "gentle" option (like your "gentle domination).. and then see one of the main people practicing it and are taken aback with the strength of some of the actions they use.

I hate to use Parelli as an example purely because of the emotions it seems to start here - but its the one I know most about at this stage - I know of people who have watched a good practioner using "phase 4" on a horse and really being surprised, and realising that they themselves never get close to that level of strength of action. (BTW I don't think thats a problem personally as I think us mere mortals need to stay well within our comfort zone on things like this - we just don't have the skills and competence the experts do..)

I've also heard people talk about respect, talk about needing to have their horse "there" for them all the time - yet they don't seem to have thought through that scenario fully.

I tend towards the passive leadership style, towards "non-dominant" approaches because that is what suits me best. And because I am happier with it, I am better at using it than a style that I would be less comfortable about. As a result it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy because I get better results - so its a better approach right ?! ;)

And I can identify with "passive leaders" cos I have one in my field. But if people haven't seen it, it is surely going to be more difficult for them to visualise, concieve etc ?

I wonder whether one of the reasons we end up with these heated, unresolved discussions is because we simply don't HAVE the broad, but deep, understanding we would all need to be able to discuss, resolve, agree (even if agreeing to differ :p ). Well I can't speak for the others but I certainly feel that way....

[Tootsie4U]

Perhaps to benefit threads like this; a clear definition of passive leadership vs dominance is prerequisite. Also, examples should be provided. What I may call PL might not be what you agree it to be. <edit> I guess that is kinda what cvb is getting at in her post above.

It seems to me that if the principle of dominance is followed to the letter, it could lead to some extremely dangerous situations. What happens if a stallion fights back? Is the conflict/pressure escalated until he eventually gives up and backs down? How is the relationship mended afterwards? How is liking restored (assuming it existed before and is not considered irrelevant)?

My horse was gelded late so has retained quite a bit of the stallion tendencies. He has fought back, as you put it, with the Parelli work I've done (I have a video to prove it, I think :rolleyes: ). I even had him tested to see if he is a rig. The results were 'inconclusive'.

He fights ANY authority (passive or dominant) and has become a master at reading humans and knowing exactly what buttons to try to push.

Like Jacquie, I 'saved' him three days shy of slaughter or sale. He came to me oppressed, misunderstood and mistreated. He wasn't fearful but if I had to describe his demeanor I'd say he looked down on humans with condemnation. In his opinion, no human was worth his time. His actions attested that strongly.

For him, I had to proove my dominance in order to gain his respect. In other words, I had to proove to him that I was a worthy leader, worthy of his obedience and respect. He was a true alpha (out of necessity) and with horses like that they dont obligingly just give up their rank willingly or easily.

I approached his training (after months of trial and error) with passive leadership when I could, but more times than not, he required strict handling.

If you look at us now, it is obvious that there is a relationship between the two of us. Friends have commented on it. Bystanders as well. The horse is as hooked onto me as you can get. He loves his work and will readily leave his pile of hay or feed to greet me at the gate. I never have to worry about catching him either. A simple whistle and he comes running. I'd say that the dominant role I had to play didnt adversely affect our relationship at all. In fact, I'd go as far to say it would have been impossible to get where we are without it. Im not experienced and haven't been doing the horse thing for very long so if there is a better way, Im open to it. I dont close my mind to anything that could make our relationship even better.

By the way, now, I employ passive leadership almost 100% of the time. Since the boundaries have been declared and our relationship established, there is no need for me to utilizie the alpha dominant position.

[KarinUS]

I haven't seen the previous thread so hopefully I am not going off on a tangent here but I believe that most people don't really understand Passive Leadership and confuse it with no leadership, etc.
My own interpretation of Passive Leadership is more easily summarized by Gincy Bucklin's philosophies like her article on Authority and Respect (http://www.xpos.com/ofonemind/archives/authresp.html). (yep, it's the one I already posted 3 or 4 times because it explains so well what Passive Leadership is to me)
And yes, I've been accused of being 'lucky' in regards to my horses. Nobody bothers to give you any credit for a quiet and well-thought out approach and its results. That's just how it goes... ;)

[Tootsie4U]

And yes, I've been accused of being 'lucky' in regards to my horses. Nobody bothers to give you any credit for a quiet and well-thought out approach and its results. That's just how it goes... ;)

Nievity. Surely your track record with all three speaks loudly enough! I bet the person who called you lucky doesn't regard you with the same outlook now!

[Shadowlark]

Great article Karin! I had missed the other million posts ;)

There is something to be said for a humans presence - the way they hold and carry themselves naturaly that just has that effect! If you are quiet confident and composed you pass that on. Wether you call that passive leadership or not.. some people have it and some don't! Like timing - some people have it.. some don't. There is also something to be said for experience in all this as well! It's one thing for me to take my own horse through different things and "wow" people. Entirely another when I haul a "sale" horse out of a paddock likely who has been "ruined" and put it through it's paces. Especially when you ride some place like I do.. where more bit.. more spur and more junk is a way of life.

I don't care how much you read, or what philosophy you follow some things just can't be taught. Although that is a big part of why I like Chris Irwin's works - They deal with posture and that sort of thing - that some people just DO naturaly. Reading his things helped me to understand why XYZ worked for me and not for someone else on the same horse.. or why I was struggling with certain things that should have been easy given my horse and my relationship.

Generally I just follow my positive but not permissive attitude from dog training and skip all the dominance thoughts all togther :) (dog people are THE WORST for gettinng hung up on dominance) In return my animals know that we work in a give and take relationship and are all happy and willing companions who enjoy work and learning.

You have to give respect.. to get respect.

Shauna

[Shadowlark]

After rereading Francis's post I had some more thoughts..

I have been a proffesional dog trainer for the last 8 years and have seen a major shift in thoughts and ideas. You will see how all these things can equate to horses very fast..

When I first started.. it was all about the monks of new skeet.. Dominance.. Alpha.. Rolling shaking and growling where common practice! Everyone need to dominate thier dog! Problems began to arise as people who didn't REALLY understand dog Ethology began to do these things with dogs.. Dogs became fearful.. and started biting people!! Alpha rolling a dog was dangerous - IS DANGEROUS.
And a MAJOR point had been missed. No Alpha ROLLS another dog. The submissive dog CHOOSES to roll over for her. There is a serious differnce there!! So in THINKING we understood dog behaviour dogs began retaliating to this treatment and biting! Monks of new Skeet actually retracted the staements made in those first books - but they continue to be printed and followed! Trainers still advocate these methods - despite the DANGER these methods put thier students in!! Misunderstanding of "natural" training methods resulted in a lot of serious injuries adn a LOT of dogs being put down for becoming fear agressive!!
We also saw these dominant rules posted everywhere.. you must eat before your dog, you must progress out of doors before your dog, the dog isn't allowed on the furniture.. you must be dominant! And yes - that stuff works! Why? Because in most cases the dog in question has never had any rules in it's life and suddenly rules are implemented under the pretense of dominance! Dogs respond to the new rules and begin to respect the human more as they set boundaries. All of which could have been avoided if said dog had boundaries to begin with!
Another scarry thing.. People who don't bother to train a dog because he is dominant.. Oh no he can't do that because he is dominant.. Rather then seek out methods that will work they just give up and say to heck with it!

Now what about choke training? People still tell me they prefer this method to reward based training because the dog is doing it "for them" not for a cookie... Hello!! first of all your dog is doing because he DOESN"T want to be choked and second of all do you go to work for free? Why should they? Reward doesn' thave to be food.. it can be toys, play a pat and a good dog - something that tells the dog - thank you I apreciate you listening!

When I bother to compete in obedience I clean house. None were trained with so much as a collar on thier necks. My dogs come out up alert perky and with a ton of attitude. If you are in the US one of my dogs and I are featured on a Rally-O episode of Top dogs. My dogs LOVE obedience. Because they GET something out of it. Not because I am alpha and have choked them into tagging along.

Now lets look at the flip side. This totally positive training. this method also seems to cause problems. People being far to permissive with them, letting them get away with nonsense and garbage so as to not hurt thier feelings... YIKES!!! This attitude seems to follow in with clicker training - although the two shouldn't be lumped together. However sometimes just ignoring the bad and rewarding the good is ineffective! hmm there is no consequence to my blowing you off? to heck with this!

I am never oposed to getting on an animals case for messing around and ignoring a request that they KNOW how to perform. If any of my 7 dogs ignores a recall - they lose out on the rest of thier time at the park and are kept on leash. Play time is a priveledge not a right and failing to respond to somthing that could very easily be life threatening.
People are always facinated when my crew are ripping around the park and I call DOWN and all 7 hit the dirt like they have been shot. and hold it till released. It was among the easiest things to teach them.. the faster you hit the dirt.. the faster I will throw the ball again ;)

These dogs walk all over thier people, they growl and people back off. Groomers HATE these dogs there is nothing worse then one of these turkeys who is used to getting his own way. He isn't a dominant dog - he has just learned if you show teeth people back off. So in turn has never learned that being restrained isn't necesarily a bad thing - only that he doesn't have to do it.

Anyhow I am prone to rambling.. and I can see this post is getting further off topic..

So lets look at a few things..
#1 are dogs/horses so stupid that they don't realize we are of a different species? you don't see these animals out in the wild being submissive to other species!! Heck they wouldn't have survived this long!!
Can a human TRULY emulate horse speak? Or are we able to copy it just well enough to transfer some of the meaning or the wrong meaning?
That being said.. why is your animal listening? because he understands? Because there is something in it for him (be it personal enjoyment, treats a game?) or is it out of fear or pain? Or does your animal jsut not listen?? Why? do you let them walk all over you? Have you never motivated them to listen?
Are you mistaking your "alpha" position as your horse being fearful? This doesn't happen in all cases but in a HECK of a lot of them in dogs it does.

Anyhow, I have always found this topic facinating - and Francis's well thought out and well expressed post sent me to thinking of the similarities - you guys end up stuck with my ramblings.. so if you made it this far congrats!

Shauna

[Jacquie]

So do you think the passive leadership approach doesn't work, or was it your application (or interpretation) of it that didn't work? Would Mark Rashid have failed with your horse?
As I mentioned in the earlier thread, I don't think the passive leadership approach can work with every horse. I truly believe that even MR couldn't be successful with this method of NH on every horse.

But I have experienced many aggressive (for various reasons) and dominant horses over the years - some (a minority) of the stallions I have worked with were like that
I appreciate your expertise Francis, but each case if different and with all due respect you may not have experienced a horse with the same behaviour issues that TB possessed.

It's uncanny how Tootsie4U has experienced more or less the same problems I encountered with TB. I'm not sure when he was gelded but many thought he was a rig because of his stallion like attitude and stance.

I've already mentioned in the other thread how the turning point came when I started following the PNH alpha approach. To begin with there was lots of arguments but when I gradually began to gain his respect and he eventually realised he could trust my judgement his nature became much softer and sweet.

I no longer have to go up the phases, most of our groundwork is done at liberty and best of all - we now have a brilliant partnership.

PNH helped me release the angel that was locked inside a demons body and for that I will always be grateful to Pat Parelli and his training system. :)

[Jacquie]

I would be very interested to see how Pat Parelli (and PNH) deals with aggressive stallions. It seems to me that if the principle of dominance is followed to the letter, it could lead to some extremely dangerous situations. What happens if a stallion fights back? Is the conflict/pressure escalated until he eventually gives up and backs down? How is the relationship mended afterwards? How is liking restored (assuming it existed before and is not considered irrelevant)?

Francis, I knew I'd saved this link somewhere in 'my favourites'. I hope you find it interesting. :)
http://parelli.com/info_page.php?page=article&lit_num=31&title=Stallions%20Demand%20Savvy&t=lit

[shaiarabians]

good post guys

with the wild dominant stallion dilema i have put a link up below just a short way down the page you will see a book cover of sam watson here in australia that has done this using what im sure is parelli he learnt and has adapted for himself.

this stallion did attack him and put him in hospital but is now as quiet as ever and used here for displays.

keep up the great discussions as this is the only way we learn
Liesl

edited cos this blonde forgot the link hehehe
http://www.horsesandhorsemen.com/HHShopcart/Books&Videos.html

go to heritage horse rescue for the stallions story
http://www.horsesandhorsemen.com/

[Chablis]

What an interesting post!

My horse recently experienced the more extreme dominance. He was at vet hospital for treatment (fence injury) and one of the vets decided to teach my boy a lesson and you cannot dominate this horse or he will defend himself...

He got nervous (only with her) and wouldn't stand still so she hit him hard twice and he proceeded to try and kick/bite her/ears pinned to skull.

He cowers when she goes near him but if cornered he will fight for his life.

Everyone, at vets, described him as a wary horse...

Oh and she chucked a bridle on him so she could enforce her dominance in what she thought was him being naughty when in fact, he had been an abused horse who defends himself then stops and thinks about it.

I warned them about his background and told them to please call me if any problems but no calls and only reassurance that he's been great (he's never been stabled before).

This person finds it perfectly acceptable to dominate horses for the *greater good*.

I have only done PNH with my gelding and have spent that time building rapport as otherwise he shuts down, I have always insisted he respect my space as otherwise he would run me over and I try to be as interesting/inventive for him as possible and he is thriving and became a joy to be around.:) Every little achievement was/is gold dust.

Prior to the vet visit, he had become very playful and I could see the horse he will become but now he is wary of everything but with the rapport/trust that I had developed with him prior to the nasty vet, he is quickly tuning into me again and being the horse I know once again.

I will trust him to respond but if he doesn't I will ask more firmly but my final phase is only 1 ounce more than what he used to try and dominate me then I back off ie if he tries to drive me backwards, I drive him backwards and ask him to go one step further than what he drove me.

This is the type of horse that force/dominance never works (it's how I ended up with him), his wild horse is very definitely close to the surface but once you get his trust/build rapport, the sky is the limit.

[Chablis]

I forgot to add that I have set guidelines as to what I consider acceptable:

1) Horse is not allowed to pick me up
2) Horse is not allowed to crowd my personal space
3) Horse is not allowed to bite
4) Horse is not allowed to kick

If he breaks one of these rules I will correct him, however, I will do it in a fair manner and learn to read the signs to avoid the situation next time. I won't hit him or punish him for lack of knowledge on my behalf.

I've seen many people hit back and create a great game called Duck and Weave. Human hits, horse ducks and weaves. If I hit him, I'd called it dominance but if I am fair about it and politely insist he not do it again, I call it building a relationship.

So many ways of looking at the same things.:)

[Mossy]

I have not seen the other thread but taking this one on it's merits:-
Why refer, in particular, to aggressive stallions. Surely that is perpetuating the myth that stallions are, per se, different. They are a horse, they just still have their ,ahem, balls and therefore their hormones. Any horse should be mannerly. I have come enough equine aggression for me thanks and deal with depending on the circumstances and the horse. As far a general education is concerned then teach, guide and reward good behaviour whilst limiting the bad. However if a horse swings it's back end towards me and I have the means in my hand to avoid a kick or give a reasonable once only demonstration of the consequences of such an action then the chances are I will use it.
I cannot get tied up with following so and so's philosophy to the exclusion of all else. I think as soon as you lose sight of the broader picture you lose something fundamental. The aim is to educate your horse, and you are doing the educating. Your body language will not be the same as PP, MR, KM, or Uncle Tom Cobbley. Theirs will not be the same as you. What you can do is critically assess the method, learning from each, using and adapting what works, rejecting what does not, until you are happy with the results that you have got. The important thing to be able to know when you need help and to ask for it.

[Yann]

Mossy, I think stallions came into it because Francis talked about his experiences with them, and as an example of how the use of different approaches might work with them as prime examples of dominant horses (or horses likely to show dominant behaviour?).

Francis, thanks for continuing this discussion, I was very surprised the previous thread was shut down when it had actually taken an interesting turn, as shown by all the responses here. As others have pointed out I wonder how much of this discussion and the difference in viewpoints stem from misapprehensions about the different approaches. For example my own approach is always to try and keep things as low key as possible - that said I'm well aware that I've still got a hell of a lot to learn and wouldn't pretend for an instant that I get everything I do right. However in general this approach seems to work very well. I don't have a lot of experience in dealing with agressive horses, but I have had periods where I've handled skittish or nervous horses on a daily basis and they've all come round and settled down in a pretty short space of time. My own horse is a delight to handle, though that's just how she is and I can't claim to really have had that much to do with it :D

However low key you are I still think you need to establish the boundaries, and with some horses that can involve a bit of getting tough now and again if they won't play ball by staying out of your space for example or trying to walk over you when leading. However the getting tough would only ever be the minimum required and would cease as soon as the horse complied. In further training you would always seek to keep things as low key and obvious as possible to build confidence and enthusiasm in the horse. This is perhaps where there is a big percieved difference with Alpha style training, the horse is repeatedly set up in different situations to learn that what the handler says goes, and goes quickly, unless the horse wants to meet high levels of pressure. With some horses this may or may not be the way to go but as far as I can see there are a lot of risks, especially if the timing and technique happen to be poor. The horse may comply in such situations, but only because it knows it has no choice in the matter.

FWIW I would expect any horse I handled regularly to lead politely and move its feet when asked. I think it can make things a lot worse if people are misguidedly half hearted in establishing the ground rules, it doesn't make for a happy partnership. Francis, I would be very interested to know if your approach would be different to this, and if so how? :)

[julesandjoy]

http://parelli.com/info_page.php?pag...%20Savvy&t=lit



How can anyone read the material on this page and still be very critical of Pat Parelli? Sure, he's annoying. :) But he seems to be spot on w/this. sylvia

[Jacquie]

http://parelli.com/info_page.php?pag...%20Savvy&t=lit



How can anyone read the material on this page and still be very critical of Pat Parelli? Sure, he's annoying. :) But he seems to be spot on w/this. sylvia
sylvia

The link isn't working.

[Susie xx]

Hi there, I only joined your very interesting site today. Gentle and natural horsemanship, using the instincts of the horse are not a new phenomenon. They do require more thought, patience and consitency than the rodeo style quick fixers. I think compared to the rough handling wild horses receive at round up Parelli & Monty are a step forwards. However their methods still see a heirachical herd and can cause phycological damage to an already stressed horse. For a horse to be sent away it can mean death in the wild. If you get a chance to read articles by Chuck Mintzlaff or Frank Bell or Michael Peace you will find mutual respect a middle ground option. In a herd or grazing situation 2 horses will often become firm friends, whatever their status or rank within the herd. Grooming partners. My own youngsters have never been discouraged from coming right up to meet me. I only side-step occaisionally when galloping babies appear racing downhill towards me and sliding to a stop after rain. They know where their feet are and after halting they know how to take a step back. Respect is a two way street, I'm happy they want to come and view humans as friendly, they have guidelines like any children and can push the boundaries as and when they grow sufficiently mentally & physically to handle each new progression.
Henry Blake was writing his observances on behaviour & communication in the early 1970's. John Rarey published in the late 1800's and Xenaphon hundreds of years ago.
More is always achievable by love, and if we insist a horse must stay out of our space how can we then achieve consistency and true friendship in a mutual groom? We must trust them, very few horses are aggressive, and even then they bother to give warning signals. Pat Parelli says if you are thinking of keeping a stallion -"Don't". He recalls an experienced lady giving the wrong body signal and having her osophagus ripped out. My TB was ridden first time in the open in the fields the mare he had been covering was grazing in. He had no problems seperating human company from horse company. May not work for everyone. I don't have horses who have been handled by anyone else, they are either homebred or bought at weaning, so a nice blank canvas with no resentment to 2 legged creatures, a bit wild at 6+ months never having had a headcollar or seen a barn, but eventually their natural friendliness & curiosity wins over.
Interesting points you all made, I can learn a lot with this much experience on offer to give me a solution when I come up with a problem. I shall not mind if it comes from the Parelli Savvy school of thought as long as it does n't involve chasing my horse away in order for him to want to come back. I don't have problems with my equines coming to me (without carrying bribes.)
Susie xx

[julesandjoy]

Sorry, Jacquie. :D This is the same link you posted!!! I had read it and was just including it in my response. Not sure what went wrong in the copy/paste.... sylvia

[Yann]

That link is interesting and makes some good points - unfortunately it doesn't really suggest how the games can be 'played and won without the horse feeling like a loser' which is a pity, so doesn't really address the question Francis put. I know none of you PNHers are level 4 or anything like it but do you have any suggestions as to what the 'savvy' might entail in these circumstances? Surely the standard approach won't work here?

[julesandjoy]

I forgot to add that I have set guidelines as to what I consider acceptable:

1) Horse is not allowed to pick me up
2) Horse is not allowed to crowd my personal space
3) Horse is not allowed to bite
4) Horse is not allowed to kick

If he breaks one of these rules I will correct him, however, I will do it in a fair manner and learn to read the signs to avoid the situation next time. I won't hit him or punish him for lack of knowledge on my behalf.

I've seen many people hit back and create a great game called Duck and Weave. Human hits, horse ducks and weaves. If I hit him, I'd called it dominance but if I am fair about it and politely insist he not do it again, I call it building a relationship.

So many ways of looking at the same things.:)


Hey, Chablis, if you don't mind could you clear a few things up for me?

Horse is not allowed to pick you up. Do you mean - literally???? W/his teeth???? Just had to ask. :)

and

How do you politely insist to a horse that he not pick you up again? :D

Seriously though...

If a horse is politely told to get out of your personal space, how many times do you find yourself 'reading the signs' to avoid the situation? Wouldn't it be easier if you told him once or twice (politely would be fine) and he learned to guard HIMSELF of your personal space? He would be, by definition, more aware of his own intentions and could avoid it much easier than you could fend him off. Just really curious. I've found myself to have fallen into the 'prevent' it trap (I call it a trap anyway). I seem to constantly be looking for signs that my horses are going to misbehave - ie not staying up w/me while leading, not stopping and backing when I stop and back, not neckreining correctly, not sidepassing as asked, and especially EATING ON THE TRAIL!!!!! arrrrgh

I have heard often, "Let him commit to the mistake" then correct. I have tried it and it does seem to help. I find that the horse pulls him/herself up short of the undesired behaviour and it takes alot of pressure off of me to be constantly vigilent. This way, too, I feel would be better for a horse who is handled by different people (I work w/alot of 4H kids). The horse learns to be its own monitor and won't test different handlers as bad.

ie - passenger lessons... You ask your horse for a specific gait - say trot (horse should already know w/t/c - this exercise, the way I use it, isn't to train a horse to trot, this is simply to train him to hold his own gait). You squeeze them into trot and then expect them to hold that gait. If they don't, you simply spank or use a crop behind the girth (do not squeeze again) until they get back into gait - then you simply ride til they break gait again, correct, ride, correct, ride... when you feel them correct themselves a few times you gently ask them to stop and you give them a minute or two rest... then go again.

I do this in an arena and, of course, they're going to head to the "gate" gate or to the rail or to their buddies (if any are present) and break gait! I don't steer them or squeeze them. I just try to go w/them and spank till they turn away from the (closed) gate, or rail or buddies, and continue on their way - trotting. We do this til we can hold a trot no matter how many horse-buddies are in the arena and most of mine will ignore even an open gate.

This 'mindset' has taken hold of one of my mares and she will hold her trot forever out on the trail. You can literally 'see' her remind herself to keep trotting - all the rider does is steer and sit back to enjoy the ride. Even my really, really non-horsey sister can sit back and enjoy Joy's trots.

Anyway, I think I might have gotten a bit off track. Just was commenting that I found myself mired in the 'watch them and fix them' mindset and it's so much easier and fun to find a way to get them to watch themselves. sylvia

[julesandjoy]

That link is interesting and makes some good points - unfortunately it doesn't really suggest how the games can be 'played and won without the horse feeling like a loser' which is a pity, so doesn't really address the question Francis put. I know none of you PNHers are level 4 or anything like it but do you have any suggestions as to what the 'savvy' might entail in these circumstances? Surely the standard approach won't work here?


To me that was, more or less, the point of the article. You don't need to know how to handle a stallion unless you're level 3 or 4. :) If an outline of level 3 and 4 were readily available online sales would, most certainly, drop (and we all know Pat's all about sales - as well he should be - it's his livelihood).

I think the article was giving instances of horrid stallion behaviour in an effort to have people aware of their potential for deadly intent - no matter how well-behaved they might otherwise be. And the 'word picture' brought to mind of how a stallion might view his life (naked ladies and all) was very thought-provoking and clear in it's intent to show that a mindset (my new favorite word, didja notice?) of 'use the viewpoint of the horse' is something to be gained by working one's way up from the bottom.

Afterall, even in classical dressage one doesn't start at Grand Prix - it's training level first so you understand the basics... then you have a nice, broad base of knowledge upon which to build years of continued education. You don't start at the rafters, you start w/the basement. :)

And, also, liability might play some part in this article's absence of details. :) If Pat did detail ways to play the games w/stallions and someone read it and proceeded to play them w/o proper preparation and all that jazz... well, the outcome could well be imagined. sylvia

[julesandjoy]

excerpt from Frank Bell's "Soaring Fast and Breezy" article...

"Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh I hissed aggressively and cracked her right shoulder with my stirrup three times"

Cracked her right shoulder w/my stirrup three times.... That's middle ground? :D

Susie, I just had to smile while reading that article. He shushed Breezy fast and aggressively back from that trailer and cracked her shoulder w/the stirrup. Now granted, she needed something firm to quit her from her dangerous habit, but does Parelli really suggest anything worse that that?

Haven't explored Frank's website enough, I suppose, to find the 7 Steps outlined in their use. He did start Breezy w/step 4 though - no working up through them? sylvia

PS -- am reading the 'Paramount' article and see this... "The horses were not used to gentle touch or attention of that kind. Those kinds of situations can either work for me in a big way or against me to the same degree." Does that mean there are horses w/whom this approach simply won't work? I know it was mentioned that any one thing doesn't work w/all horses all the time - that is, to me, basic common sense... BUT if his approach doesn't work, reckon what he'd do?

[Tootsie4U]

Yann, that was an awesome post and by the sounds of it, you're a better trainer than you give yourself credit for!

Its called micro-managing (the opposite of what you do). There is something to be said about giving a horse some responsibility and allowing it to do a job *for himself*.

I use a very similar approach with the horses I ride. I understand that I have a responsibilty as a rider and they have a responsibilty as my mount. Thats where "Team" fits into "Partnership".

:)

[julesandjoy]

I have to ask, I mean... I just really have to ask....

Is Frank for real????

I've been reading Frank Bell's articles and got to the Diamond-in-the-rough one. Ok. She has a blind spot??? She has a phobia about changing eyes? Now, granted I am more familiar w/Clinton Anderson and Pat Parelli and I watch RFD-TV when I can - mostly what I've heard is that horses are two-brained beings. Meaning, they have a right brain and a left brain and you have to train each one. Is this what Frank meant (only he was speaking in Frank Melting-the-Horse Lingo???).

To me Diamond wasn't blocking him out on the right - that side of her just hadn't been worked yet so Tia was meeting the New Diamond... a basically, brand new, unworked horse. She should have aleady known she was going to have to start all over w/a very small signal to move off.

?????

I'm enjoying reading his stuff but he sounds just like all the other trainers/clinicians who are trying to sell their way of horse training. He has his own lingo and tries to use terms the others don't use. I mean, what grown man uses the word and phrase "melt" and "melted into each other" as a regular part of his vocabulary??? :D :D *big, big grin*

I give total credit to all these trainers/clinicians who are out there trying to help people and horses by making horse training something approachable by almost anyone w/a brain and common sense. It is literally the only reason I am able to have horses - I would have given up long ago otherwise. It is, honestly though, rather nauseating to read sometimes...... :D sylvia

[teabiscuit]

i agree-there's lots of good stuff, but also some unendurable crap in NH, how's the learner supposed to seperate the wheat from the chaff?

[Jacquie]

i agree-there's lots of good stuff, but also some unendurable crap in NH, how's the learner supposed to seperate the wheat from the chaff?

The best way I could suggest would be.....

Find out as much information as you can about the methods and principles used by well known and respected NH trainers. When you find one you agree with (many trainers use more or less the same techniques) that's half the battle won.

From there your horse will soon let you know whether the chosen method is suiting him. If it's not, this doesn't mean the training methods no good it just means it's not suitable for your horse, if that's the case, follow another NH route.


Seperating the wheat from the chaff isn't as difficult as you may first imagine if you always remember to follow your own instincts and never attempt to teach your horse anything you feel uncomfortable with ;)

[Chablis]

Hey, Chablis, if you don't mind could you clear a few things up for me?

Horse is not allowed to pick you up. Do you mean - literally???? W/his teeth???? Just had to ask. :)

and

How do you politely insist to a horse that he not pick you up again? :D

C: Actually, sadly, I was being serious:( I was trimming his hooves and he thought it would be more interesting for me to be in the air hanging from his mouth. He didn't lunge or was aggressive, he picks things up and decided to do it for me as well....

Any mouthy behaviour or what I consider him being dominant ie barging etc I back him, gett him going sideways, give him a new focus ie jumping, pick an option up other than me etc. Things that get him tuned into me. He can be quite introverted (and then explode) so I have to watch this and go at his pace and we are going fast than I ever imagined:)

If he doesn't try to pick me up and is respectful of the fact I am somewhat smaller/weaker than him, I leave him alone.:) But he still looks to me for a good rub.:)

Jules: Seriously though...

If a horse is politely told to get out of your personal space, how many times do you find yourself 'reading the signs' to avoid the situation? Wouldn't it be easier if you told him once or twice (politely would be fine) and he learned to guard HIMSELF of your personal space?

C: I don't think I have been very clear. I don't avoid any situation but as I get more knowledge/savvy, I am reading more and more signs that my horse is being introverted/extroverted and bad situations stop occuring as I think I am no longer causing those problems :)

With this horse, you can quickly tell the savvy level of whoever handles him as he is very explicit in letting me/us know.

I try to be aware at all times around him, in fact, all horses I interact with so that I can try to avoid or diffuse a situation before it occurs. :) I don't always get it right ie him picking me up but it hasn't occured again as I've removed the motive.

I do tell him that it is not acceptable behaviour and he has learnt to respect his - ie I flap my elbow and if he keeps trying to drive me, he runs into it - I don't hit him with the elbow or go out of my way to get him with the elbow.

As soon as he backs off, incident forgotten and we move on - I don't aggressive but I politely enforce my personal bubble around me that I did not invite him into.

He was recently at vets who have never experienced a horse like him before (they told me differently) and I went out to see him and he tried to barge me. A quick reminder that it is not acceptable ( I backed him up) and he was 100% okay with me again but he will only respond to the level of the person who is handling him.

This is an extremely playful horse but one that can quickly go sour in the wrong hands.

Jules: He would be, by definition, more aware of his own intentions and could avoid it much easier than you could fend him off. Just really curious. I've found myself to have fallen into the 'prevent' it trap (I call it a trap anyway). I seem to constantly be looking for signs that my horses are going to misbehave - ie not staying up w/me while leading, not stopping and backing when I stop and back, not neckreining correctly, not sidepassing as asked, and especially EATING ON THE TRAIL!!!!! arrrrgh

C: I don't so much avoid it as try to find the reason it is occuring in the first place then work out a solution for the original problem. It does not mean that I stop what I am doing because he starts to get upset, I just ask him to tune into me before we continue with the task (for want of a better word).

I try to see all the little things that occure before he starts barging ie just trying to drive me a step backwards then stopping and looking at me as if to say what are you going to do about that?

Does that make sense?

As he tends to barge people, I ask him a lot to back up, move his forequarters around while keeping his back feet relatively still etc to get him 1) tuned into me and 2) get him light on his forehand.

Jules: I have heard often, "Let him commit to the mistake" then correct. I have tried it and it does seem to help. I find that the horse pulls him/herself up short of the undesired behaviour and it takes alot of pressure off of me to be constantly vigilent. This way, too, I feel would be better for a horse who is handled by different people (I work w/alot of 4H kids). The horse learns to be its own monitor and won't test different handlers as bad.

C: You have to have very good timing and feel in order to do this without having the horse feel critisced (sp) so well done. Nothing like micromanagement to annoy people and horses!

Jules: ie - passenger lessons... You ask your horse for a specific gait - say trot (horse should already know w/t/c - this exercise, the way I use it, isn't to train a horse to trot, this is simply to train him to hold his own gait). You squeeze them into trot and then expect them to hold that gait. If they don't, you simply spank or use a crop behind the girth (do not squeeze again) until they get back into gait - then you simply ride til they break gait again, correct, ride, correct, ride... when you feel them correct themselves a few times you gently ask them to stop and you give them a minute or two rest... then go again.

C: Me too. Very emotionally and mentally testing for both horse and rider. For years (before PNH) I couldn't let go of the reins but now it's one of the first things I teach a horse to do (apart from breaks and steering) is to be able to go at w/t/c on a loose rein and then when I ask for collection, I don't have to worry about my horse running off. Also very good for helping people to move with their horses movement and not against it - my TB mare used to get very upset if I didn't move with her movement at all times but it became a non-issue after pp riding.

Using phases is fabulous and much easier for both horse and rider to learn.

Jules: I do this in an arena and, of course, they're going to head to the "gate" gate or to the rail or to their buddies (if any are present) and break gait! I don't steer them or squeeze them. I just try to go w/them and spank till they turn away from the (closed) gate, or rail or buddies, and continue on their way - trotting. We do this til we can hold a trot no matter how many horse-buddies are in the arena and most of mine will ignore even an open gate.

C: Yep, ride out the way they want and then they let you ride back the way you wanted. Be fair without being critical. Feels great when it becomes consistent, doesn't it? It's great to build this up until you can do it long distances as well.

Jules: This 'mindset' has taken hold of one of my mares and she will hold her trot forever out on the trail. You can literally 'see' her remind herself to keep trotting - all the rider does is steer and sit back to enjoy the ride. Even my really, really non-horsey sister can sit back and enjoy Joy's trots.

C: Horses become very, very comfortable with patterns and with my mare, if she became a little bit unsure during PP riding, she went back to doing a pattern. I also used the patterns in between doing new things to keep her confident.

Jules: Anyway, I think I might have gotten a bit off track. Just was commenting that I found myself mired in the 'watch them and fix them' mindset and it's so much easier and fun to find a way to get them to watch themselves. sylvia


C: No worries! I love talking horses. If I have confused anyone, I have edited the quote and added my remarks with C at beginning and Jules at beginning of Jules' quote

[teabiscuit]

jacui-i wasn't referring to myself-my approach is much like Yann's only i developed it instinctively over the years from personal experience-i have an unusual background with horses.
i read a lot of NH stuff that makes sense, which i do already. some of it is patent rubbish though and i feel sorry for the horses that will ahve this practices upon them with the best of intentions just because the latest "in" NH expert says it is the way to go.
there is no quick fix with horses in my opinion, time, fairness and patience is all.

[Jacquie]

.....i read a lot of NH stuff that makes sense, which i do already. some of it is patent rubbish though and i feel sorry for the horses that will ahve this practices upon them with the best of intentions just because the latest "in" NH expert says it is the way to go......
teabiscuit
Sorry, I couldn't have made myself very clear.....

This is exactly what I was referring to when I suggested folk should find out as much information as they can about the methods and principles used by well known and respected NH trainers and also follow their own instinct by never attempting to teach a horse anything they personaly feel uncomfortable with . It doesn't matter what NH training method they're following, there will no doubt be a few things along the way they disagree with. ;)

[julesandjoy]

Hey, Chablis, just have to laugh... the vision of you dangling from the teeth of a large horse - rasp in hand - is just too much!!!!! :D :D

I think you and I are more or less on the same page - getting their attention is very important. When you say that as you become more aware of what their intentions are (ie becoming more fluent in horse body language) and you begin to base your corrections on that 'feel' are you not, in a way, making it harder for lesser linguists to handle your horse? Just a bit of thought-provoking fluff here...

A horse can only be as good as his/her basic temperment will allow, sure. And not all horses can at all be handled by anybody - yes, I give over on that point. But...

..as I said, I do deal w/lots and lots of kids who are handling both my horses and their own in some tightish situations. I want my horses to be able to be handled and ridden by most anyone (with supervision).

Just as an example here ---

Joy is a 7yo mare who was inadvertantly taught to buck by her non-horsey owners several years ago. I bought her and found her to be very intelligent and willing albiet w/a huge tendency to voice her displeasure w/some 'hind end airs above ground'.

If I am keeping a watch on Joy's intentions by looking at her ears and she twitches them (which is prelude to them being flattened which is prelude to her nose sticking out which is prelude to her head going down which is, of course, prelude to her heiney going up) and I say, "Oh no, Missy, you're not going to buck today!" then I've circumvented a bucking episode w/her, sure.

But if those ears are allowed to twitch and then flatten, and the nose is allowed to flip up and then down, the heiny is thereby, in her opinion anyway, being allowed full range of motion. Miss the Twitch - Game On.

Now. If I DO allow her to twitch, then flatten, then scale up into a bit of a buck and I CORRECT her in NO uncertain terms (meaning hard circles and flexing mixed w/some loud verbal correction w/on a 3 second span of time) and I do this w/a concerted effort over a period of days then she'll soon know that just 'cause her rider misses the 'twitch' doesn't mean it's Open Season w/the heiney. :D She learns to govern herself instead of depending on me to do it for her as when I kept watching for the twitch.

This way she can be successfully ridden by a myriad of rider levels w/o worries. If she does make her way through the twitch,flatten,irritation-nose-flip and all that then she is much more likely to end up by just stopping in her tracks w/her nose in the air and missing the bucking thing altogether - afterall it wasn't the twitiching which evoked the correction, it was the bucking so she just leaves that off and finds a much safer way of voicing her displeasure at being roughly handled by said beginner.

Does that make sense:

I will add that I'm still looking for the twitch w/Joy. I need to run an experiment w/her on the merits of her watching out for herself. Maybe instead of the 'punishment' of a few hard circles I should help her find the 'brick wall' Frank Bell spoke of. Trouble would be my own lack of timing/feel in that..... :) sylvia

[Chablis]

Hey, Chablis, just have to laugh... the vision of you dangling from the teeth of a large horse - rasp in hand - is just too much!!!!! :D :D

I think you and I are more or less on the same page - getting their attention is very important. When you say that as you become more aware of what their intentions are (ie becoming more fluent in horse body language) and you begin to base your corrections on that 'feel' are you not, in a way, making it harder for lesser linguists to handle your horse? Just a bit of thought-provoking fluff here...

A horse can only be as good as his/her basic temperment will allow, sure. And not all horses can at all be handled by anybody - yes, I give over on that point. But...

..as I said, I do deal w/lots and lots of kids who are handling both my horses and their own in some tightish situations. I want my horses to be able to be handled and ridden by most anyone (with supervision).

Just as an example here ---

Joy is a 7yo mare who was inadvertantly taught to buck by her non-horsey owners several years ago. I bought her and found her to be very intelligent and willing albiet w/a huge tendency to voice her displeasure w/some 'hind end airs above ground'.

If I am keeping a watch on Joy's intentions by looking at her ears and she twitches them (which is prelude to them being flattened which is prelude to her nose sticking out which is prelude to her head going down which is, of course, prelude to her heiney going up) and I say, "Oh no, Missy, you're not going to buck today!" then I've circumvented a bucking episode w/her, sure.

But if those ears are allowed to twitch and then flatten, and the nose is allowed to flip up and then down, the heiny is thereby, in her opinion anyway, being allowed full range of motion. Miss the Twitch - Game On.

Now. If I DO allow her to twitch, then flatten, then scale up into a bit of a buck and I CORRECT her in NO uncertain terms (meaning hard circles and flexing mixed w/some loud verbal correction w/on a 3 second span of time) and I do this w/a concerted effort over a period of days then she'll soon know that just 'cause her rider misses the 'twitch' doesn't mean it's Open Season w/the heiney. :D She learns to govern herself instead of depending on me to do it for her as when I kept watching for the twitch.

This way she can be successfully ridden by a myriad of rider levels w/o worries. If she does make her way through the twitch,flatten,irritation-nose-flip and all that then she is much more likely to end up by just stopping in her tracks w/her nose in the air and missing the bucking thing altogether - afterall it wasn't the twitiching which evoked the correction, it was the bucking so she just leaves that off and finds a much safer way of voicing her displeasure at being roughly handled by said beginner.

Does that make sense:

I will add that I'm still looking for the twitch w/Joy. I need to run an experiment w/her on the merits of her watching out for herself. Maybe instead of the 'punishment' of a few hard circles I should help her find the 'brick wall' Frank Bell spoke of. Trouble would be my own lack of timing/feel in that..... :) sylvia

No, I don't think that myself becoming a better horse person makes it harder for other people as my horse will only respond to the level of savvy that a person has.

Even if I hadn't improved, it wouldn't suddenly mean that they could handle him. The whole point was that no one else could handle him at the stage I got him. Catching a horse in 300 acres quickly shows up the skill level of someone:)

It's like putting a beginner rider on a Grand Prix dressage horse and expecting the horse to still do all the movements without the beginner rider knowing how to ask them correctly.

Even if the rider hadn't trained the horse to that level, it doesn't mean that the beginner rider is suddenly going to know how to ride as well as someone who has ridden for 10 years.

I do believe that this horse will always be wary of people especially those with aggressive bodylanguage - it is after all a natural thing for a horse to be wary of something that has proven to be dangerous to him in the past.

He has a very quick flight response and he is definitely not a leader but a follower. He is extremely uncomfortable as a leader.

His first response is to defend himself and if you don't know what to do to get him left brain again, you are in BIG trouble. I've simply improved my own skill level (with help) so that I am able to successfully communicate with him.

I can drag a tarp next to him, carry an open umbrella, load him onto a box etc. But I'm the only one that can. If I hadn't done this with me and given him incentive to not look at me as the enemy (despite it wasn't me who hurt him), I'm sure he would have been even harder for the vet to do stuff as she woudn't even have got near him.

He was very much a wild horse albeit an abused one when I got him. He is NEVER going to forget this so only certain people are allowed near him.

With me, we are now at the stage where things have progressed to the stage that if all goes as planned, I will be continuing to retrain him and climb all over him this weekend.

He's worn a bareback pad and saddle and is now confident in them.

Anyway, going horsin' now so if I've missed anything, I'll write it on Monday.

[Yann]

To me that was, more or less, the point of the article. You don't need to know how to handle a stallion unless you're level 3 or 4. If an outline of level 3 and 4 were readily available online sales would, most certainly, drop (and we all know Pat's all about sales - as well he should be - it's his livelihood).

J&J, I have to take issue with a couple of things here :) Firstly how many people are there worldwide at PNH level 3 or 4? Very few at a guess, the time, dedication and expense involved mean this will continue to be the case - if people took PP's advice literally, domestic horses would soon die out :D Secondly I don't see that outlining an approach, even in some detail is going to hit him in the pocket in terms of sales of level packs or expose him to liability. Plenty of big and small name trainers are perfectly happy to put their techniques and approaches to various situations into the public domain without affecting their ability to make a living. It all depends whether their primary motivation is 'making the world a better place for horses and owners' or making more money? Somebody with a stallion looking to improve how they deal with it is going to be disappointed with an article like that, and they're not going to put it away until they've done the required levels either :)

The original question about stallions was a very pertinent one and a fuller answer would have been most enlightening as regards the PNH / alpha approach. It would appear that a different tack is required, certainly join up for example is not recommended with stallions.

This is exactly what I was referring to when I suggested folk should find out as much information as they can about the methods and principles used by well known and respected NH trainers and also follow their own instinct by never attempting to teach a horse anything they personaly feel uncomfortable with .

I quite agree. Anybody interested should read widely and attend demos and clinics, they will soon get an idea of what suits them and their horse and what doesn't. It can also depend to a large degree on what sort of relationship you already have with your horse - if it's one like mine then playing some of the Parelli games to the letter would probably be seen as a gross breach of trust and result in a nervous horse. If on the other hand you have a horse that is very dominant and has no respect for you or your space then it might be a more suitable way to go, I don't know.

jacui-i wasn't referring to myself-my approach is much like Yann's only i developed it instinctively over the years from personal experience-i have an unusual background with horses.


That for me is why NH in the widest sense is such a good thing, you can reach a decent level of understanding and competency without having to be grey haired or having had the benefit of a wise and grizzled personal teacher :D

Yann, that was an awesome post and by the sounds of it, you're a better trainer than you give yourself credit for!


Thanks Tootsie, that was awfully kind of you, but don't forget that there's often a gap between theory and practice :)

[Tootsie4U]

Oh, just take the compliment already! :D

But why isnt join up recommended with stallions? Is it because of the 'at liberty' issue?

If confronting a stallion was just plain bad and never recommended it'd be impossible to ever have one.

Training stallions takes a certain 'tact' and approach. You dont necessarily need to do anything more differently than you do with geldings or mares. Its true that you need to have it somewhere in the back of your mind that this is a stallion whose sole purpose is to eat, sleep, fight for breeding rights and breed. But he's still a horse in the most fundamental ways. The prerequisite of 'tact and approach' is probably why it remains a task for Level 3 or 4 Parelli students - thats my guess. Not that a Level 1 or 2 doesnt have tact or approach, but you're just more 'seasoned' at the more advanced levels.

[julesandjoy]

Yann, :) Have no idea how many 3 and 4 level PNH handlers there are. That wasn't the point I was trying to make. I was simply offering ideas which might explain why Pat choose not to put outlined steps of stallion handling in this article. Who knows what was going on in his mind and why he didn't? No one but him. Maybe you could e-mail him... I'm sure he'll give you a toll-free number to call and order a listening CD or cassette w/all the answers!!!!! :p (and I'm a Parelli user/supporter)

I have to admit that the article (even as is) presented some really good reading - I like his writing style. (much better than 'melt into me' Bell, imo) :rolleyes: sylvia

[julesandjoy]

Chablis,

Hmmm, I feel that you entirely missed the point of my post. :) I was in no way saying that you should handle your horse differently or that your growth as a horse person should be stunted or put away so that others could handle your horse. :)

In a nutshell my post was... isn't it common sense that, if temperment allows, a horse could (and should if different levels of handlers are present) be trained so that he/she governs his/her own behaviour in most circumstances?

Nothing to do whatsoever w/your specific horse other than you happened to have mentioned that only those w/certain levels of savvy are listened to by him. He may not have the capacity to govern himself. If other horses do - isn't it commendable to train them to do so?

I don't think the Grand Prix parallel fits in w/my initial idea, either. Joy and most kid-handled horses are not Grand Prix level. ;) You could not expect to take a horse trained at the top of his game (w/p, jumping, cutting, whatever) and have them perform at their top level w/a novice/beginner aboard. That's not what I was saying at all. I was not advocating the training of all horses so anyone could ride them at top level. That is (if I may be so direct) stupid! :)

But does that exclude my idea from being a workable one in terms of privately kept horses? Those who should be expected to NOT buck, NOT kick, NOT bite, and NOT run away, expecially when kids are going to be handling them? sylvia

[Jacquie]

... don't see that outlining an approach, even in some detail is going to hit him in the pocket in terms of sales of level packs or expose him to liability. Plenty of big and small name trainers are perfectly happy to put their techniques and approaches to various situations into the public domain without affecting their ability to make a living. It all depends whether their primary motivation is 'making the world a better place for horses and owners' or making more money? Somebody with a stallion looking to improve how they deal with it is going to be disappointed with an article like that, and they're not going to put it away until they've done the required levels either :)
Yann
Pat Parelli outlines most (if not all) of his techniques and approaches to various situations, a selection of which can be download free from his website - now how many other trainers offer this service? ;)

The reason he'll not go into detail about training and handling stallions is for one reason, and one reason only.....safety - it has nothing to do with $ signs.

I doubt if there's any well respected trainer who will go into detail or advise an amateur on this because they believe stallions should only be handled by very experienced people, this is why PP will not give advice to any student below L3. :)

[Yann]

I stand corrected, he does indeed ;) And it wasn't me who suggested the financial motive :D
As I understand it join up isn't recommended for stallions because it can potentially be seen as a challenge - this would also go for the majority of the seven games too, which is why some elaboration on the particular 'savvy' required to exercise them in those circumstances would have been very interesting.

[Jacquie]

I stand corrected, he does indeed ;) And it wasn't me who suggested the financial motive :D
As I understand it join up isn't recommended for stallions because it can potentially be seen as a challenge - this would also go for the majority of the seven games too, which is why some elaboration on the particular 'savvy' required to exercise them in those circumstances would have been very interesting.
I agree, it would be very interesting to be able to watch Pat handle a stallion and listen to the advise he gives. I'm not sure what criteria's needed for this though. I know a student has to be level three or above but I'm not sure if this means in both groundwork and riding or whether only a L3 online/liberty pass would be acceptable (not that I've got that yet).:D

[Susie xx]

We should n't have to fix them, we should teach clear, consistant from birth, then the problems are overcome and good habits are formed. Even with an older horse, we can ignore the past history and start ground training from scratch, lots of reward for correct effort and not be afraid to reprimand with body language and voice (and a replica horse punch like a horse running past another with a neck swing and closed teeth if they are really rude). We need our horses to be horses, but to know we don't play colt games and dangerous aggressive behaviour will not be tolerated by us any more than their grazing friends. Surely we want to be their partners.
Susie xx

[julesandjoy]

We should n't have to fix them, we should teach clear, consistant from birth, then the problems are overcome and good habits are formed. Even with an older horse, we can ignore the past history and start ground training from scratch, lots of reward for correct effort and not be afraid to reprimand with body language and voice (and a replica horse punch like a horse running past another with a neck swing and closed teeth if they are really rude). We need our horses to be horses, but to know we don't play colt games and dangerous aggressive behaviour will not be tolerated by us any more than their grazing friends. Surely we want to be their partners.
Susie xx


If memory and past information serves -- the only stallions who are 'partners' w/anyone in the wild are the bachalor bands - and they only agree to be partners 'cause they can't find a herd stallion to beat and take over. Let a couple of loose mares come by and you'd see how fast those 'partnerships' liquidated.

It would seem that stallions don't have an over-ridding desire (in the wild anyway) to be partners unless they see no chance at being King. sylvia

[Shiny McShine]

I can't say I'm familiar with the original thread of discussion, but I have just been reading and thought I might add that dominance refers to act of being dominant, which is itself defined as "excercising the most influence or control".

As far as this definition goes I would say that even "passive" advocates such as Rashid are dominant over their horses... it is implicit in the act of riding and commanding a horse that you are influencing and controlling them. Anything else would require our horses to be mind readers.

Dominance is not inherently equal to fearsomeness, although it can be achieved via those means. My point however, is that everyone of us who influences or controls a horse uses dominance in training.

[Yann]

I think in the context of this thread the term was being used to differentiate between different training styles (ie. alpha / passive) rather than as an absolute definition. It's clear that nobody can do anything constructive with a horse (in our terms) unless we can consistently influence its behaviour. There can be a very wide variation in how that influence is obtained, and straightforward 'dominating' may not always be necessary or even desirable.

[Francis Burton]

I think in the context of this thread the term was being used to differentiate between different training styles (ie. alpha / passive) rather than as an absolute definition.
Assuming that "passive" is the only alternative! (I think it is the alternative most cogently articulated, by Mark Rashid, and one that matches my "style" most closely - though I probably focus more on learning theory and tend not to think in terms of leadership at all.)

It's clear that nobody can do anything constructive with a horse (in our terms) unless we can consistently influence its behaviour. There can be a very wide variation in how that influence is obtained, and straightforward 'dominating' may not always be necessary or even desirable.
Right!

A hectic week at work stopped me coming back to engage properly with this burgeoning discussion. That hasn't stopped me thinking about it though! Actually, the more I've thought about it the less I feel I need to add. Much ground has been covered already. Still, there are a few points to which I would like to respond. :rolleyes:

We are all on a journey, striving to improve our relationships with our horses. Our ideal destinations are probably not far apart in practice, even though we might describe them rather differently, e.g. one person's "authority" vs another's "partnership". How we get there seems to be the contentious bit. :cool: Will the dominance debate ever be resolved to everyone's satisfaction? I doubt it! Still, I reckon this discussion has been quite useful.

Tootsie4U wrote:
"Perhaps to benefit threads like this; a clear definition of passive leadership vs dominance is prerequisite. Also, examples should be provided. What I may call PL might not be what you agree it to be. <edit> I guess that is kinda what cvb is getting at in her post above."

Yes, I do think there are different notions out there about what actually constitutes PL and D, and at times this has thickened the fog. However, rather than debating which of two rival brands of horsemanship is superior, it might be better, perhaps, to consider elements the approaches have in common or are different.

"I approached his training (after months of trial and error) with passive leadership when I could, but more times than not, he required strict handling."

I don't see those as necessarily contradictory! Teaching clear boundaries is important for all horses, and especially for stallions. This can be achieved in ways that are more or less confrontational.

"By the way, now, I employ passive leadership almost 100% of the time. Since the boundaries have been declared and our relationship established, there is no need for me to utilizie the alpha dominant position."

Glad to hear it! :) The fact that you aren't continually having to reaffirm an alpha dominant position must feel good to both of you.

KarinUS wrote:
"My own interpretation of Passive Leadership is more easily summarized by Gincy Bucklin's philosophies like her article on Authority and Respect. (yep, it's the one I already posted 3 or 4 times because it explains so well what Passive Leadership is to me)"

Although the article puts a lot emphasis on Authority, I think she gets to the heart of the matter when she talks about: "a supreme confidence that the animals will listen to them, accompanied by a total lack of need to ‘control’ the animal, and a total lack of fear." Nice article!

Shauna (Shadowlark), your doggy digression was most interesting. :) Thanks for that. I was aware of this counter to the "alpha dominance" dogma (no pun intended!) and it seems that position may be losing support. I suspect opinion is still too entrenched in the horse world for a similar swing, but it gives one hope! Dogs and horses are quite different in terms of social structure and behaviour, yet there are analogous lessons to be learned. So this bit really struck a chord with me:

"Because in most cases the dog in question has never had any rules in it's life and suddenly rules are implemented under the pretense of dominance! Dogs respond to the new rules and begin to respect the human more as they set boundaries. All of which could have been avoided if said dog had boundaries to begin with!"

Could the same not be said of horses?!

To my mind, "respect" (or rather respectful behaviour) is created when a horse learns boundaries - the limits of acceptable behaviour. The other way round, i.e. it is the horse becoming respectful that causes him to heed certain boundaries, seems much less plausible to me. After all, how can he be expected to know what any one person's boundaries are without learning first?!

Yann, I couldn't agree more with trying to keep things as low key as possible. I believe quietness is a key factor in success with horses, as your experience confirms - not just nervous animals but aggressive/dominant ones too. Horses don't learn very well when emotions are running high. Furthermore, calm goes hand in hand with confidence. This is conveyed brilliantly (imho) by Tom Widdicombe in his book "Be With Your Horse". Have you read it?

In the rest of my post, I'd like comment on PP's intriguing article on stallions.

The first third or so of "Stallions Demand Savvy" is about how dangerous stallions can be. It seems a bit melodramatic to me, obsessing somewhat on rogue stallions. It seems like he is trying to impress a "Health and Safety" message on readers, which I suppose is fair enough. True, it doesn't take much to cause stallions to behave badly, or even (I suspect) to turn them into rogues. Therefore more vigilance and skill is needed to handle stallions safely compared to mares and geldings. Yes, I can understand why it is tempting to consider and treat them almost as if they were a separate species, with different rules. But in spite of their "rocket fuel" hormones, they are horses after all. With good, consistent handling, the risk of being injured through aggression directed at the handler is very slight. There is always a reason for a horse to attack. Having the stallion trust and like you eliminates a couple of reasons; on top of that, the handler should avoid provoking aggressive reactions.

("One stallion in California lives in a maze of pens that funnel him into the breeding shed so no one has to handle him. All his teeth have been removed.

This sounds like In Tissar, the rogue stallion that Monty Roberts described in his book "The Man Who Listens To Horses".)

Pat Parelli wrote:
"With a stallion, everything can be fine until:
He's faced with mares.
You get in his way."

My response: Don't do it then! :) Guide, direct and facilitate him; don't thwart or frustrate him!

"You challenge his dominance, even using the Seven Games."

Again: Don't do it then!

PP comes to the same conclusion as me when he writes "You must know how to earn his respect without using violence". However, it is not clear from the article what he does instead. Playing dominance games with stallions is risky - we agree on that point. But if the horse never feels "like a loser" of those games, how can it really be about dominance, a key aspect of which is the perception of outcome and relative position?

PP writes very well about the effect of health, upbringing, environment and isolation on stallion behaviour. I have no argument whatever with that section of the article, and wish more people would pay attention to his message.

Unfortunately we start to diverge again when it comes to how to deal with young studs nipping. Ideally, this behaviour would be dealt with at the foal stage, but this is not always possible in practice, and most young male horses have an ongoing mouthy urge.

"First of all, nipping is disrespectful behavior."

In the eye of the recipient, maybe. In dealing with it, however, one can either take offence at it, or not.

"The answer for this horse, however, is not punishment."

Hmmm, I wonder why not? Punishment seems to me entirely appropriate here (though it shouldn't be considered a panacea, and as a general training technique is not well suited to the way horses learn). However, it's how it done that really matters in this instance - with a big fuss or calmly, angrily or matter-of-factly, harbouring bitterness or instantly forgiving, with or without confrontation. It's safer to punish from a position of liking and trust, but you must be consistent, fair and forgiving so as not to erode that trust. Properly measured punishment, delivered precisely at the time of the unwanted behaviour, is, in my opinion, much fairer on the horse (and more effective) than expecting the behaviour to go away as a result of repetitive, drawn-out exercises intended to instill "respect". Sending away/"moving feet" can be used to punish, but I feel it is liable to be rather cumbersome, non-specific, and potentially confrontational!

(In case you hadn't realised already :) I dislike confrontation. I sincerely believe it should be avoided if at all possible, especially with stallions.)

I think I have said enough for now - much more than I intended to be honest. Again I would encourage anyone interested in how we fit in with the natural life of horses to at least take a look at Lesley Skipper's book "Let Horses Be Horses". As well as a couple of chapters on dominance, there is also one on stallions. (Has anyone here read it, and what did they think?)

[Yann]

This is conveyed brilliantly (imho) by Tom Widdicombe in his book "Be With Your Horse". Have you read it?


In my humble opinion too - I was gifted it by a knowledgeable friend who said I'd like it, and she was right :)

[FRED]

Francis, I wanted to get my tuppence worth in to, but what a week! even rising at 5am yesterday for work,are you an engineer too?.

Anyway,my reading guide through Natural Horsemanship,the late Bill Dorrance who has a comprehensive book all in one.
His view on dominance/dominate:No ,this word "dominate" wouldn't fit a horse at all.
I love his book and what a good guide it is too:)

He sugests we leave dominant and speed out of all our work and thoughts with horses,go slow,real slow.

[Jacquie]

....PP comes to the same conclusion as me when he writes "You must know how to earn his respect without using violence". However, it is not clear from the article what he does instead......
Francis
As mentioned previously, PP doesn't go into detail on how to handle stallions because he believes they should never be handled by amateurs in the first place (and let's face it the majority of folk who visit this and any other website looking for advice fall into this catergory).

If this information was readily available, there'd no doubt be a few folk read it and think 'wow, I could do that' and go get themselves a stallion (and heaven help the outcome).

Francis, would you be prepared to go into detail on how to handle a stallion and what an amatuer should do when things goes wrong?

(In case you hadn't realised already :) I dislike confrontation. I sincerely believe it should be avoided if at all possible, especially with stallions.)
I agree Francis, infact I doubt if anyone does actually like confrontation but unfortunately for some owners with dominant horses it's unavoidable at times.

[Chablis]

Chablis,

Hmmm, I feel that you entirely missed the point of my post. :) I was in no way saying that you should handle your horse differently or that your growth as a horse person should be stunted or put away so that others could handle your horse. :)

In a nutshell my post was... isn't it common sense that, if temperment allows, a horse could (and should if different levels of handlers are present) be trained so that he/she governs his/her own behaviour in most circumstances?

Nothing to do whatsoever w/your specific horse other than you happened to have mentioned that only those w/certain levels of savvy are listened to by him. He may not have the capacity to govern himself. If other horses do - isn't it commendable to train them to do so?

I don't think the Grand Prix parallel fits in w/my initial idea, either. Joy and most kid-handled horses are not Grand Prix level. ;) You could not expect to take a horse trained at the top of his game (w/p, jumping, cutting, whatever) and have them perform at their top level w/a novice/beginner aboard. That's not what I was saying at all. I was not advocating the training of all horses so anyone could ride them at top level. That is (if I may be so direct) stupid! :)

But does that exclude my idea from being a workable one in terms of privately kept horses? Those who should be expected to NOT buck, NOT kick, NOT bite, and NOT run away, expecially when kids are going to be handling them? sylvia



C: LOL. I think we are at crosswires here too:)

Well, yes, there is always that possibility but you would really need to meet this particular horse before making that assumption, wouldn't you?

Who knows, maybe in future, he will be okay for kids (or inexperienced people ) but at this point in time, it's not possible so I make allowances. Kids are not allowed around him unsupervised.

I would love for him to be confident and okay for all types of skill levels to handle and it's certainly one of my aims.

[cvb]

I agree, it would be very interesting to be able to watch Pat handle a stallion and listen to the advise he gives.

I guess it depends what you mean here, but I was watching "Natural Solutions for Spooy Horses" at the weekend and in the first section Pat is riding Magic around, with Casper ( her "husband") at liberty in the arena. Every so often Casper's thoughts turned to more interesting things ;)

At one point Pat sent him off cantering around the arena - that soon got him thinking about more boring things.... the horse equivalent of a cold shower ?

It was quite interesting to watch...because it really wasn't an issue. Clearly he knows the horses and the relationship very well, and has done all the "prior preparation" to "prevent p*ss poor performance" ;)

[Francis Burton]

Francis
As mentioned previously, PP doesn't go into detail on how to handle stallions because he believes they should never be handled by amateurs in the first place (and let's face it the majority of folk who visit this and any other website looking for advice fall into this catergory).
Presumably professional stallion owners -- those who ride, show and breed -- are considered to be amateur from PP's point of view. Actually, I have some sympathy for this viewpoint, having seen a wide range of stallion handling by professionals, from brilliant to abysmal and everything in between. (I am somewhere in between myself, but can recognize excellence when I see it!)

If this information was readily available, there'd no doubt be a few folk read it and think 'wow, I could do that' and go get themselves a stallion (and heaven help the outcome).
Hmm, I'd have thought the tone of the article would actually put people off getting a entire male horse, tending as it does to accentuate the negative! I think that would be true even if it also said that an approach based on ??? (that requires much skill and experience) makes respectful, obedient and willing stallions.

Francis, would you be prepared to go into detail on how to handle a stallion and what an amatuer should do when things goes wrong?
Problems can arise if a technique is published or demonstrated - witness the number of people who "have a go at" Join Up without really understanding what it is, why it works, and under what circumstances it is appropriate (or inappropriate) to use it. So I definitely can see where you're coming from. However, I'd have thought that no harm would come from PP explaining in broad terms his approach to stallions, leaving the "nuts and bolts" to personal tuition (or however Parelli people end up learning to handle stallions). There are ample caveats about stallions' potential behaviour in the article, but more could be added specifically warning against "trying this at home". As the article stands, his approach to stallions is only hinted at, and in a way that which could be interpreted as creating a mystique.

I agree Francis, infact I doubt if anyone does actually like confrontation but unfortunately for some owners with dominant horses it's unavoidable at times.
Well, Mark Rashid doesn't have a problem with that! As you may remember from "Horses Never Lie" (p19), he writes:
"Now, before I go any further, it is important for me to say that there is nothing wrong with this idea or style of training. And I mean absolutely nothing wrong with it. Not all horses trained in such a way develop the behavioral or attitudinal problems that I have just described. Rather, I think it's simply a personal preference--a method of training that either works for people and their horses or it doesn't. I believe it comes down to the type of relationship you're looking for with your horse. If you want your horse to see you as the alpha or dominant herd leader, then that is what you should pursue. Many, many trainers and horse owners have a tremendous amount of success working with horses in such a way and, in fact, some horses do prefer to be handled in such a way." [emphasis mine]

Evidently, it is possible to have success with many horses using the principle of dominance. My personal view is that you don't have to apply a technique or principle just because it works. As an approach that eschews dominance also works with many horses (including, but not limited to, stallions and aggressive/dominant individuals) and fits better with the type of relationship that some people are looking for, there is surely room for both.

It remains an open question as to how successfully (or easily) the dominance approach can be applied to stallions. My own experience, both handling stallions myself and watching others, is that playing dominance games can lead to a lot of trouble. It's still not clear to me whether Pat Parelli does play dominance games with stallions to win, and if he does, what form they take.

[Francis Burton]

I guess it depends what you mean here, but I was watching "Natural Solutions for Spooy Horses" at the weekend and in the first section Pat is riding Magic around, with Casper ( her "husband") at liberty in the arena. Every so often Casper's thoughts turned to more interesting things ;)
I'd love to see that one! Is there a UK outlet for the DVDs or does one have to order from the US - which can get very expensive with VAT, import duty plus the processing fee. (I'd like to watch In a Whisper too sometime to see what all the fuss was about.) You know... I have a feeling I've asked you this before and you probably told me, but I can't remember. :o

At one point Pat sent him off cantering around the arena - that soon got him thinking about more boring things.... the horse equivalent of a cold shower ?
Yes, keeping a stallion's mind focused on something else (e.g. work) is a good solution to that particular problem!

It was quite interesting to watch...because it really wasn't an issue. Clearly he knows the horses and the relationship very well, and has done all the "prior preparation" to "prevent p*ss poor performance" ;)
That's great! Ideally that how one wants it to be (i.e. not an issue). :)

[cvb]

Francis

well of course you can just borrow my copy ;)

Equine Ethology were having a bit of a post-christmas (and post-PNH ?) sale, hence I got both the "Spooky" and "Won't go" DVDs :D

In A Whisper - I don't want to buy, but i would like to see. There's someone in Europe who flogs copies on eBay - but its still more than I'd want to pay for a "curiosity" view... hoping to get a look at someone on NRs copy, but haven't heard from them for a while...

[Mossy]

I am a complete amateur but have been following this thread with interest. as far as I am concerned the definition of a well mannered stallion is that, from his demeanour and manners the general public would not know he was a stallion. Yes he will have that certain "je ne sais quoit" and on close inspection certain attributes, but a badmannered and inefficient handler who does not recognise their limits with a particular equine is surely just that regardless of the gender of the horse. I have hunted with an large entire who I suspected was but would never have guessed from his behaviour[ he was ridden by a slip of a lass] and also with a Welsh Cob stallion who looked very flashy, as did his rider but they were an absolute liability! I have also ridden my mare in company but kept well out of the way, with her ribboned up as she also can be somewhat of a handful, so I can see both sides of it.
PS My daughter is an "amateur" by the standards of many on this board but works in France and handles young entires of all shapes and sizes without fuss and bother. She tells me the attitude to gelding and breeding is rather different over there.

[Jacquie]

Presumably professional stallion owners -- those who ride, show and breed -- are considered to be amateur from PP's point of view.
Not at all, these people are, as you say 'professionals' not 'amateurs' and therefore have (or should have) gained the required experience, knowledge and savvy that PP suggests is needed.......
quote:
I want you to know how good you are and to be savvy about when things are over your head. Safety is #1, and until you are Level 4, I have concerns about your safety with a stallion. The solution, therefore, is to put your stallion aside and get your savvy level up first.

However, I'd have thought that no harm would come from PP explaining in broad terms his approach to stallions..
In my opinion this does briefly explain PP's approach to handling stallions..
Quote:
You must understand the horse's psyche and herd behavior, and with a stallion, you need a truckload of savvy. You must know how to earn his respect without using violence. You must read situations very quickly and stay one step ahead of what he's thinking, all the time. This is why handling stallions is a Level 4 study.....
...Evidently, it is possible to have success with many horses using the principle of dominance. My personal view is that you don't have to apply a technique or principle just because it works. As an approach that eschews dominance also works with many horses (including, but not limited to, stallions and aggressive/dominant individuals) and fits better with the type of relationship that some people are looking for, there is surely room for both...
I agree, passive leadership does work for many horses, but through personal experience, I know it doesn't work for every horse. This is why I turned to the 'alpha' approach as a method to gain my horses respect and trust in me. Once we'd crossed that milestone I was then able to 'mix n match' while developing our partnership. I believe in being fair at all times but being prepared to get firm if (or when) needed.

I think at the end of the day everyone is looking for the same type of relationship with their horse, this is a partnership that includes, trust, harmony and mutual respect. In my opinion it doesn't matter how long it takes or what route you eventually follow (as long as it's not the aggressive/violent road) reaching this destination is the main aim and desire of every horse owner :)

[julesandjoy]

Posted by Fancis
"Problems can arise if a technique is published or demonstrated - witness the number of people who "have a go at" Join Up without really understanding what it is, why it works, and under what circumstances it is appropriate (or inappropriate) to use it."

Hmmm, that is, more or less, exactly what I said. If Pat posts his techniques for the world to read they'll go try it and have trouble and come back on Pat. I also added the thought that they would see no point in purchasing his stuff 'cause "Gee, it didn't work." :)

I got my wrist gently slapped for my orations... ??? sylvia

[julesandjoy]

Chalis posted
"Well, yes, there is always that possibility but you would really need to meet this particular horse before making that assumption, wouldn't you? "

I'm a bit confused. What assumption?? sylvia

[Jacquie]

I was going to start another thread but I think this fits in well on this one...

Is this trainer well know and what's your thoughts on his methods of dealing with dominant horses?

http://marvwalker.com/cowgirl.htm

I know what mine are!!!!!!

[Chablis]

Chalis posted
"Well, yes, there is always that possibility but you would really need to meet this particular horse before making that assumption, wouldn't you? "

I'm a bit confused. What assumption?? sylvia

I've copied and pasted one of your posts:

In a nutshell my post was... isn't it common sense that, if temperment allows, a horse could (and should if different levels of handlers are present) be trained so that he/she governs his/her own behaviour in most circumstances?

But does that exclude my idea from being a workable one in terms of privately kept horses? Those who should be expected to NOT buck, NOT kick, NOT bite, and NOT run away, expecially when kids are going to be handling them? sylvia

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I was going by this post by missed the bolded part and thought you were making the assumption that it is ALWAYS possible for a horse to be handled by any level of handler and in particular mine without having seen him before.

Sorry.

You are right, it is common sense that ideally all horses would be handled by any level of handler.

My point was, I don't always think it's always possible, but there is always a chance that things may change:)

[julesandjoy]

Posted by Chablis
I was going by this post but missed the bolded part and thought you were making the assumption that it is ALWAYS possible for a horse to be handled by any level of handler and in particular mine without having seen him before.



Ah, yes. That would be a rather large assumption on my part! :D I don't think it would be a good idea to think that literally ALL horses could be trained to a point where they were handleable (word?) by any level person - I DO think it's a good idea to keep this goal in the back of your mind when training one's own horse. It would make him/her easier to handle by yourself too. No constant 'watching' for things to go wrong... leave it w/your horse to watch himself and you just sit back and enjoy the ride!

But this whole conversation is neither here nor there as the 'dominance' part of the thread goes, is it? We aren't doing such a hot job of watching ourselves are we???? :D :D sylvia

[cvb]

I was going to start another thread but I think this fits in well on this one...

Is this trainer well know and what's your thoughts on his methods of dealing with dominant horses?

http://marvwalker.com/cowgirl.htm

I know what mine are!!!!!!

Jacquie

I think I've commented before that about 16 years ago I saw a US trainer work a horse in the round pen - the horse was ok to be handled (as I remember) but would not be ridden. It all got pretty aggressive. I think that formed some of my opinions - maybe not directly at the time, but reflecting on it since - having that "real" experience to use as a touchstone...

The trainer concerned used some of what we might call "old style" techniques - like tying the horse's head to its tail, lying it down and so on. (Not sure "old style" is the right categorisation - but its not what I'd categorise as "natural horsemanship" !)

In theory this was the horse "fighting against himself" rather than against the trainer. The trainer talked about "only using necessary force" but then what he defined as necessary, and what I define - different things. It may be that he "saved" that horse, and that if I had tried I wouldn't have (then or now). But it may also be that there were others ways to deal with it... I'll never know I guess.

But your post just made me make the connection as to WHY I'm not into the "alpha" approach and why I am much more interested in exploring the PL approach. It all goes back to watching that trainer and horse in the round pen... (didn't realise it was one of those formative moments - but it clearly was).

[Jacquie]

Jacquie
....But your post just made me make the connection as to WHY I'm not into the "alpha" approach and why I am much more interested in exploring the PL approach. It all goes back to watching that trainer and horse in the round pen... (didn't realise it was one of those formative moments - but it clearly was).
cvb
In my opinion this trainer was using nothing short of aggressive and violent behaviour towards the horse. :mad:
quote:
The FIRST time the horse came through my physical responses at me I'd let him have the stun gun and hopefully drop him right there. I'd wait until he regain his feet and then I'd very calmly and matter of factly tell what I wanted him to do. If he made another move on me, I'd drop him again.
This type of practice has no place in any 'alpha' training approach and I doubt if any well respected NH trainer would use such tactics.

However, the link does prove what type of trainer is prepared to give detailsl on handling a dominant/aggressive horse on their website.

[cvb]

Jacquie

sorry - didn't mean to tar the "alpha" approach with one brush.. :(

what I meant was that seeing an extreme - a far end of the spectrum - made me think through the shades of grey that exist in the middle more than I otherwise might have.

That'll teach me to try and use too few words to explain myself ;)

[Jacquie]

Jacquie

sorry - didn't mean to tar the "alpha" approach with one brush.. :(

what I meant was that seeing an extreme - a far end of the spectrum - made me think through the shades of grey that exist in the middle more than I otherwise might have.

That'll teach me to try and use too few words to explain myself ;)


No need to apologise cvb, no offence was taken. :) ;)

[Francis Burton]

Posted by Fancis
"Problems can arise if a technique is published or demonstrated - witness the number of people who "have a go at" Join Up without really understanding what it is, why it works, and under what circumstances it is appropriate (or inappropriate) to use it."

Hmmm, that is, more or less, exactly what I said. If Pat posts his techniques for the world to read they'll go try it and have trouble and come back on Pat. I also added the thought that they would see no point in purchasing his stuff 'cause "Gee, it didn't work." :)
Silvia - You're dead right - you did and I missed it - sorry! :(

[julesandjoy]

Read that Marv Walker e-mail response.

Wow.

That is one more aggressive horse. If I had the bad fortune to own him, I would send him poste haste to the killers. As for using a stun gun... does sound a bit drastic but that's where this owner seems to be - at her wit's end and desparate for anything to help her out.

EDITED TO ADD - she ended up w/advice to use a stun gun. And possibly she did. You just have to wonder what termoil someone goes through to place them in a position where they would actually LISTEN to such advice. THAT is the sentiment I was attempting to form w/this comment. END EDIT

I must say, if not a stun gun,
EDITED TO ADD = (I am NOT condoning or agreeing to the use of a stun gun on horses) END EDIT
then what in the world do you do w/one like that?? Maintain the pretense that all is right w/the world and continue to 'circle lead' them everywhere? Keeping the peace by letting him have his way?

I'm glad I only have a few irate mares to deal with. :D sylvia

[julesandjoy]

Hey, Francis. Thanks for that post. I appreciate it. :) sylvia

[Jacquie]

...I must say, if not a stun gun, then what in the world do you do w/one like that?? .....
j&j, I can't believe you actualy agree with the trainer repeatedly using a stun gun on a horse as part of his training method. :eek:

Personaly, I'd have thought the first steps to help the colt overcome his behaviour problems would have been to get him cut/gelded then take it slowly from there.

There's no excuse or reasoning for a stun gun to be an acceptable tool for any form of training!!!! :mad:

[nix]

I'd been reading this thread with interest, but was dismayed when I read the Marv Walker link. If you were joking about agreeing with it Sylvia, it is in very poor taste :mad: .

I agree with Jacquie, also having a horse who had similar behavioural issues, there is absolutely no justification for using those type of methods :( :mad: .

[julesandjoy]

j&j, I can't believe you actualy agree with the trainer repeatedly using a stun gun on a horse as part of his training method. :eek:

Personaly, I'd have thought the first steps to help the colt overcome his behaviour problems would have been to get him cut/gelded then take it slowly from there.

There's no excuse or reasoning for a stun gun to be an acceptable tool for any form of training!!!! :mad:


Jackquie,

Big time misunderstanding here.

Uhhh, I was not agreeing w/using a stun gun on a horse. Not at all. Please go reread my post. :)

Cutting him would calm his hormones but would do nothing to help the really bad habits he has formed regarding people.

So, I say again. How do you, realistically, deal w/a horse who wants to see you dead? Literally, smash you into mincemeat w/his hooves? sylvia

[julesandjoy]

I'd been reading this thread with interest, but was dismayed when I read the Marv Walker link. If you were joking about agreeing with it Sylvia, it is in very poor taste :mad: .

I agree with Jacquie, also having a horse who had similar behavioural issues, there is absolutely no justification for using those type of methods :( :mad: .


Nix, I say to you also. When I typed that response it was more of a, "Gee, this dude is using a stun gun - on a horse. What else could you do??? What other choices would be available to him??? How do you handle a horse who wants to kill you?"

Get mad. Go ahead. Sorry for the misunderstanding. But please do understand now that I did not say I agreed w/the stun gun.

Nix, I see where you're from England. Not sure where Jacquie is from but I will try to use more formal english from now on. I'm sure some stuff... uh, intentions, get lost in translation so I will be more vigilant to proofread my posts from now on. Hopefully I can avoid misundertandings which stem... uh, originate, from using American slang, local idioms, or sarcasm which would require visual back up... uh, clarification. :)

Heading back to edit that post...... sylvia

[barebacker]

I still am amazed at the misconceptions involved in natural training---it is not dominance or the the lack of that is at issue with developing a clear and communicative relationship with the horse--(I natural train all breeds---
wild, young and old---stallions or not) --pressure to move and communicate the direction of movement and the intention of movement is all geared to move the horse with as little pressure as possible to get the desired movement-and no more---therefore we start with very little pressure and increase it gradually until we get movement---then the key is each time we repeat this exercise we use less and less pressure untile only a movement of a shoulder or hip or our head in a manner which communicates at the horses level and he responds out of shear respect---also we use pressure to get the eye contact and head movement as well as his feet---at all times we are merely establishing not our dominance but our trusted leadership of the horses being. This leadership quality we comunicate and convey is why the horse will allow himself to follow us humans at liberty---why he will run with us-around us---stop when we stop---we are his TRUSTED LEADER and we established this not by dominance or pressure---but the right amount of pressure and the lack of it when the horse complied and exactly when he complied---the horse is lead because, of trust and the reward of no pressure when he complied---I have found no dominant aggressive horse as suggested in books or movies due to my body language and movement and assessment of each horse when I meet them for the first time---It pays to feel out what the horse has dictated as he personal space before entering it---all these things come from --watching, patience and the willingness for us humans to be a true leader of the horse---this is not for everyone and no everyone cannot be great at it--but everyone can enjoy the benefits and a closer relationship with the horse.

[Jacquie]

Jackquie,

Big time misunderstanding here.

Uhhh, I was not agreeing w/using a stun gun on a horse. Not at all. Please go reread my post. :)

Cutting him would calm his hormones but would do nothing to help the really bad habits he has formed regarding people.

So, I say again. How do you, realistically, deal w/a horse who wants to see you dead? Literally, smash you into mincemeat w/his hooves? sylvia
I've just re-read the post you've now edited but in all fairness how the original post was worded certainly gave the impression that you agreed with the use of the stun gun.

I wonder if the handler ever sat back and wondered why this 18 month colt had developed so many problems with people? To me the whole link screamed out violence and aggression from both the handler and the trainer's input - if this was mainly the type of contact the horse had experienced from people in his short life then no wonder he was aggressive towards them (self survival springs to mind). :rolleyes:

As mentioned earlier, I'd have thought the first thing to do would be get him gelded, this would go a long way to help settle him down.

The next steps would be to 'take the time it takes', by just hanging around with him untill a mutual trust was established. Then and only then, attempt to start gaining his respect by quietly working him online, this is because when (not if) problems do arise the handler is in a much better position to deal with them. Personally, I don't think working at liberty in the round pen should be attempted untill a handler has gained the horses respect (or earned it). :)

It's very rare a bad horse is born, they're usually the product of bad handling. Time, patience and perserverance are the key factors to help with behaviour problems in any horse, violence and aggression can be what causes them. ;)

[Yann]

Jacquie, you sound a bit like Mark Rashid there :D

I don't think anyone here could agree with the sentiments in the Marv Walker article, regarding the stun gun or the win at all costs attitude. There didn't seem to be any consideration of any external factors which might be making the situation worse either. I wonder what his approach would be with stallions, because I don't think it would be very successful:eek:

With regard to the whole alpha / non alpha thing I think the thing that possibly generates most heat is the perception that unnecessarily tough handling can result from the alpha approach on horses who really don't actually need it. Whilst some horses clearly do respond well to a black and white approach, many are probably pretty much OK, have a moderately good relationship with their owners but just lack consistency and understanding in their day to day handling. A full on approach to these horses, especially the more stolid types can have its risks, as a number of anecdotes about upset, unsettled, and suddenly uncharacteristically aggressive horses seems to indicate. One approach can't possibly fit all?

I believe in being fair at all times but being prepared to get firm if (or when) needed.

This caught my eye because I agree with it 100% :)

[Jacquie]

Jacquie, you sound a bit like Mark Rashid there :D
Now you've gone and got me all embarassed Yann, :o what a compliment, thank you very much. :)

With regard to the whole alpha / non alpha thing I think the thing that possibly generates most heat is the perception that unnecessarily tough handling can result from the alpha approach on horses who really don't actually need it. Whilst some horses clearly do respond well to a black and white approach, many are probably pretty much OK, have a moderately good relationship with their owners but just lack consistency and understanding in their day to day handling. A full on approach to these horses, especially the more stolid types can have its risks, as a number of anecdotes about upset, unsettled, and suddenly uncharacteristically aggressive horses seems to indicate. One approach can't possibly fit all?
I couldn't agree mo