Natural Horsemanhip- why the bad name?

[hackedoff]

I've deliberately put this in the General section to get as wide an opinion as poss- so if you do NH or not, why do you think it is getting such a bad name? I have been on forums where people are hostile and downright rude about NH, and have heard some folks dismiss NH as 'the latest trendy nonsense' or 'a load of parelli b*ll*cks'

How do you see natural horsemanship (of any variety, lets leave the parelli merchandising empire to one side if we can) is it a passing fad? Or the way forward? Or just one solution of many to get half a ton of flight animal to do our bidding? I think, if you've read my posts you know which side of the fence I sit on ( albeit gingerly, fell off again! )

So, over to you............

[Peace]

If we're talking about the general techniques of training and handling horses that NH folks are teaching, then it's the same method people in the southern Appalachians have been using since my great-great grandpa and uncles rode with the Confederate Cavalry. And probably before then - that's only as far back as I know about for sure. So no, I wouldn't call it a passing fad.

But I can think of some reasons why "NH" might be getting a bad name. I think its modern incarnation relies heavily on marketing techniques such as clinics and videos and special equipment. While there are good ideas in all those things, I can see how a person with less experience than the clinician might be disappointed when s/he doesn't acheive the same results s/he saw at the workshop. I can also see how a person relying only on what s/he sees on videos or at clinics might innocently misapply what s/he's been taught and make things even worse.

In short, there's just no substitute for working with an experienced trainer or instructor one-on-one over time.

[No_Angel]

I thik it could be sort of turning into a fad. I mean recently alot of people having been buying treeless saddles and bitless bridles (I know not techniquly sp? NH but its close),me included, but I have looked into treeless saddles for a few years and my bitless was a bit of a chance I took, but it works. I think since the horse whisperer film came out, and the recent sea biscuit film where Nh is in it I think people have been trying it.
I work in a tack shop and had one lady come in and ask for a specific bit because she watched a programme on the tv and they said it was the kindest bit. She described it as a sweet iron bit with copper strips on. Like the new Monty Roberts bit.

[laura jeanne]

My general understanding of NH is that the horse and rider cooperate due to mutual trust and respect.

If the alternative is to force horses to do what we want out of fear of punishment, then I can't see how NH can be just a fad or considered to be a bad method of training horses.

[Tootsie4U]

I blame most of it on ignorance. The solicitation of it is fairly new, but like Peace said, its been around for a very long time. The solicitation of the alternative has been around much longer and that is what people identify "horse training" with. You tell them they're wrong and automatically the defenses go up.

Read KarinUS' very recent post. Talk to any non-horsey person. See what they think horse training involves. We humans dont like to be told we're wrong

[denise42]

In my area NH gets a bad rap because people misinterpet it to mean . Let the horse do what it wants to.
As and example :
We have a farrier & a Vet that refuse to go to a particular barn in our area. The NH barn owners , who took a FEW clinics and altered what they were taught it to their way of thinking, and proceeded to insist that all boarders handle their horses according to their way of thinking , have created horses that have no manners. The farrier & the Vet have both been injuried by this , " Let the horsie do what it wants to " way of thinking.
At another barn :
I have seen a person open the stall door to try and get her 2 yr old out, when the mare refused , THE OWNER left the area, leaving the door open, so the mare could come out " When she is ready "
That is why I think it is getting a bad rap. People warp it into what it was never intended to be.
If they listen to any of the good NH teachers, there is alway an element of respect, and saftey.
Some folks just miss that point and are creating problems, for the rest of us.

[chev]

Echo that. 'Traditional' horsemanship got a bad name through people who took it and abused it - think of all teh anti BHS feeling that exists and ask people why. They'll tell you it's because the BHS methods are cruel, don't listen to the horse, don't work with the horse, and so on. In fact, many of the 'traditional' methods have a lot of sense and kindness going in their favour. Nowhere in the BHS stages are you taught to use ever stronger bits to stop bolting, or to whip a horse that doesn't co-operate - and yet that's teh view so many people have.

Same with NH. Take a few well meaning but largely ignorant people chasing a horse in circles waiting for it to start following them and do their every bidding, or letting a horse walk all over them so it's not forced into anything it doesn't like, and NH gets the same bad name.

It's not a fad - it's just another set of communication keys that will be shot down in flames by some, abused by others, and used by many more to great effect.

[Yann]

You do get some negative reactions, but I've personally found they're sometimes from people who have quite a mechanistic view of their horses and tend to view their behaviour and relate to them in human rather than equine terms.

A lot of things that aren't NH get lumped under that banner, if it isn't mainstream or traditional then it gets that tag. Forgive my french but a lot of crap gets spouted about being more 'natural' by using this or that or looking after your horse in certain ways, when natural it ain't, very little of what we do with horses is. It's a bit of a culty holier than thou thing sometimes I'm not particularly keen on the label anyway.

What NH also isn't is about letting the horse do what the hell it likes, I don't know where people get that impression from, as I've never seen it advocated, if anything NH is about establishing leadership and dominance in a non forceful and non violent way. I suppose it's because it's in contrast to the 'show it who's boss' by beating it approach?

I've said it before but there isn't that much different between good traditional horsemanship and a lot of 'NH' methods. For me it's about understanding what makes horses tick, and there have always been good horsepeople.

[Drummers mum]

I echo most of you on the board. I truly believe in the natural horsemanship way but I also believe that there is no right or wrong way of training a horse, its what works for you, as long as no cruelty is involved.

I have looked at many of the NH trainers but if you strip off the fancy layers down to the bare boards they are all basicaly telling you the same thing. You need to develop a partnership/relationship with your horse.

As for the people that slate NH, they have no business to do so. Horsemanship in its very basic form several 100 years ago was basicaly what we call NH today and all the modern riding techniques are developed from it. We are just revisiting our past and geting back to basics. A good thing, don't you think?

[laura jeanne]

I think that some dog owers also have some of the same training issues. Some people let their dogs jump up on people and generally be a nuisance to others instead of teaching it good manners. People can be too harsh with their dogs, too soft with them, be negligent and everything.

If everything we do with horses is unnatural, the same can be said for dogs when in the wild they live with a pack and no one tells them to keep off the furniture but we make them live in the house and they get to go out on a leash a couple of times a day.

I think people who use a little common sense in training their animals realize the capabilities and limitations of them and work with them accordingly.

I may have gotten way OT and started to ramble, sorry.

Anyway, cats, for one, are made to be spoiled.

[Cheko]

I can see what people are saying with regard to natural horsemanship. I practice what can be called 'natural horsemanship' on my Fell because he wont tolerate 'conventional' riding at the moment. If I wanna turn left, then I put more weight on my left buttock etc and leave his mouth alone. He wont tolerate any sort of pressure to do this or to do that at the moment. No way, could I in any shape or form, kick him to go forwards, a very very light squeeze suits him. Natural and tactful riding is what he needs at the moment. There are different types of natural horsemanship where various 'aids' are used. I dont have any of these, nor could I ever see myself being able to afford them. So, I'll just carry on using body position, weight etc until he tells me otherwise. It's interesting to see the different methods of riding/training people are using on their horses.

PS: I would also agree that cats are made to be spoilt!

[lawgirl]

I felt I needed to jump in on this one.

I have listened and read all about the NH. It seems to me that we are frowning upon some of this because of several different reasons.

First, it seems that this issue is similar to the Bible, we all have read, learned or been told about it and what we choose to repeat or do with that information, then becomes fact. It is a theory and how you choose to preseve this information is up to you.
Good or Bad.

Secondly, it seems as those someone learns a new thing, or old but new to them, its gosspel and everyone should use it and listen to them. That offends some people, when they have a good relationship with their horse and then someone tells them they are doing somthing wrong, it should be this or that way.

Lastly, whether or not I agree or disagree with the ways of NH, I do beleive that at the minimum, it gives beginners a place to start that isnt atrusive, cruel or damaging to a horse. Although I do beleive that it can be taken to a level that is distructive.

I believe it is like anything else, moderation is the key, common sence mixed with good intentions has no lasting, perminate negitive result. But,,,,you MUST enter common sence in the mixture.

Thanks for listening.

lawgirl

[janet hakeney]

I think it is because people brissle at the term Natural Horsemanship. The inference is that if they aren't doing it then what they ARE doing is Unnatural Horsemanship. So they they then set to and defend what they are doing, trying to show it is right, hence NH must be a load of cobb***s if it is the opposite.

[Yann]

Cheko, nothing at all wrong with the way you're riding your horse, with weight aids and light pressure, quite the opposite, but I can't help wondering why you describe it as NH or natural?

[Zingy]

I think the big positives are that it's all making some people think, and encouraging them to do far more groundwork with their horses rather than just expecting wonderful manners with no effort. Done properly it's very effective, but people think it's easy.

Having said that I don't like all the implication that if you don't do it, you're wrong. It's like if you don't have this type of bit/ saddle/ feed then you're not doing the best you can for your horse. I freely admit I look at NH techniques and then use them how I want with whatever equipment works. I don't fully embrace a single way of schooling and stick to it rigidly. And when I asked a well known NH trainer about a specific problem I was told that if I only 'played' with it, what did I expect - so it's all or nothing then.

The blinkered approach is bad on either side. No training technique will work for every horse and you have to be prepared to be flexible. Equally if what you're doing works, try other things anyway - they might work better and at least you'll learn something, whatever your horses reaction.

[lawgirl]

I agree with Zingy, I dont beleive any way of training should be held as gosspal or the "only way" to do it. Not to mention, us humans have a tendency to interpet things we hear for our own benifit, and when repeated, leads to mass confustion. I feel we should stay open minded about new or approved ideas, however, if we do adopt a theory or idea, SUGGEST to others what seemed to work for you, but dont be so closed minded to think that it the ONLY way to do it correctly, if we followed these simple rules, I dont think NH people would be given such a hard time right now. It is hard to listen to someone that projects an idea to you and follows up with "and if you dont do it my/that way, its being done wrong and your not a good trianer/horseman. It projects a negative response almost instantly with most.

The bottom line is for most of us or horses are similar to our children, we try to do the best we can, and if we fail at a few things life goes on and most will end up with a nice horse and a good companion. We are ALL only human, we will make mistakes.

All have a great day,

Wendy

[Cheko]

Yann, I read your posting in which you ask why I describe the way I ride Falcon as 'natural'. A lot of people now a days dont use the simple seat aid, they literally boot the horse on the left/right side and expect it to turn in the required direction, or practically yank its head off to change direction. Of course riding schools must take their share of the blame. Most of them have large classes and rather than take time to explain they just tell riders to use the left leg and pull with the rein to turn the horse. Nothing is mentioned about using the relevant buttock. Even if a horse has never been used to the buttock aid being used as the norm, it will turn in the direction it feels you weight has been shifted to. Sorry if this is a bit vague but I've got a rotten cold which is making me feel quite unwell.

[Yann]

Fair point, there are lots of riding schools about like that unfortunately However weight and seat aids are part and parcel of correct and classical riding, as is not steering with the reins or pulling back on them, all of which my BHSAI instructor teaches me. Not picking an argument here I promise, just pointing out that things that are 'different' or 'alternative' aren't necessarily 'NH'.

[Kate F.]

Sorry - this is going to be long - but you did ask! :-))

I think there are several reasons for the bad PR.

One is a very widespread misconception of what natural horsemanship is. To me, natural horsemanship means simply learning to understand the horse's view of the world, its natural behaviour, and its way of learning, and taking these into account when training them. It is not a set of exercises or a pack of equipment - it's a mind-set, an attitude.

Parelli is not definive of natural horsemanship - he is one practitioner of it who has come up with a few rules of thumb to help people get better results with their horses and has marketed it extremely well. The system is called "Parelli Natural Horsemanship" - it is one person's interpretation. Like any standard package, it has benefits and pitfalls. The main pitfall is that it is rather inflexible and doesn't really teach people to read different horses and adjust their own behaviour accordingly - it is a bit mechanical - "do this and that will happen"!

The methods I use are heavily based on the principles taught by Richard Thompson. Many parts are similar to Parelli, but we put more emphasis on WHY the horse behaves the way it does, and are more flexible in the way the exercises are done. These methods stem principally from from Buck Brannaman, Tom Dorrance, Bill Dorrance and Ray Hunt and are heavily geared to working with the horse's mind in ways that are logical to the individual horse.

Monty Roberts (who myself I would not put in the "natural" category, but is often included) has focussed on one detail of behaviour in the round pen - hook-on, or join-up as he calls it, and has made a show, several books and a lot of money out of it. To me, he is simply a showman and does not come into the natural category for several reasons, not least because of the equipment he uses and his 30 minute claim. The notion that one can set a clock on a horse's responses goes against every tennet of natural horsemanship as I understand it - but neverthless you keep hearing his name in connection with natural horsemanship - so right or wrong, people are making that association.

There are just 3 diverse examples - there are plenty more people out there carrying the natural horsemanship label who have many more diverse approaches - so its easy to see how the misunderstandings and misinterpretations arise.

Making it worse are the many and various practitioners with equally many and various levels of skill and understanding. There are certainly a fair number out to make a "quick buck" with gimmicky equipment and over priced courses with little content that will be of practical help to the horse owner afterwards.

There are also quite a few who are keen to show how clever they are, but not so keep to impart their knowledge to their students. I hear quite often "Fred Smith got my horse in the trailer after half and hour, but I still can't get it anywhere near it".

Personally, I would feel I had failed if a person who asked for my help didn't finish each time with at least a few things they could confidently use to improve their relationship with their horse. They've wasted their money if only I can get the horse's respect, pick up its feet, put it in the trailer or whatever - the crucial thing is that the owner/handler can do it. Better to take smaller steps and have them able to do it themselves than have a flashy display that's no help to the owner.

Looking at the history, no it's not new. It goes back even further than the earlier post suggested. The spanish conquistadors took their horses to America. Their horse carers and trainers integrated with the locals and became the "Vaqueros" or "Cowboys" using the horse training ideas that stemmed from the European baroque school. It is this Vaquero tradition that forms the basis of modern natural horsemanship. Being based in Vienna, I am lucky enough to have a few friends at the Spanish Riding School - and I think most people would be amazed at how close their training ideas are to what I understand as natural horsemanship!

Natural horsemanship is something every great horseman is doing - whether consciously or just instinctively. They won't be truly great unless they have that understanding of how the horse feels. To some, it is just so obvious they don't even mention it.

So why is "natural" different from "traditional"? Ironically, "traditional" is probably newer! Since the horse ceased to be a means of transport and an essential worker in the labour force and has become a pet and item of leisure, there has been pressure to get horses to perform better and better for people with less and less skill. Shortcuts started being taken - and gadgets used to make up for lack of rider skills and to try to overcome problems quickly for people without the skills or resources to re-train. Then the gadgets became standard and force became part of the culture. The emphasis became to MAKE the horse do it, rather than making the horse WANT to do it.

That brings us to another huge misconception. Natural horsemanship is not a magic wand, and it is not a quick fix or a short cut. When you get good at it, you can get spectacular results in a short time because you are working with the horse's mind - but to get good at it the person has to study, observe and practise hard. It's no easier than learning anything else - but is is fascinating and hugely rewarding. People are sometimes disappointed when they think they can take an unschooled pony to a clinic and come back 2 days later with an olympic dressage horse! :-))) - but seriously, a lot of people think it is a "quick fix" that will change the horse without them having to change anything in themselves. Not true.

I could go on - but will restrain myself! If you're interested in the approach I use, I've written a website and book about it - so please have a browse!

Is it the way of the future? I hope so and believe so. It was the way of the past, and I think it will come round again. The passing fad is the idea that there's a gadget to fix every problem! That goes along with miracle diets, learn a language in 24 hours, make a fortune in 14 days etc. etc. etc. It appeals to the lazy part of us - but at the end of the day, that's the approach that doesn't work!! :-)))

Am curious to see other opinions on this topic!

[Star Shaped]

I have never really looked that deeply into NH so this is just a generalized opinion rather than a knowledgeable one. It seems to me that with most things in life (not just horsey) anything natural, alternative or different from the was someone has been taught is generally met by most of the population with either complete disapproval or thought to be the only way that is right before they even know the ins and outs of it. Take things like feng shui, aromatherapy, natural remedies and even as far as beliefs such as witchcraft, buddhism, and whatever that religion that all the stars like Madonna do (I can't remember what it's called). A good portion of people will just see words like that and have a strong opinion without actually looking into things properly. Some people will even turn into whole hearted believers and followers without bothering to see if it really is for them because it has had great/fast results with someone else.
I think it is more about people's reactions and what they hear from other people more than the training methods itself. I mean lets face it humans in general are pretty easily convinced of things. And as previous posts said no one training method will work for everyone.