# Natural Horsemanship techniques



## Peepsqueak (Apr 6, 2005)

Who does natural horsemanship techniques instead of "old school" punitive techniques for horse training? I am using Parelli horsemanship but many have questions on it. Many novice horse owners like this philosophy but many experienced horse owners think it is a bunch of hooey because it may not be quick and effective enough. I did this for my young horse and it was easier for me however, I did need to incorporate other people who trained a little differently to get her going. Groundwork is first and foremost and essential to preparation. She is being trained as a leisure animal and for English hunter jumper and some dressage and a few Western skills for trail riding. She is basically a pet and leisure animal. Quarter horse mare with some thoroughbred bloodlines.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

I'm not a big fan of 'one way only' training methods. Over the years, I've found that not one way works for every horse and what may work for one trainer may not work at all for another. 

I am fairly open minded and will listen to suggestions from other trainers but the whole Parelli thing just doesn't make sense to me because it seems to be a marketing empire intended to sell merchandise. The old timers I know (myself included) don't want or expect quick results, we want good results and expect years to get a fully trained horse and last I heard Parelli claims it can be done in no time flat. 

If what you're doing is working well for you, keep doing it but just because we don't follow the Parelli way, don't assume that anybody not promoting themselves as 'natural horsemen' are punitive trainers. It's just another trendy word that allows someone to sell a service for a bit more money by using a catchy phrase or slogan.


----------



## offthegrid (Aug 11, 2009)

I don't know much about Parelli but I am curious what you mean by "punitive techniques"....?

I'm pretty sure my trainer doesn't use either Parelli or "punitive" techniques, and she trains horses for a living. 

My issue with some of the "groundwork exercises" I've heard about with natural horsemanship is that for some people it seems to go on for years before they ever get on. I think groundwork is really important, but so is actually riding. Some groundwork exercises cross over into riding skills, and others just don't. My horses don't really mind groundwork, but I have no interest in "playing games" unless they will further my horse's skills under saddle.


----------



## Grumpy old man (Aug 6, 2013)

wr said:


> I'm not a big fan of 'one way only' training methods. Over the years, I've found that not one way works for every horse and what may work for one trainer may not work at all for another.
> 
> I am fairly open minded and will listen to suggestions from other trainers but the whole Parelli thing just doesn't make sense to me because it seems to be a marketing empire intended to sell merchandise. The old timers I know (myself included) don't want or expect quick results, we want good results and expect years to get a fully trained horse and last I heard Parelli claims it can be done in no time flat.
> 
> If what you're doing is working well for you, keep doing it but just because we don't follow the Parelli way, don't assume that anybody not promoting themselves as 'natural horsemen' are punitive trainers. It's just another trendy word that allows someone to sell a service for a bit more money by using a catchy phrase or slogan.


EXACTLY , Just another "buy my book/cd " marketing plan


----------



## Bret4207 (May 31, 2008)

I think I can pretty much guarantee that if old Pat or Clinton or any of the other big name, mega rich horse trainers have a horse reach out and bite their arm, they will get real "punitive" real fast! Of course, you won't see that on the film. You don't need to beat any animal, but this business of never smacking an animal or whatever can go too far. It's like that Ceasar guy on TV that trains dogs- he got canned because all the bleeding heart softies objected to him actually touching the dogs or even intimidating them when they were misbehaving. A horse can kill you, simple as that. You can be gentle, but go watch a herd of horses interact someday and see just how gentle they are. You'll never be able to kick or bite like a horse and they beat on each other all the time. So while I don't advocate shock collars and beating, there is nothing wrong with corporal punishment at the proper time for some violations. Learning when the proper time is, that's the hard part.


----------



## SFM in KY (May 11, 2002)

Pat Parelli, John Lyons and a great many other "Natural Horsemanship" trainers are IMHO 'showmen' first and 'horsemen' further down the list. NH methods work ... IF you can read your individual horse and are aware of why the NH methods work.

I was extremely fortunate in that I was able to clinic with one of the real horsemen that used NH methods, Ray Hunt ... he wasn't particularly good with people, he related better to horses, definitely and better to experienced horsemen. He wasn't as good dealing with inexperienced horse people because he wasn't as able to explain how to read a horse to people that didn't understand what they were looking for in the first place.

His methods and NH in general, impressed me very much and I learned a lot from him though I'd been riding and training myself for years. I continued to use a lot of the methods in NH, combined with things I'd learned over the years that worked for me, including a lot of classical dressage foundation work I learned when I was in Spain. 

I definitely agree with WR ... no one method works for every horse or every trainer and a good trainer will use what works best. An open mind and hands-on horse experience are the things that will make a trainer successful in the long run.


----------



## dizzy (Jun 25, 2013)

I use NH methods for my horses, but can't stand many of the big names out there. IMO,most don't do a good job of explaining what you're trying to accomplish nor how to read the horse. As a result, many people are still never able to develop that bond w/their horse that they're looking for. And some end up getting seriously hurt.

Most people that I know that have had some exposure to NH methods w/out understanding what they're aiming for are under the impression that having the horse join up w/you is your goal-it's not. Joining up is, IMO, the step you need to be able to really work w/your horse.


----------



## Wolfy-hound (May 5, 2013)

Parroting any technique without actually understanding WHY you are doing what you're doing and HOW it is supposed to work and WHAT response you're aiming to get is not only detrimental, but possibly dangerous.

Whether it's NH or any other method, if you don't know what response you want from the house, you don't know when the horse has done it. If you don't know how the technique works, you don't know if/when you're doing it right.


----------



## Bret4207 (May 31, 2008)

Some others have sort of alluded to this, but Parelli and Anderson and all the rest for the most part aren't really teaching horse training to people. What they are doing is teaching PEOPLE how to observe and react to a horse to get the horse to react to the people. They are people trainers in the end. Nothing wrong with that at all, I admire their skill. They are also catering to a hobby that has a lot of dollars flowing through it and they make an excellent living. Showmanship is certainly part of it and so is selling their products. I seriously doubt a Clinton Anderson training stick is worth one penny more than a switch you cut off the edge of your woods, but some people will pay a relative fortune for something with a kangaroo on it.

The other factor in this the "brand name" end of it. "Natural Horsemanship" just sounds so warm and fuzzy and a lot of people find that appealing. It's the whole "green", "environmentally friendly" type thing. The thing is it means nothing really. It's like a guy out there that labels himself a "Biological Woodsman" and markets his "Healing Harvest Forestry". Yeah, right. It's sustainable logging, no more, no less. But the marketing is in play and is no different than sticking "NEW!" "IMPROVED!!!" label on a jug of laundry detergent. Amazingly, it sells.

This stuff just irks me to no end. Rant over!


----------



## Grumpy old man (Aug 6, 2013)

I just upgraded ms Grumpy's house cleaning to personal environment specialist ! but she's always been warm and fuzzy !


----------



## SFM in KY (May 11, 2002)

Wolfy-hound said:


> If you don't know how the technique works, you don't know if/when you're doing it right.


This is probably the single biggest factor in why NH does NOT work well for many people and also I'm sure one of the reasons that Ray Hunt was prone to rants about 'wannabes' in private with groups of actual cowboys.

The clinics I went to were in MT or WY and most of the riders were actual working cowboys that had grown up horseback and had learned a lot about reading a horse, so his explanations made sense to those people and they were able to build on that foundation with his explanations.

But that kind of ability to read a horse's potential reactions is something that comes from experience, which fewer and fewer people have now. The Ray Hunt clinics were great for someone with the foundation ... but for too many people, they were like putting a junior high student in a calculus class ... no matter how basic the instructions were, the foundation to learn what was being taught just simply wasn't there to build on.


----------



## jennigrey (Jan 27, 2005)

People want quick results. They want shortcuts. They want "one weird trick" to lose weight, improve their skin, make money, attract the opposite sex, make horses do what they want. 

If you had a course set up that actually taught people to read horses and learn how to anticipate their movements, to communicate effectively... it would be like watching paint dry to a person new to horses. The various clinicians are trying to teach observation and communication skills without boring the heck out of people. People need to feel like they are getting somewhere. They need to enjoy working with the horse. Can you imagine how many drop-outs Ray Hunt would have had if he had a class full of home-makers with only 2 hours scheduled per day to interact with their horse before they had to go pick up the kids?

People new to horsemanship are "following a feel" - to use an industry phrase. The feel that most of them are following is a warm fuzzy one. They want a bond, an instant rapport, and worse, they want their horse to LIKE THEM the way they like their horse. Bursting that bubble won't endear you to your customers. The expectations that they bring to the table are the primary barrier between themselves and their goals.


----------



## jennigrey (Jan 27, 2005)

I guess what I'm trying to say is that while I don't feel that most of the popular "Natural Horsemanship" clinicians are doing a great job of teaching horsemanship skills... I also acknowledge that a lot of the people they are marketing to would probably drop out of the horse industry altogether if the world only offered Ray Hunts. Mr. P (and his ilk) teaches and markets to a certain type of person with certain expectations and needs. Expectations and needs that I, personally, would feel morally conflicted about attempting to meet. But I guess I will never make my fortune teaching horsemanship.


----------



## Bret4207 (May 31, 2008)

jennigrey said:


> People want quick results. They want shortcuts. They want "one weird trick" to lose weight, improve their skin, make money, attract the opposite sex, make horses do what they want.
> 
> If you had a course set up that actually taught people to read horses and learn how to anticipate their movements, to communicate effectively... it would be like watching paint dry to a person new to horses. The various clinicians are trying to teach observation and communication skills without boring the heck out of people. People need to feel like they are getting somewhere. They need to enjoy working with the horse. Can you imagine how many drop-outs Ray Hunt would have had if he had a class full of home-makers with only 2 hours scheduled per day to interact with their horse before they had to go pick up the kids?
> 
> People new to horsemanship are "following a feel" - to use an industry phrase. The feel that most of them are following is a warm fuzzy one. They want a bond, an instant rapport, and worse, they want their horse to LIKE THEM the way they like their horse. Bursting that bubble won't endear you to your customers. The expectations that they bring to the table are the primary barrier between themselves and their goals.



Wow Jenni, that's a whole great big mouth full of truth you just posted right there! I've fallen for more than a couple of those "quick fix miracles" myself!


----------



## offthegrid (Aug 11, 2009)

I guess I don't have a whole lot of opinion on "natural" or other horsemanship techniques, since I'm not a trainer. My horses are already trained, so I guess I don't really see the need to train them myself...? I ride them, and I still use a trainer (to school on occasion and to give me lessons.) Even though my horses live on my farm, it's not a big surprise that my trainer still rides them better than I do....

It's not necessarily about her "bond" with the horses, but her skill as a rider and trainer. 

Now, if I were to compete at a top level, I'd definitely want more of a connection between my horse and myself - being able to read each other better would make us more competitive, more efficient, etc. The more hours spent "working" together (under appropriate conditions, with goals, supervision, etc.) would make us more of a "team" than individuals.

But I am not sure that the difference is "natural" horsemanship v. something else....maybe it's just "horsemanship?" And practice, and time...

I don't know....I find the whole idea sort of confusing. Maybe it is geared for people who don't want to employ a trainer? (Which is sort of scary in itself....?)


----------



## jennigrey (Jan 27, 2005)

offthegrid said:


> I guess I don't have a whole lot of opinion on "natural" or other horsemanship techniques, since I'm not a trainer. My horses are already trained, so I guess I don't really see the need to train them myself...? I ride them, and I still use a trainer (to school on occasion and to give me lessons.) Even though my horses live on my farm, it's not a big surprise that my trainer still rides them better than I do....
> 
> It's not necessarily about her "bond" with the horses, but her skill as a rider and trainer.
> 
> ...


What is your goal with your horses? What do you want to achieve with them?


----------



## offthegrid (Aug 11, 2009)

jennigrey said:


> What is your goal with your horses? What do you want to achieve with them?


Why?

We are casual riders; my kids occasionally show. We ride english pleasure, a bit of dressage and jumping here at home.

My horses are well-schooled, well-behaved, and need little "training" from us. So, I can't really imagine how "natural horsemanship" (or other training/exercises, etc.) done by me would advance our riding much...but I will admit that perhaps I don't know all of the things people describe when talking about "natural horsemanship". 

More time riding would certainly help us progress, for sure. Too bad we don't have more time to do it!


----------



## Bret4207 (May 31, 2008)

offthegrid said:


> *But I am not sure that the difference is "natural" horsemanship v. something else....maybe it's just "horsemanship?" And practice, and time...*
> 
> I don't know....I find the whole idea sort of confusing. Maybe it is geared for people who don't want to employ a trainer? (Which is sort of scary in itself....?)


That's sort of the point I was trying to make. It is what it is. Labeling it "natural" or "warm and fuzzy" or whatever is just marketing to differentiate it from other types of methods or theories. That's not to say that you don't learn from those guys. It's pressure and release and it works with horses, cattle, sheep, llamas, goats, etc. There used to be people advocating mechanical trainers, drugs and a lot of other ways of doing things. The old days of "breaking them" like John Wayne where you rode them into submission was more or less fear based and a lot of people got hurt or killed trying to do it. Today instead of fear we try to gain cooperation through pressure and release. It surely involves a lot less blood and broken bones. That's a good thing in my book.


Jenni said something above I wanted to add to- "...they want their horse to LIKE THEM the way they like their horse." Most non-horse or new horse people have a real hard time understanding a horse is not like a dog. They expect a dog's reactions from their horse.It takes a while to learn that a horse has no interest in pleasing you like a dog, he just wants to comply to the point that you release the pressure you are applying and nothing more. At least that's the conclusion I come to. Maybe it's not worded too well, but it makes sense to me.


----------



## offthegrid (Aug 11, 2009)

Bret4207 said:


> That's sort of the point I was trying to make. It is what it is. Labeling it "natural" or "warm and fuzzy" or whatever is just marketing to differentiate it from other types of methods or theories. That's not to say that you don't learn from those guys. It's pressure and release and it works with horses, cattle, sheep, llamas, goats, etc. There used to be people advocating mechanical trainers, drugs and a lot of other ways of doing things. The old days of "breaking them" like John Wayne where you rode them into submission was more or less fear based and a lot of people got hurt or killed trying to do it. Today instead of fear we try to gain cooperation through pressure and release. It surely involves a lot less blood and broken bones. That's a good thing in my book.
> 
> Jenni said something above I wanted to add to- "...they want their horse to LIKE THEM the way they like their horse." Most non-horse or new horse people have a real hard time understanding a horse is not like a dog. They expect a dog's reactions from their horse.It takes a while to learn that a horse has no interest in pleasing you like a dog, he just wants to comply to the point that you release the pressure you are applying and nothing more. At least that's the conclusion I come to. Maybe it's not worded too well, but it makes sense to me.


Yes, I understand and agree with you. My APHA mare is not warm and fuzzy, or a pleaser. She wants you to get to the point, let her know she did it correctly, and then let her go back to her hay. She's not *unfriendly* but she certainly is not trying to *please* me.

My other point was that I could play "pressure and release" all day with my horses....but that would be a big old waste of time since they already know that. Maybe if I were going to train a horse myself I'd consider "natural" horsemanship - but I think I'd say "hey, I don't think I'm qualified to train a horse, let's call a professional".


----------



## birchtreefarm (Jul 22, 2007)

Bret4207 said:


> Jenni said something above I wanted to add to- "...they want their horse to LIKE THEM the way they like their horse." Most non-horse or new horse people have a real hard time understanding a horse is not like a dog. They expect a dog's reactions from their horse.It takes a while to learn that a horse has no interest in pleasing you like a dog, he just wants to comply to the point that you release the pressure you are applying and nothing more.


This is true, but there are an awful lot of dogs out there that have no desire to please, and some that will only work for you AFTER you gain their respect. And an awful lot of dog owners who don't understand this any better than the horse owners you mentioned above understand their horses.

The problem with being married to one method of training is the assumption that that one method (whatever it is) will work for ALL horses (dogs/whatever). I absolutely cannot work with my sensitive and submissive Icelandic the same way I work with my stubborn TWH. 

I actually have used a dog-training philosophy called NILIF (Nothing In Life Is Free) to work with the TWH. Of course he's not a dog, and I don't expect him to "like me" like a dog, and if he doesn't "like" me, that's fine, as long as he respects me. I expect eventually he'll "like" me well enough, but I've only had him a couple months so it's early days yet.


----------



## jennigrey (Jan 27, 2005)

offthegrid said:


> Why?
> 
> We are casual riders; my kids occasionally show. We ride english pleasure, a bit of dressage and jumping here at home.
> 
> ...


I ask because my take on horsemanship is that it is about bettering your communication with horses - all horses. Good horsemanship makes you better at everything horse-related. I think that horsemanship is about the relationship between you and the horse. "Natural" horsemanship is defined by whoever is doing the speaking at that moment and I don't think I really feel like going there in this post.

I think that people who seek to improve their horsemanship are focusing on the relationship between themselves and the horse. Some people are more goal-oriented with their horses. To shave seconds off their run. To improve their canter depart. To do better at the next event. 

If I were to try to verbalize a goal with my horses, I guess it would just be to become a better horseman. I work my horses on the farm, I ride my horses for fun, I sometimes hire out for jobs with my team, I teach people to drive, I help people to better understand their own horses. 

There's always chores that I need to do, such as drag logs up to be cut for firewood, harrow the manure in, disk and level part of the pasture. Those are concrete goals. Then there's the things I want to work on with each horse - a softer jog with one horse, improve another horse's neck-reining, just get miles on another. Those are also concrete goals. Every ride and every drive there are opportunities for improvement on my part and on the part of my horses. When I improve as a horseman, everything else improves as well. So I guess improving my horsemanship is my life-long goal.


----------



## AugustRED (Apr 18, 2010)

Well I'll go ahead an add my two cents since everyone else is - I personally primarily use CA, have for probably the last 6-7yrs. I'd prefer my horse like me but it's not my priority anymore. For those who like to group all the "NH" trainers in a lump - IMO he doesn't seem all that warm & fuzzy, he's not above using a good hard whack when needed and doesn't shy away from doing in on TV or in person. He is most definitely not a tree hugger, lol, and likes to joke about it. His view is our horses are for _our_ enjoyment, not the other way around. We foot their bills, when we want to handle/ride them that's _our_ time to have fun, they have the rest of their day to do whatever they like. At the end of the day our horses will "like" us a lot more for cutting the crap & being a leader than for dolling out treats & cooing to them.

As I understand it a lot of his GW looks similar to PP but has different expectations. We groupies tend to loathe the amount of disrespect permitted in the name of "playing" and being "liked". I personally like to spend 2 or so weeks on groundwork before I start riding a new horse. Once we've established who's in charge & made sure they're thinking cap is properly installed I tend to taper off & just do what I want. I'll admit to enjoying all that silly stuff like sending them over obstacles so I spend time on it. I'm also a firm believer in introducing things on the ground first - water, ditches, logs, etc seem to go much smoother under saddle if we've already decided there's no boogie monsters. I'd like to avoid any extra cross country maneuvers for now. Just the way I prefer to do things...

As for riding I like reining so am obsessed with getting my horse soft, supple and light to my aids. Most people aren't & that's totally up to them. The fact that Clinton trains & competes to the top of my favorite discipline certainly doesn't hurt. Plus my equine chiropractor was nice enough to let me know it's actually good for them to be that supple. So I'll stick with it. Your horse will only get as soft as you insist so the whole "too soft" argument is null (not that I've ever hear someone complain about their horse being _too_ soft, have you?). Probably the most important thing to me is that everything's laid out - start here, build on it this way to reach this. I'm no good at putting together a training program from bits & pieces. Will I glean from other places? Absolutely! Only now I have an idea of where that tidbit will fit in for the best results. I can't speak for the rest but if you actually listen to Clinton talk for any amount of time you'll hear him openly admit that there are many better horse trainers out there - he's just better at teaching people than most. He encourages people to learn from whom ever they can & admits to seeking other peoples help/ideas himself, never stop learning. He even flies one of his mentors in from Australia a couple times a year to further _his_ education. The way I see it he's got the money to do some of the learning I could only dream of, why not take advantage of that? Does he sell tons of tools/dvds/etc? Heck yes, wouldn't you if you could? It's unfair to scorn someone for building a successful business. I will say though after using the knock off products I'll now spend the $ for the real thing & I'm an incurable penny pincher (have found some eBay sellers though who use the same rope materials so can satisfy my scrimping itch some that way)...

What I think all you life long horse people have to remember is many of us come from a horseless back ground, we didn't grow up around them or have someone showing us the ropes from an early age. Reading a horse takes us many years if not our whole lives to learn. Most of this horse stuff is greek to us in the beginning. So we have to learn by trail and error, mostly error to begin with. If we're expected to learn perfectly it just ain't going to happen. Obviously it's best to have someone to guide us along & show us the responses we're looking for but that's not always an option. So we do the best we can with what we understand. I think as long as said person is truly studying and not just looking for quick fixes or ways around the long hours & hard work then they're on the right path. It's unfair to belittle the choice to 'follow' a method or trainer - hoorah for you if you can go right out there & know what your doing and piece things together and get success with your horse. We envy you. But that's not really the norm anymore...


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

AugustRED said:


> It's unfair to belittle the choice to 'follow' a method or trainer - hoorah for you if you can go right out there & know what your doing and piece things together and get success with your horse. We envy you. But that's not really the norm anymore...


I don't feel I belittle anyone who has a clear idea of training a horse and I certainly have respect for someone like yourself that understands the principals of training. 

I do have a huge problem with the comment about natural horsemanship or the 'old punitive method' (which implies inflicting harsh punishment). As I have stated, I feel that there are more than one way to train a horse and it doesn't all center around the big showmen. 

Realistically, if they help someone learn how to ride a horse and understand a horse, that's great but I'm firmly of the opinion that it takes a lot more than buying a set of DVD's and a few games/exercises to make a trainer.


----------



## Bret4207 (May 31, 2008)

birchtreefarm said:


> This is true, but there are an awful lot of dogs out there that have no desire to please, and some that will only work for you AFTER you gain their respect. And an awful lot of dog owners who don't understand this any better than the horse owners you mentioned above understand their horses.
> 
> The problem with being married to one method of training is the assumption that that one method (whatever it is) will work for ALL horses (dogs/whatever). I absolutely cannot work with my sensitive and submissive Icelandic the same way I work with my stubborn TWH.
> 
> I actually have used a dog-training philosophy called NILIF (Nothing In Life Is Free) to work with the TWH. Of course he's not a dog, and I don't expect him to "like me" like a dog, and if he doesn't "like" me, that's fine, as long as he respects me. I expect eventually he'll "like" me well enough, but I've only had him a couple months so it's early days yet.


I know what you mean, but a dog seemed the best example for what I was trying to say. I suppose a lot of us would like a nice biddable horse with the desire to please of a nice Golden Retriever or Lab. Just ain't gonna happen.

I have a couple horses that like to come and just stand near me and get scratched. That's about as close to a dog as it gets!


----------



## Bret4207 (May 31, 2008)

AugustRED said:


> It's unfair to belittle the choice to 'follow' a method or trainer - hoorah for you if you can go right out there & know what your doing and piece things together and get success with your horse. We envy you. But that's not really the norm anymore...


I hope I didn't come across as belittling any trainers or students. My comments about "warm and fuzzy", etc. were in reference to the salesmanship end of the deal. You have to believe in something to buy it, right? If you look I also said I admire their skill, and I do. I admire Clintons ability, I wish I had it. But I don't admire the saddles and bits and sticks and ropes all labeled with a kangaroo that apparently means it's worth sooooo much more! That's how he makes his bucks and it's great for him, but it's got nothing to do with the effectiveness of his system. He could can it "natural horsemanship" or he can call it "boggy di-da", it doesn't matter. What matters is does it work and do people want it? Like my wife says, you can call a rattlesnake a kitten, but it's still a rattlesnake. It is what it is. So, no offense to you or them, we're just discussing labels and meanings here I think.


----------



## Annsni (Oct 27, 2006)

I always laugh at the people who are down on "punitive techniques" because apparently they've never watched a herd of horses interact.  I'm sure the alpha mare doesn't use Parelli on the other horses! LOL


----------



## SFM in KY (May 11, 2002)

Annsni said:


> I always laugh at the people who are down on "punitive techniques" because apparently they've never watched a herd of horses interact.  I'm sure the alpha mare doesn't use Parelli on the other horses! LOL


Exactly. Feed a herd of horses all winter and watch how they interact. I guarantee that you will have a much more realistic view of how horses enforce discipline and good manners after that.


----------



## offthegrid (Aug 11, 2009)

Annsni said:


> I always laugh at the people who are down on "punitive techniques" because apparently they've never watched a herd of horses interact.  I'm sure the alpha mare doesn't use Parelli on the other horses! LOL


I agree. 

Although there are some wacky trainers that do wacky things - tie horses to a post overnight in a bridle; tie the halter to the girth for horses that won't bend, ride in big spurs and bloody them up; ride in tie-downs so tight the horse is unbalanced....I am sure there are many other horrible ways to try to cut corners or simply bully an animal.

But most of us (or at least most people I know) would never condone that sort of "training"...no matter what the behavior of the horse.

So if that is the type of "punitive" methods people think of....I know those people exist, but I don't think only "natural horsemanship" trainers DON'T use these methods.


----------



## offthegrid (Aug 11, 2009)

OK, for argument's sake - this video was posted on COTH. I don't know these people, or this horse, so I'll be nice.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWF7yD15uZc[/ame]

What is the point of this exercise? It doesn't seem (to me) that the horse understands what it is expected to do, and seems pretty anxious.

It says "week 1" on the video, so clearly this is a work in progress. And we haven't seen a "before" video...maybe the horse was very unruly and this is a huge improvement? 

But I don't get the point of "come here" and "get away". When I did initial ground work with my TB mare (before i was comfortable riding her), I practiced leading and halting; backing on command. I put verbal cues with my commands so they might be used under saddle. We worked on some lateral cues with an aid - touching her side in a similar manner as a leg cue. We worked on bending from the ground. Then I taught her to lunge, and put verbal commands in - trot, canter, whoa... - in preparation for riding.

Maybe I had a different horse to work with - she was an older broodmare. So she led very well, but hadn't been ridden in about 8 years. 

I don't see that the horse "is out of her space" as the narrator is describing. She invites the horse in, and then chases her out. 

So, is this "natural horsemanship" done well? 

(As an aside, that's some deep footing!)


----------



## Bret4207 (May 31, 2008)

That is a disciple of Clinton Anderson I think, that has misinterpreted what the exercise is for or is just doing it wrong. I think the idea is to have the horse come to you when you invite it in and to move away when told, but I agree it doesn't look like the girl is getting the message across. IIRC the main idea is to get the horse to yield to pressure, but I'm not a hard core CA watcher and my rememberer is on the fritz anyway.

OT, but, why do young women allow themselves to be filmed in such an unflattering outfit. I don't mean to be insulting, but when your crotch is eating your shorts they are too short and too tight!


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

I feel so sorry for that little mare, it's obvious she's trying to understand what the little twit is asking but the cues are so ambiguous (and in my opinion stupid) that they just aren't understood.


----------



## CraterCove (Jan 24, 2011)

Annsni said:


> I always laugh at the people who are down on "punitive techniques" because apparently they've never watched a herd of horses interact.  I'm sure the alpha mare doesn't use Parelli on the other horses! LOL


Actually, I always thought of 'natural' horsemanship as the kind that utilized herd psychology and behavior to understand the mindset of a horse and therefore learn how to apply minimal force, maximum leverage in teaching them?


----------



## AugustRED (Apr 18, 2010)

Belittle was the wrong word. I guess it's more of a frustration, it often seems to me that saying you follow one way or another automatically makes you a greenhorn because you have to follow someone & aren't just forging your own path by gathering information independently & knowing how to put it all together. I found a method that works for me & probably wonât deviate much even after I start feeling well accomplished, heâll still be years ahead in experience. Maybe it's the fact that most 'traditional' training doesn't have it's own brands and therefore it's not like you can really say "I do it this way" & everyone knows what youâre talking about. There's a plethora of misc methods in 'traditional'...

I'm a bit amused by all the gripe about marketing though. I'm no more a fan of the glitz than the next guy but branding is how you create recognition, it really has nothing to do with being better, just being known & recognized. In advertising you never talk down your product, that would be counterproductive (& probably get you fired or bankrupt). Granted it's a new thing for trainers to market _themselves_ as a product so to speak but it was bound to happen. We've been buying saddles, blankets, grooming supplies, etc for years based on brand recognition. And it's stamped right there on the product. Why wouldn't Clinton stamp a Kangaroo on everything that leaves his warehouse, maybe someone else will see it, want it & buy another one! It's called advertising. And advertising builds business...

As for the lovely YT video, to answer your question - No, that is not NH done well. That is a mess. The handler is not being clear at all and so the horse is annoyed. It pretty much amounts to nagging, works just about as well with horses as it does with husbands, pretty soon they're out looking for a new owner/wife . Below would be a much better example, while not perfect you can tell he took the time to really understand both the how & the why to what he's trying to do. The horse is being respectful and seems more than happy to comply (although I'm sure they had to work to that point, it doesn't always start that way). As with any training some people take the time to really understand & others just seem to glance at the instruction and wing it. They don't want to take the time it takes to really understand it. But on the flip side of that you can't just look at one exercise & write off the whole system as pointless just because you don't understand the reason behind that single part...

[ame="http://youtu.be/HEnACbsHHDM"]http://youtu.be/HEnACbsHHDM[/ame]

BTW she drifted through a number of exercises. The outback exercise that you are referring to is basically an obedience test - will the horse back out of your space as far as you tell it too & wait until you invite it back in? It requires respect & obedience on the horsesâ part. One of the big things she missed was that once you invite the horse back into your space & they do so respectfully (without barging) you then rub on them as the release. You should be their safe place that they want to stay with (draw) but they still have be respectful of your space & not be pushy. Obviously different ways of achieving this goal, this is just one way. In my world an exercise doesn't have to have a showring or under saddle purpose for me to do it, if it chips away at resistance or builds respect I really don't care how silly it seems. That being said I've actually used this one while showing Trail in Hand much to even my surprise, course I didn't know that was going to be the case when I was teaching it...


----------



## Bret4207 (May 31, 2008)

Red, I get ya. I don't think it matters if you follow Xenophon or CA, as long as it works for you it's good. But the hot guys today sure do have the marketing down!


----------



## dizzy (Jun 25, 2013)

CraterCove said:


> Actually, I always thought of 'natural' horsemanship as the kind that utilized herd psychology and behavior to understand the mindset of a horse and therefore learn how to apply minimal force, maximum leverage in teaching them?


That's my understanding of NH as well, and it's the way I work w/my horses and how I've worked w/them since I first got into horses. I'll admit to not being a fan of Parelli or of CA. I don't expect my horses to "love" me, but I do expect them to respect me. I board (self care), and my horses are the best behaved out of any of the horses on the farm.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

AugustRED, again, I don't think I indicated that anyone using natural horsemanship methods is a greenhorn I would continue to question why it is acceptable to speak in a negative or derogatory manner about those that don't feel it is a training method that works for them. Perhaps you haven't considered that it may be just as insulting to say that those that don't train according to Clint Anderson, Pat Parelli are abusive or looking for shortcuts. 

I did indicate that I don't feel that anyone can become a trainer just by going out and buying a set of DVD's and I simply don't feel that is a safe or effective concept. The video that you took exception to is a perfect example of my theory. People want to mimic what they see but they don't always know why they're doing it or what they may be doing wrong to interfere with the desired response.


----------



## Molly Mckee (Jul 8, 2006)

I think one of the problems with the popular trainers is that somehow people can become a trainer or horseman(woman) by going to clinics and watching tapes. You can't. You can get ideas that may work, but you need experience, lots of experience!

I have gone to a CA clinic and Monty Roberts. CA is funny and entertaining, and if you watch him he has spent lots of time handling horses. Monty Roberts is IMO better, he has so many years of experience it is just a part of who he is. The only way you can get to that level is to spend thousands of hours working with horses, not watching tapes.

I feel that if I watch anyone and I get 1 idea or something reminds me of something I'd half forgotten, it was a success.

I certainly don't expect to become a trainer by watching tapes, although I personally know of one person that opened a training stable after spending 1 week with John Lyons. She was not even a very competent rider. The one thing she did have was a much older, rich husband and a very nice set up. However she was so clueless she didn't even realize she was. She found a better use of her time quickly.


----------



## dizzy (Jun 25, 2013)

Just something to toss into the mix, it's not the years of experience you have that matters, but the experience in your years. 

For example, I used to work on a horse farm. The woman that owned the farm is in her 60s. She's been around horses probably most of her life, teaches, judges, etc. But I can read a horse better than she can. I was watching one day while she was grooming a horse. She never picked up that the horse was ready to explode and I knew if I told her, she wouldn't have listened-I'd only been around horses for about 8 years at that time. Well, the horse exploded and broke the cross ties. I'm not sure how many he broke while I was working there, but he never broke any on me and I groomed him more than she did.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

dizzy said:


> Just something to toss into the mix, it's not the years of experience you have that matters, but the experience in your years.
> 
> For example, I used to work on a horse farm. The woman that owned the farm is in her 60s. She's been around horses probably most of her life, teaches, judges, etc. But I can read a horse better than she can. I was watching one day while she was grooming a horse. She never picked up that the horse was ready to explode and I knew if I told her, she wouldn't have listened-I'd only been around horses for about 8 years at that time. Well, the horse exploded and broke the cross ties. I'm not sure how many he broke while I was working there, but he never broke any on me and I groomed him more than she did.


It's unusual to be around horses for that many years and learn nothing and once in a while, you'll come across an old timer that's been injured and has developed fear issues they don't address and they get so nervous about what could happen that they make a horse anxious or they simply can't relax enough to read a horse. If it has gotten to that point, they're better of judging than working with horses.

There are also the odd few that simply can't read equine behavior and they should absolutely not be teaching new riders or training horses and hopefully,word of mouth thins them out fairly quickly.


----------

