# Willing Compliance or Aversive Reflex



## Hondo

On my first and last introduction to the round pen the home trainer was showing me the "ropes", literally.

Said trainer was holding the lead rope in the left hand and twirling about a foot or more of the end in the right hand.

As the trainer stepped towards the hind quarters of the horse, the horse stepped away with his hind quarters.

"See that?" "He knows if he doesn't move I'll hit him."

To the casual observer, it might have appeared the horse had moved willingly.

Did he move willingly? Or by aversive reflex? Or is there a difference? Or in the long run does it make any difference?


----------



## BlindHorseEnthusiast4582

Subbing to see what others say. 

I've seen this talked about as "adding pressure" that can be released when the horse complies. I have never worked in a round pen, that's just my only experience with seeing/hearing what you describe. Swinging the rope like that is useful for corralling a horse because it makes you look larger and moves them away from you. 

I don't think "he knows if he doesn't move I'll hit him" is the best way to look at it, but I see where his concept is. I'd say it's not willing necessarily though, because IMO a horse shouldn't listen because it fears physical consequences, it should move because it respects the handler's direction, and then is aware that things can become unpleasant for them if they fail to comply with the command. Then, it should do it willingly next time, because it's aware of that consequence, not afraid of it. 

Just my thoughts on it.


----------



## tinyliny

reflex is an unlearned behavior. that making the hind move over with pressure is a learned behavior, so not a relfex.

however, the point i training should be to have the horse move where we ask with as little pressure as possible. so, if you always move the horse with propellor swinging, that's what it will take to move him. you should be working to make him move off a "air pressure" alone. 

so , you should only have to 'hit' once or twice before he knows that a swing of the propellor means move over.

but, if you start out with 'air tapping' at him, and go up to propellor, then allow the propellor to just sort of 'land' on his hind end, he will realize that it's coming, and will soon chose to move at 'air tapping', so no propellor spinning is necessary, much less hiney hitting.


----------



## Smilie

Agree with Tiny
The lightest cue you use, when first asking a horse to do something, will be the lightest cue he will ever learn to respond to.
Thus, if you eventually want a horse to yield just to focusing your eyes on what you want him to move, adding a verbal cue, or cluck, start with that, then if no response, go to 'ask, ask louder, then demand'. A horse then learns to respond tot he lightest cue, be it a rein, a leg or to slight body language, as he is given a reason to be light.
Going to the ask louder, or even demand, at the beginning, will get you a horse that will never respond to less


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

Tiny Liny brought up a good point. The horse can’t be willing until it understands what we are asking. After the horse understands what we are asking, then you can make the call as to whether something is being done out of willingness or coercion. To me yes, it does make a difference.


----------



## Hondo

tinyliny said:


> reflex is an unlearned behavior.


Unfortunately, sometimes words are just not my forte. I should have said, "Aversive Response". Do you have the ability to change the title? Or coercive aversion? Would that be right? 

@Smilie
RE: go to 'ask, ask louder, then demand'
COMMENT: I do understand this is almost holy grail in the horse training world. After my first horseback ride in 40 years here on the ranch, I took two paid lessons in town where I was presented with the "ask, tell, demand". I will not defend myself as being right or wrong, but I simply do not and will not demand anything of a horse. It's just not in me or any part of who I am. If I felt that there was no recourse to demanding, I'd vacate my relationship with horses. But that's me.

@tinyliny, Reiningcatsanddogs;
I do understand that a horse does not have the choice of doing what you want unless it knows what you want. And I do understand that pressure/release is not punishment but rather negative reward. I believe it is important that the pressure be only something regarded as a discomfort where the horse searches for a way to end the discomfort. If the pressure is actual pain, then I believe the horse's actions enters the realm of self defence against the trainer. Although the final effect when viewed from the outside may be the same, I tend to think that the internal feelings of the horse toward the trainer my be damaged since the horse comes to think the trainer is someone he must defend himself against.

The notion that you may just have to "pop" the horse once or twice with the rope and never again, to me, is just a result of the horse's very vivid memory.

I do not see a clear distinction between punishment and the clear threat of punishment in terms of aversive responses and the view the horse has of the punisher or threatener.


----------



## jaydee

If someone swung a rope at you or flicked a whip at you would you move away from it or stand there? 
Horse's are no different in that reaction to humans but horses that have to survive in a herd situation are even more tuned in to knee jerk reactions than we are
It's harder to train a horse to not move away from a whip flick than it is to train them to move away even if they've never been touched by one which is why you have to take some time getting the horse used to the whip being used as a cue when you start lungeing or its going to be constantly pulling away from you
I rarely use any sort of body language/whip/ropes for direction at all once my horses have learnt verbal cues because I can't use body language from the saddle.


----------



## jaydee

If someone swung a rope at you or flicked a whip at you would you move away from it or stand there? 
Horse's are no different in that reaction to humans but horses that have to survive in a herd situation are even more tuned in to knee jerk reactions than we are
It's harder to train a horse to not move away from a whip flick than it is to train them to move away even if they've never been touched by one which is why you have to take some time getting the horse used to the whip being used as a cue when you start lungeing or its going to be constantly pulling away from you
I rarely use any sort of body language/whip/ropes for direction at all once my horses have learnt verbal cues because I can't use body language from the saddle.


----------



## Smilie

Hondo, you missed what I really said. So please read my response again.
The idea is, to always ask as softly as possible, , going to the louder only as needed, then to ask as softely as possible again,each time
This creates a horse that will respond to the lightest aids
I never swing ropes=that rope twirling is an NH type of thing, that I never got into, any more then using rope halters routinely, \round penning endlessly, ect
The reason I don't need to wear spurs trail riding, is because my horses will go anywhere, including across rivers, up steep, winding , muddy, root covered trails, because I have instilled that lightness. They walk out on a loose rein, whether coming or going, while watching their footing.
If you don't like that type of horse, so be it
I am not into analyzing , trying to put some label on any technique, I just don't use a method I don't like, and that endless rope twirling,is one of them
On a horse that understands as to what you are asking, they become neither light by going to that demand, never giving the horse a chance to respond to the lightest cue, nor do they become light, if you quit before you get them to respond to a cue they understand-that is the basics of horse training.


----------



## bsms

We adopted two kids shortly after getting married. When the two kids refused to try eating spaghetti, I forced them to. Literally. Shoved it in my son's mouth and held his mouth shut until he swallowed. My oldest daughter, then 3, watched with wide eyes! After a few very messy rounds of that, he agreed to chew and swallow on his own. My promise was if they tried it two times, and did not like it, I would never ask them to eat it again.

Mid-way thru the second meal of spaghetti, they both realized it was goooood eats! And in the years that followed, I never had to use force to get them to try something. They would try it twice, willingly - because they had figured out that there were a lot of good tasting foods they could only discover by trying.

That story is part of family legend now. They both have kids of their own. They both used as much force as needed to enforce a "boundary": "You will make two good faith efforts to try a new food". In return, they knew that staying within the boundary meant they would never have to eat something they did not like more than twice. It proved to be a mutually acceptable compromise.

It is like the electric fence Tom Moates and Harry Whitney discuss. The fence creates a boundary. The horse decides if it will challenge the boundary. If it does, the horse gets hurt. If it doesn't, the horse has the freedom to graze - and will cheerfully do so, right next to the fence. As the chapter title states, "*Electric Fences Don't Chase Horses*".

I have no problems using whatever force is needed to create a boundary that is important to me - no bucking, no spinning, no bolting, if I tell you I really need you to go forward then go forward. In return, I give the horse freedom within those boundaries - we can go past X with a little extra room, or trot past, or if going forward is not REALLY important to me we can even turn back. We may even quit riding on a day if the horse doesn't feel like it. But the horse doesn't get to 'not feel like it' every day!

A boundary means "_You picked the wrong action. Try again_." No animosity. No punishment other than to respect that boundary. And freedom to try multiple options within the boundaries. Electric fences don't chase horses, and neither do my boundaries. And they seem to soon figure out the boundary, and respect it willingly enough - in part, I think, because they have freedom inside the boundaries.

I willingly drive my car down paved roads. Why? Because taking off across country doesn't work as well. I'm quite happy to use paved roads. Or dirt ones, if that is all that is available. I try to avoid leaving the roads, because submitting to the road allows me to go someplace I want to be. The road is not coercive nor is it aversive. It just is. I can travel 600 miles in a day, or get stuck in 600 yards. My choice. The road merely is.


----------



## Foxhunter

I do not find using a rope winging it or using it to get the horse to move over, I teach them first in the stable then when leading them out, to move over from my voice or, at the most a finger on their side. It easily translates to when you are riding or on the ground


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

BSMS, Let me tell you how it worked out for my parents going the route you took. Doing what you did I would swallow it and then gag and immediately throw it up! When I was three they force fed me milk at school, I swallowed, gagged and then threw up on the teacher’s shoes, which they then made me clean up. Honestly, I didn't care as long as I didn't have to drink milk that day. Cleaning up barf was preferable to drinking milk. 

After a while of trying to force me to “try things” my parents just decided that if I didn’t eat dinner, then I went hungry the rest of the night. It wasn’t going to kill me to miss a meal and if I was uncomfortable with a grumbling tummy, then that was my choice. They tried the whole, you won’t get anything else until you at least try this thing (they would put it in front of me for subsequent breakfasts, lunches and dinners) and after three days where I ate nothing, they gave up (the food was spoiling anyway), worried I would pass out in public and someone would call child services.

Then again, I was also the kid that got spanked and said “That didn’t hurt, hit me again” so they had to get creative to gain compliance. Different strokes for different folks.


----------



## jaydee

The food thing's going off track but as a child there were loads of things that I refused to eat - my own kids the same - but as I got older I developed the maturity to try different stuff and some I liked and some I didn't so I'm not sure of it as a comparison to teaching a horse anything!! 
Not sure what would happen if anyone tried to force me to eat sushi!!


----------



## bsms

There is more than one approach to teaching a kid to try a new food, but one does a kid no favors by letting the child refuse to try new foods. Sometimes you have to push a kid before the kid will learn that he likes doing that something.

Sometimes a horse needs a shove in the right direction. I think an honest "just try it" - coercive though it may be - is better than making a horse spin circles for 5 minutes and pretending that isn't punishment. I also think it is needed at times, unless one plans on letting the horse decide everything. Done fairly and honestly, I've seen no resentment result - provided the fence doesn't start chasing the horse.


----------



## greentree

How would a roping horse get trained if he always moved away from the rope(so tgat it would not hit him)??


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

None of my kids were adventurous eaters. Never made them try anything they didn't want to after I tried selling it to them (It has all of the things you like in there, it is really good, look your baby sister/brother loves it etc.) They grew up to eat practically anything, even bugs and tarantulas, while I remain a picky eater to this day. In all fairness, eating was never all that important to me; I sometimes forget to do it.

I found the same to be true with training horses. They will try anything you ask as they gain confidence and trust. How you go about gaining that trust and building their confidence is what differs.


----------



## Hondo

jaydee said:


> If someone swung a rope at you or flicked a whip at you would you move away from it or stand there?
> Horse's are no different in that reaction to humans but horses that have to survive in a herd situation are even more tuned in to knee jerk reactions than we are
> It's harder to train a horse to not move away from a whip flick than it is to train them to move away even if they've never been touched by one which is why you have to take some time getting the horse used to the whip being used as a cue when you start lungeing or its going to be constantly pulling away from you
> I rarely use any sort of body language/whip/ropes for direction at all once my horses have learnt verbal cues because I can't use body language from the saddle.


I do understand using a rope as pressure. Not a source of pain, but pressure. The same as perhaps holding your thumb in their sides until they move away from it. And I know about rubbing whips on the horse so he won't be afraid of it. And "grounding" the whip when the is no cue being indicated with it so the horse will not become confused.

I understand all that. I've read about it, watched videos about it, and had it demonstrated one on one in a round pen.

I aborted when I was told, "See? He knows if he doesn't move I'll hit him". Too many, way way too many people cannot understand using a rope or a whip to look larger than they are or to apply pressure without pain or fear.

And even if they understand it, too many, way way too many, just won't stop there.

I have urges to hit. Yes, reflexive urges to hit. And I have. And that has resulted in mortification on my part and an added distance in the relationship with Hondo which I had to work hard at recovering.

I understand that horses can't talk. If they could, it might be harder to teach them. hee hee

I know we have to communicate with body language for that's all they know. BUT BOY DO THEY KNOW IT. 

It makes me wonder if we could only control our thoughts and have the proper thoughts in our head, our body would communicate those thoughts to the horse without us even being aware. To a degree of course. No nouns, verbs, or adjectives.

@Smilie
I have no problem with asking or telling. If fact, too often I tell before asking. But I'm getting better.

It's the demanding I have a problem with. Of the trainers I've read and respect, they all say that a horse is willing to do as asked if it is within his capability, if he knows what is being asked, and if it is not going to cause him pain or danger. There may be a few others I've forgotten.

When demand time comes, I think it's time to step back and say, "Whats going on?" Yourself, your surroundings, your horse. What's going on? Why is he unwilling?

Demand is, to me, and maybe just to me, too forceful of an attitude for a proper partnership relationship, which is important to me above all else.

@Foxhunter The only downside to using a finger in the side to indicate move over, which Hondo and Rimmey respond to very very well, is that when I'm checking to see how fat Hondo is he moves before I can feel his ribs. Maybe he doesn't want me to know for fear his rations will be cut?

@Reiningcatsanddogs :grin:

I have four kids, one dog (at present) and two horses (almost)

I do not, have not, and will never be comfortable doing anything to any of them that I would not do to my very best friend.


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

Hondo said:


> @Reiningcatsanddogs :grin:
> 
> I have four kids, one dog (at present) and two horses (almost)
> 
> I do not, have not, and will never be comfortable doing anything to any of them that I would not do to my very best friend.



I agree but would add one caveat. If my best friend (or one of my children) was drunk and trying to get in a car to drive, I might do what is necessary to keep him from hurting himself or others....not out of hate, anger or distain but out of love.


----------



## Avna

This is one of those discussions in which semantics really takes over. The truth is, horses must do some things and not do others if they are to be useful domestic animals. Operative word: must. There are no options, there is no 'if he feels like it today', no 'if he really trusts me'. 

Violence, including the threat of violence, is almost always a poor training method for any living being. It may create obedience but there is the baggage of fear you have also created. Sometimes that fear leaves a permanent mark in the mind. For example, if someone had force-fed me even once as a child, I would remember it as a hideous trauma for the rest of my living days. Not everyone would, but I would. I'm glad it never happened to me. 

Violence, in my semantics, means pressure exceeding what is absolutely required. Pressure is always required. It may be as light as a thought, or a glance, it may simply be waiting. But there has to be pressure. 

In the system of enhancing human relationships via conversation called NonViolent Communication, there is a concept called request vs demand. The only way one can distinguish between them is by what happens when the answer is no. With a request, there are no consequences. With a demand, there are. My position here is that almost everything we do with horses involves demanding, on some level. You can demand with great tact, patience, and understanding, or like a total jerk. That is the choice.

Violence might be an option in a true emergency. There are rarely as many true emergencies as we imagine.


----------



## Hondo

@ReiningcatsanddogsAgreed. And if my best friend was preparing to jump off a building to his death, I would do what I could to stop him even if it meant breaking a leg, if there was no other alternative.

@Avna RE: For example, if someone had force-fed me even once as a child, I would remember it as a hideous trauma for the rest of my living days. 

Comment: At one level, I agree with what you say. But it just isn't necessarily always true. There are children who by the standards of anybody on this forum were abused to a degree they could have been prosecuted for it. Yet those same children as adults are often heard defending their parents actions as something they should have done and something they agree with.

There is a reason for this. It is as I recall similar to the reason a child that has been abducted and abused will after a time form a positive view of the abductor. Something to do with survival. With the parent I think it also has to do with admitting you may have been mistreated by a parent that you would prefer to respect.

I'll let the psychologist on board explain/correct further.

RE: With a request, there are no consequences. With a demand, there are. 

Comment: Consequences is one of my most unfavorite words. I always read it as a smokescreen for, "With a request, there are no punishments. With a demand, there are.

As I said somewhere previosly, all of the nationally and internationally known trainers that I personally respect, stop at demand with the belief that something is wrong which needs to be discovered.

RE: The truth is, horses must do some things and not do others if they are to be useful domestic animals. 

Comment: I understand this as I was raised on a farm that only used horses for plowing, pulling a wagon, mower, etc until I was 14 years old.

If a person is only interested in a confined domestic servant, then what you say is often the way it is. But I don't think it HAS to be the way it is even under those conditions.

But to the degree a person may be enamored by the grace, beauty, and elegance of the horse, and enjoy deeply a close bond with one, that mindset just will not work.

Don't get me wrong that I think a horse is a dog. They are not. I have a Great Pyrenees dog and they are as close to a horse as a dog can get. She was good training for me. Pyrenees will be your friend on condition. Not unconditionally like many dogs. They are the only dog that there is no obedience circle at dog shows.

Yet they are extremely intelligent.

So if a person wants to confine a horse and force him to do things he doesn't want to do, fine, if that is the desired relationship.

But having a willing partner do those things, is to me, and again perhaps only to me, contradictory to demand.


----------



## Foxhunter

Very well said AVNA. 

It is instinctive for the very young foal to lean into pressure, they have to be kindly taught to move away, 

I am extremely patient with animals and children but, of the needs be then there is no one tougher than me. I was brought up with the teaching that a bog stick was often the answer. It took a couple of remedial ponies I was riding to teach me otherwise. I was around ten at my awakening. From that moment on I tried to get my wanted response with patience and understanding. However if a horse was a right beggar and taking the mickey then the big stick would come into play. 

No one would ever call me soft with my animals, I expect a lot from them, I get a lot from them, they seem happy with the way things are between us. 

HONDO You say that your horse would move away when you try to feel his ribs if you used a finger poke, surprisingly, they don't. They learn the difference between wanting them to stand or to move away.

I would muck the horses out whilst they were eating. Everyone of them would automatically move to one sode if I wanted to get to that sode to clean it. They didn't need telling, they didn't lift their heads from their mangers, they just swung their quarters over yet when they were having other things done to them and I went to the other side they stood stock still. 

I am sure horses are more capable of understanding and reasoning than we give them credit for.


----------



## Smilie

Force feeding kids, as Jaydee commented, is getting way off topic!
Hondo, I have a great relationship with my horses, as I do with my kids, as neither were spoiled, and learned to be"\good citizens'
Thus, my kids learned to do things at times, just because , as the parent,I knew what was best
Horses don't sit and analyse a relationship with us. They are secure, confident, and in fact, seek, clear fair leadership
Horses are also not all quite as altruistic as many like to believe, and when a horse understands a request, has been asked softly to comply, there does become a time to demand
If I know the safest place to cross a river, where neither the boulders are too large, or there is a deep hole, I do expect my horse to cross where I ask him to, versus arguing with me, at a place it is not even safe to argue
I do not need to beat my horse, as that response , though trust in my leadership and judgment is ingrained
Too many horses wind up in slaughter, unwanted, because many people just don't get, 'be as soft and gentles with a horse as possible, BUT also as firm as needed, to make that horse a good citizen
We have a recent post, on a horse that balks, and then goes backwards, to avoid going where asked (away from buddies and barn . I think that is a time to demand that foreward. Of course, little things were missed by someone, as the horse should never have gotten to that point in the first place
Now maybe that horse thinks he will be in danger, leaving his buddies, but that is because, his leader (s) is back in that pasture, and not on his back


----------



## Avna

As a general rule, telling someone that they do not enjoy the deep spiritual bonds with their horse that the speaker does is unendearing. Just my personal experience.

That's all I think I'm going to contribute to this thread.


----------



## Hondo

Just so's yall don't think I'm a halpless softie nincompoop.

Molly is the lead mare in the herd. One day when I had taken Hondo back to the herd I was petting and talking to him before taking leave. Molly sauntered over turned her backside to Hondo only about eight feet from him and feigned with her hinds off the ground 18 inches or so.

I had the halter in my hand and immediately threw it at her. Chased her and threw it a couple of more times. For the longest time, maybe into months, she avoided me. We are now best of friends and she comes to greet me anytime I'm nearby.

Physically threatening actions in the vicinity of a human is of course something that can't be tolerated and my response was at least close to a reflex.

But I characterize my response as defensive and that's ok. And if a horse is being defensive, that's ok to me also.

But I am not tough with the horses and they know it. And no advantage is taken.

BTW, Hondo doesn't move over for a light examination, it's when I really have to push hard to find a rib. He says, "What? Oh, ya want me to move over?"

Sorry but I just feel bad for horses who are destined to spend most of their lives reacting to fear, pain, or the threat of pain. Coercion is coercion whether a hand need be lifted or not.

I realize they have fear in nature and that nature is not always kind. But in captivity I do not think it should or needs to be so.

One of the things I have consciously attempted to make both Hondo and Rimmey understand that I will never harm nor hurt them in anyway.


----------



## Hondo

Sorry if I offended you Avna. We are all here to discuss, exchange ideas, and hear how other people think. We're not here to necessarily always agree on stuff.

The first paragraph of your first post is close to 180 degrees from where I am or want to be. Now I know and now you know. We don't HAVE to always agree.

If everybody agreed on everything, what would we talk about?


----------



## Prairie

I think there is some confusion on the intensity of the ask, tell, demand sequence in working with horses. Assuming the horses knows the correct response to the cue, normally the ask is executed quietly, and if the horse refuses, the cue is executed "louder", and if another refusal, the cues is shouted. So if my horse refuses my whisper of a leg cue, I'll use my leg with a little more force, and if that is refused, I'll demand by backing up the leg cue with a tap of my whip----there's no need to cause pain and it's more of a reminder to listen to what I'm asking.


Think of it like a alpha mare moving an underling out of her way......first she just walks towards him, if he doesn't move she pins her ears, and if he ignores that she's quick to swing her butt around and threaten a kick. By then the underling has most likely gotten the message to move even those the alpha never kicked him.


----------



## Avna

I sincerely doubt that the practices -- never mind the theories -- of most or all of the posters on this thread are far more similar than they different. If you think my horse lives in fear you definitely haven't met her.


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

I don’t think Hondo is suggesting that your horse is living in fear anymore than you are suggesting that his horse is a spoiled brat headed for the slaughter house. 

However, if you are around horses long enough you will run into those who fit one of those or even both descriptions. 

Depending upon where you live, you may run into more of one type than the other. It has a way of coloring your viewpoint and sending you a bit to one side or the other.


----------



## Smilie

Ditto to Avna, far as my horses living in fear, responding to physical pain.
You know Hondo, there is a happy intermediate position, between using pain, intimidation , and being ineffective, with the horse constantly needing to ask, \who is leading who?'
While true cases of abuse exist, and should be abhorred by any true horseman, it is also true, that more horses wind up in slaughter, unwanted, dangerous, because they have become spoiled, with that owner not knowing the difference between good fair leadership, and afraid to be a leader, because the horse then might not love them.
Ask, ask louder, can be as simple as first just applying a feather of a leg against the horse,then more firm leg aid, and finally a bump, if that horse does not move off that leg
Next time, the horse is again given a chance to respond to that feather light touch. That is what creates a light horse, and does not mean you have to wallop on that horse
I plan my holidays around my horses, worrying about their care when I am gone. 
My horses come up to me, are easy to halter, even after working hard for three days in the mountains. They are relaxed around me, don't mind being touched anywhere on their body, and horses don't do that, if they fear harsh treatment.
Such horses flinch and tense when touched.
If I want one to move over, that is tied, I only have to look at their haunch and smooch. However, if a horse that understands that request, sorta \say'. naw, think i'll just stand here, then they just might get a slap on that haunch, and a stern;over'
next time, they will yield with that soft smooch.
Happy trails, anyway, Hondo, and hope horse Hondo never decides to take you on a ride, where it counts!


----------



## Hondo

@Smilie

The happy medium position as you describe it is where I strive to be.

And I have no problem under certain conditions of bumping Hondo with my heels.

For instance, if we are going out for round up or now packing salt with Rimmey in tow, Hondo is all business. Seldom request to stop to eat or rest.

But on the other hand, when we're just out moseying around, something he quickly picks up on, he'll frequently go for a bunch of grass. He knows this is tolerated by me when on a stroll.

When "I" decide "I" want to go he will sometimes ask, "Wait a minute, couple more bites, please?" Which of course I sometimes give in to under the casual circumstances. But he really prolongs, I jiggle his reins, and he still wants to eat, he often gets a "Oh C'mon Hondo, with a bump from both heels.

To me that's like two friends out on a stroll when one wants to stop and investigate something. The other is waiting and finally says, "C'mon, let's go!" Maybe they go then or maybe a bit later. So my bumps are a little bit of that back and forth that takes place between friends. There is no overlay or threat or even the slightest suggestion of coercion.

I know there are many many people here on this thread and elsewhere that believe a little coercion under certain circumstances is ok. But that is not where I am or want to be or ever will be.

I have no idea what you mean by your parting sentence, "Happy trails, anyway, Hondo, and hope horse Hondo never decides to take you on a ride, where it counts!"

What counts?


----------



## tinyliny

@Hondo

I agree that "hitting" a horse that doesn't understand, or is simply afraid, results in 'mortification. it isn't helpful.

I don't do a whole lot of rope propellor swinging, but when I watch my trainer do it, it is more like the propellor moves without any real intention., it is just like a wall; a wall does not reach out an hit someone. but, if you ignore it's reality, you will run into it and you will feel it.

now, the propellor is moving toward the hrose, but one thinks of it as a wall; a wall of pressure. however, you let the horse know that you want it to move with something much lightler. then, you keep asking , but you also approach the horse, with FULL belief that you will have have the horse move.. you walk forwad as if you will walk right THROUGH the horse. the swinging propellor is just sort of there. 
there is not real 'intention' in it. there is not threat in it. no meanness, nor cruelty. nothing. it represents a wall. you step forward, asking "move your shoulder over" or, "move your hind over". 
bringing in the swinging propellor should not amp up your energy, only back it up. and, the propellor doesn't HIT the horse so much as the horse, seeing it coming, does not get out of it's way and runs into it. 
the horse runs INTO the pressure. there is all kinds of freedom for the horse to move away from the pressure, with never having actually met the 'wall'.

there's a WORLD of difference between that and actually "hitting' the horse.



lastly, it is sad to me that so many people have such a negative view of Natural Horsemanship. it isn't smoke and mirrors, or rainbows and farts, or all the negative things that are attached to it. not in it's correctly done format. but, people have their prejudices, which they hold onto dearly.


----------



## Textan49

bsms said:


> A boundary means "_You picked the wrong action. Try again_." No animosity. No punishment other than to respect that boundary. And freedom to try multiple options within the boundaries. Electric fences don't chase horses, and neither do my boundaries. And they seem to soon figure out the boundary, and respect it willingly enough - in part, I think, because they have freedom inside the boundaries.


One of our boarders was having a problem with a new horse that would toss his head and back down the aisle because he didn't want to go into the grooming stall. I corrected it in a couple of sessions by not trying to correct his refusal to go in (he was allowed to stand and think about going into the stall) but correcting him from backing up. By eliminating the backing up he had only two choices left. In the first session he thought about going in for about three minutes. The second session was less than one minute, and there was no need for another session because he was given the opportunity to make the right choice on his own.


----------



## Foxhunter

What is respect but a form of fear? _I say fear and do not mean terror.)_

I greatly respected my parents. I did not go out to rob a bank or mug an old lady not because I was afraid of the law but because I feared the reaction of my parents! Not that they were violent, but a mad mother was worse than any prison sentence! 

I found that dealing with horses that were bred at home very easy. They were handled correctly and accepted things I did with them as fair. I rarely ever haltered them as they could come in and out loose. I used not only humans to teach them but also the dogs. 

Coming in at night from the fields the youngsters would often want to race inside. I would let them out of the electro gate onto the track and they would start to charge, placing either my GSD or BC on the track would stop them. The dog would then lead them up the track into the barn. Laziness on my behalf as I couldn't be bothered to catch five or six horses in the poring rain and walk with them into the barn. 

It was easy with having them from foals. They quickly learned to trust me. They knew when they had transgressed and a quick "Eh!" ended any nonsense before it got out of hand. 

They trusted me as they would a lead horse. My old mare was also a great help in that she was a passive leader. She never went to the first feed bowl but would stand back and watch others sort themselves out before going to whatever bowl was free, but nothing ever even tried to drive her away from that bowl. She would willingly share with me of the youngsters but not with anything that tried to boss her, one look was enough for them to back down. I tried to emulate her.


----------



## Hondo

Fear vs Respect is a whole controversial topic in and of itself.

When it first looked as if I might get a horse, Hondo, of my own a little over two years ago and began reading, fear vs respect was one of the very first concepts I delved into. I was not on a forum at that time and just Googled several varieties of fear vs respect. Fear vs love, etc.

Fear works and I'm not talking about terror either. Mild fear works. I've seen it work and know it does. And I know it can be used in such a way that it is not "majorly" harmful to human/horse relationship/interaction.

My own individual and personal world view, whatever that means, is such that a fear based interaction, no matter how mild, just does not form a comfortable fit for me.

And my own personal conclusion has been that fear and respect are not one and the same. Many agree and many disagree. It may be a semantics thing. If respect is considered as pure esteem, then I think it is clear that a person can be held in high regard or high esteem without any fear attached.

Whether a horse has the ability to esteem would be yet another topic.

It's so easy sometimes it seems for words to become such a muddled mess with the emphasis on differing concepts of the same word that people have no clue what the other is really trying to say.


----------



## bsms

Foxhunter said:


> What is respect but a form of fear?...


I have respected a lot of people whom I did not fear in the least. I greatly respect the 85 year old deacon in our church. He's has serious health issues with cancer now, but he's one of the finest men I've ever met - but an 85 year old man getting chemo isn't at all frightening.

A few weeks after I traded Mia for Bandit, I decided I'd work with Bandit on the assumption that horses were more like humans than most say they are, and try to gain his trust and respect the way a human would - by demonstrating to him that I had excellent judgment and that the things I told him to do - even when he was scared - should be done because they were better than any idea Bandit had.

Much of NH is based on building "trust" and "respect" in a round pen, and what THEY teach is really to fear the human - obey or else. Then they call that trust. After all, "_What is respect but a form of fear?_"

My idea was that I'd ride Bandit. When there were things that scared him - and a human neighborhood provided MANY things outside his previous life experience on the Navajo reservation - I'd do whatever was needed to demonstrate to him that I knew what to do, and doing things MY way would keep him safe. If that meant backing a ways, then dismounting and taking 5+ minutes to slowly approach something, so be it.

My promise to Bandit was, *"You are never alone. WE will do it TOGETHER, or WE will not do it at all."*

Last October, he took a big, lifelong rider sideways 100 yards, thru a neighbor's yard, to avoid a car parked beside the road. Later in that ride, he bucked hard enough to put the rider on the wrong side of the saddle horn. He would fight to save himself, or flee, almost every ride - UNLESS ridden in a way that respected his fears as genuine to him, and with the rider looking for a mutually acceptable compromise.

Yesterday was the first time since April that he has shied. I don't know what it was and I don't think Bandit knew. It was also his first time in a curb bit in many months & I didn't want to do anything with his mouth. But he shied about 50 feet sideways, in our arena, then turned on his own to look at the place he shied away from. So we worked our way back over, on loose reins, and a few minutes later he was content there was nothing there.

Is he perfect? Nope. Neither am I. But we've gone from multiple "I can't do that" moments in a ride to his first motion away from something since April - and he controlled that on his own in 50 feet.

All I did was set some boundaries. If he spun away, I'd spin him back so we would end up facing the scary thing. I was willing to use as much pressure as needed to handle any bolts, but he rarely tried any bolts UNLESS the rider pushed him forward and tried to force him past something. On slack reins, he wouldn't reach the point of trying to bolt. If he bucked, I'd darn near tear his head off getting his head up, then wait for him to stop. Another boundary is "We do not buck". As soon as he stopped bucking, I'd release. If he bucked again, I'd raise his head again and wait. We do not buck - but that is a boundary. I'll enforce that boundary, but I won't "chase" the horse afterward and punish him. Once the bucking was done, we'd both try to find a mutually acceptable way of progressing.

And most of the time now, on a trail, if I point him at something that makes him nervous, I can let him pause for 10 seconds, and then his ears move forward and HE decides WE can go on. It isn't 100% and may never be, because I want a horse to refuse at times. There are animals that attack horses and people that live here, and there are places the footing looks good but is actually very unstable. So I want him to refuse at times, and he may refuse a few more times than I consider optimum. I also think a horse who knows how to buck will always retain that in their mind as an option. But most of the time now, he'll go because I say to go - and because I've shown him, many times over, that I know what I'm talking about.

I've noticed he has done the same thing with the other two horses. For a long time, he would refuse to follow either of our two horses past anything. He had no trust in their judgment and considered their passing by something safely to be good luck. He still thinks Trooper is an idiot and ignores Trooper's example. But he has decided Cowboy has OK judgment, and he'll now follow Cowboy without much question. He is not the least bit afraid of 13.0 hand Cowboy. But unlike a year ago, he now trusts Cowboy's judgment.

Not all horses are alike. Bandit is half mustang and half Arabian, and as my farrier told me, "_If you wanted unquestioning obedience, you got the wrong horse!_" - and this from a guy who prefers mules to horses.

During my military career, I had commanders. And I had leaders. And they often were not the same person. A commander is obeyed because he can and will punish you if you do not obey. A leader is obeyed because it makes good sense to do things his way.

BTW - I was re-reading Littauer's book on the history of modern riding last night. He quotes from an 1878 book on using a round pen to build "trust" and "respect", and it looks like something in Monty Roberts or Clinton Anderson. I just don't think that has anything to do with REAL respect or trust.


----------



## Foxhunter

I agree with you totally, it is just difficult to explain the form of respect.

Non of my horses were frightened of me yet they knew not to push things to far. I want them to be a partner, on my side. I also want them to have their own characters. 

Trust has to be both ways.

Handling a horse on a daily basis it doesn't take me long to gain their trust. I correct the little things, no grey areas. 

I had an older hunter come to me. He was an honest horse, had had a tough life and wasn't 100% sound, just wear and tear. I got him sound, tended to his needs. Hos rider was not over experienced and one day we went hedge hopping to give the rider more experience. On returning home he was turned out with the other horses. Later, bringing them in for the night, hos owner walked down the field to catch him. As he approached the horse walked away from him heading to me. As he walked up the field so I could see he was not sound. On reaching me he stood looking at me and then held his front leg up towards me. 

On examination I finally found a thorn driven into the front of hos fetlock. That horse knew that o could help him where his rider wouldn't know what to do. 

His sort of thing has happened more than once with other horses ignoring their owners and turning to me for help.


----------



## bsms

I find it a balancing act. One I still struggle with and probably one that never really ends. I need some control or my horse would not want to leave our little arena, where the summer rains have created...green grass to eat! But if I try to control too much, it provokes resistance. And with both Mia and Bandit, I find giving up some control - such as using slack reins when they are nervous - often seems to give me MORE control long term.

But it is very much a two-way street. I have to learn to trust Bandit enough to give him some freedom so he'll trust me. As he trusts me more, I can afford to give more freedom. 

In May of 2015, when I swapped Mia for Bandit, Mia was actually a calmer and more trusting horse than Bandit. Her biggest problem, in spring of 2015, was that her rider couldn't forget how she was in 2010 and 2012, and I often tried to ride the 2012 model of Mia instead of the 2015 model. My lack of trust in her had become her biggest obstacle. But if a horse has repeatedly scared the living daylights out of you, it is hard to put those memories aside - even if the horse has!

What success I've had with Bandit has all been rooted in what Mia taught me, with two differences:

1 - Bandit does calm faster after an incident than Mia would, and 

2 - Since Bandit was NOT Mia, I didn't try to ride the Mia of 2012 while on Bandit in 2015.

I also strongly agree that after 8 years, I handle far more things while they are small because I automatically notice them BEFORE they become big. And that gives the horse confidence. I was far too inexperienced and new to have been riding Mia, except no one else wanted her...

Happily, she is a mommy now raising a foal and in a place where the riders are very experienced. And Bandit is turning into the sort of horse where I can lift one leg up on top of the saddle so we can squeeze between two cacti - something I'd never have tried with Mia. Win/win!


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

I agree with fear/self-preservation being a huge motivator. I don’t know that it can be entirely avoided with animals or people. I mean we even have a fear of failure! 

IMO there are two types of fear, instinctual and reasoned/learned. I don’t know that you can avoid an instinctual fear; you can mitigate it and program the response to it but you cannot eliminate it entirely. They say bravery is not an absence of fear, instead, it is being scared to death but doing it anyway. 

To say that you never want to elicit fear in your horses, I’m not sure that is an entirely realistic goal. Learned fears on the other hand are something much more in our control.

A whip itself has no meaning to a horse who has never seen one. A horse who has never known the sting of a whip will not fear the sight of the whip itself. They may fear the sudden movement of it or the loud noise (primal fear), but not the sight of the object itself. A horse who has experienced the consistent stinging pain of a whip, will have a learned through transference, fear of the object itself. Like a small child reacts to seeing the nurse bring in a tray full of syringes with attached needles. They see those things and start crying, anticipating and fearing the pain to come.

This is a learned fear, reasoned through by past experiences. The human has the whip, they are going to hit me with it and that hurts, I don’t want to be hurt and self-preservation kicks in. There is no question in that horse’s mind that you are going to use that whip on them to inflict pain rather than communicate.

We board an older mare who has a severe fear reaction to the very sight of the lunge whip. The second I pull it out she withdraws to a corner somewhere and refuses to come anywhere near me until it is put away, then suddenly, she is my best buddy again. To get her past her fear, I am going to have to confront her with that which she fears so that she re-learns that there is nothing to fear. 

One of my retired ranch horses has a similar reaction, though with time, has begun to overcome his fear. He is re-learning that here, in our hands, the big whip appears when there is fun to be had.

A third completely retired from riding ranch horse also makes himself scarce when the whip comes out.

So far that’s 50% at our place who at one time or another have learned fear of the whip, which when used correctly should be seen by the horse as nothing more than an object of communication. 

Obviously, it was misused by someone, at some point in all of these horse's cases and appears to be a quite common learned fear. There is a difference between a healthy respect of something and a fear.

This is in direct contrast to my personally trained horses who, when they see me pick up the lunge whip, come scrambling over to our arena gate because to them, it symbolizes time for some mental stimulation and play. They have been rarely touched by the end of the whip; never in anger or haste and never hard enough to inflict pain, only to reinforce communication. Simply put, they respond well before it is ever necessary to "demand", which is really the goal...to get a response at the ask and never have to demand.

So Hondo, to answer your musing, horses are very good at reasoning their way into transference whereby the crumple of a bag and jingling of buckets = feeding time. Or the sight of a halter can mean 'ugh, thankless work' or 'yeah! We are going for a ride'. A whip in its appearance can encompass pleasure or pain. And the sight of a human, specifically their human, can mean good times ahead or a miserable afternoon. 

I don’t think you can absolve your horse of ever having a fear reaction to something you do, some of that is built in, what you can do however is remain conscious to minimize their learned fears and create willingness in as many situations as is possible so that "demanding" becomes a very rare and almost obsolete necessity.


----------



## Dustbunny

OP..." I will not defend myself as being right or wrong, but I simply do not and will not demand anything of a horse."


How would this be possible? I demand they don't bite me, kick me or run over the top of me...just for starters. If I'm working with a horse and ask them to do something, I know they understand and are capable of doing it but simply prefer not to or are out in la-la land somewhere, I will ask with more pressure until they do it. One of the two of us has to be in control. I prefer it be me.


----------



## jaydee

When I think of the difference between respect and fear I always remember the headmaster of my school and the deputy headmaster - the first was feared because he was a harsh man who enjoyed using the cane way too much and for way too little reason. No one respected him but you behaved in his lessons out of fear. The deputy was loved and respected by all students, no one played up in his lessons because they admired him so much they wanted to please him
You can't use exactly the same route with horses but if you're patient and consistent, being sure that they always fully understand what you're trying to do they'll be far more likely to take you wherever you point them later on down the line than the horse that's been trained using fear tactics so is begrudging not willing. When they come across something that frightens them more than you do they'll let you down every time


----------



## Smilie

Fear and respect are not even remotely the same.
In fact, you can teach a fearful horse nothing, as he stops thinking, and goes into flight or fight mode.
While I don't like some of the the NH techniques, esp those that are over done, I do not think that those trainers who use NH round pen work correctly, base their training on fear.
Lets be clear, that I trained horses for many years, before I even read or watched any NH training techniques, thus never used 'round penning, join up, ect, but I have seen where it is effective, not done over and over again, pr on a horse that has been habitually handled, or a horse that has been abused, but on a young horse, handled very little, for one or two training sessions.
The person has to be reading that horse correctly, removing pressure, at the right time, just like when riding, controlling his direction, through body language, and then removing all pressure, at the point of connection, so that when they walk away, the horse will follow them.
My son used it when first getting on colts. The colt would just stand ground tied, while saddled, and my son would step up on both sides, in the stirrup, then walk away, with the horse following him. At that point, the horse was ready to be mounted, and ridden lightly, at all gaits, with never a buck.
After those few sessions, he would never round pen a horse again, and would just ride them in the open ASP
Getting a bit off track here, but the main problem I see with NH, is that those techniques shown by many of the clinicians are used incorrectly or too much, with even sub trainers, certified by many of those clinicians, using techniques incorrectly, esp that stupid rope twirling, backing a horse endlessly that way, trying to do join up over and over again, using round pen work incorrectly. over flexing at the standstill, getting too focused on dis engaging hips, and nothing on working with actual engagement, which should be the major basis of training
When I talk of a horse being respectful, I am talking of a horse that does not invade my space, thus leads without walking into me, pulling or lagging behind, that horse gives to pressure, be it a leg or rein or lead shank. The horse never decides he can bite me, threaten to kick, and when feeding, never acts food aggressive around me. Just a few points.
Far as horses that you raise correctly, never needing that correction, of a horse that has been handled incorrectly-I think any horseman knows that, and why good trainers would rather train ahrose handled very little, or not at all, over a horse that has learned bad habits through incorrect handling/training
We are, however, getting off on many tangents here, that are not really relevant to the original question
I do believe that respect comes first, and with that respect comes trust. A spoiled horse with no respect, gets no confidence from that person, as a leader
If I had to beat on a horse, to make him go down a trail, had that horse continue to spook and try to leave the country, had to get off, over and over again, taking that horse up to an object I had assured him was not a problem, then I would consider that I had failed in training that horse, or ever truly earning his trust
I lead always on trail rides, as hubby just likes to follow along, thus my horse first sees any suspicious rock, rustle in the leaves, perhaps some game,grouse flying up, etc. Once I have that respect and trust, the most my horse will do, is give a little spook in place, then continue on
If that horse tries to whirl, bolt, ect, I have failed, or that horse is not one I would be proud of having bred.
Last, to answer your question, HOndo, as to what I meant by your horse deciding to take you for a ride, and I have been there, riding a horse I did not train or raise!
That mare I bought off the track, and who came with baggage, got better, and perhaps, if she came into my life when i knew more about training, would have even become more solid, but she at times tried to take me for a ride
On case, was when we were way back in grizzly bear country , and had to go through a bog. Once in that bog, she panicked, and simply would not go where I asked her to, but instead, plunged deeper into that bog, thus cutting one back leg on some submerged sharp branch.
Ever ride through thick under brush, and your horse decides the best way out, disregarding any attempt for you to rate him, or even pick a path? I think you were there once on Hondo, as I re call.
I expect my horse to listen, when I say 'no, not that way, but this way:!


----------



## Avna

There are times I let my horse pick a path, because she's the one with feet on the ground not me. Going down a steep bank, I just let her do it her way. Tricky footing, I let her decide what looks safest. But she already knows what direction I asked her to go in, and she doesn't get to change gait. She did have to earn my trust before this became my habit. Generally that's the way of it -- I establish the rules, and once she demonstrates she understands and will obey them, we can both relax and get the job done within those parameters. That, to me, is the kind of trail horse I want. 

Arena work is a whole nother thing, since it is all about her learning to be supple to continual cues. She really doesn't get to do anything her way. One of the reasons I have to push myself to do arena work although I know it is good for both of us. 

As far as being 'prejudiced' against NH, I have to say I started with a blank slate where NH was concerned, and became more and more critical the more I heard from its adherents -- as far as I'm concerned they do not argue their case very convincingly.


----------



## bsms

Smilie said:


> ...had to get off, over and over again, taking that horse up to an object I had assured him was not a problem, then I would consider that I had failed in training that horse, or ever truly earning his trust...


IIRC, you raise and train your own horses. 

When I got Bandit, he was 7 years old and had many hundreds of miles on him - in open country, with a dominant rider who believed in just pushing a horse past. If the horse blew up, but you got him past, you 'won'. 

Cowboy came to us as a free ex-lesson horse. He's terrified of round pens and hates arenas. He assumed the worst of humans. Time, and a lot of trail rides carrying people who like him, have revealed a very level-headed trail horse. If I had to trust one horse with my life, it would be Cowboy. I trust him to teach my wife about riding by riding on trails. Even Bandit has begun to trust him. I think he is an outstanding horse, all 13.0 chubby hands of him! But his trust had been demolished by people who really should have known better.

Heck, Trooper had been spurred so bad he still has scars after 8 years. The scars are mostly gone, but there are some good ones on his right side still. A horse who arrives looking like this is not going to be a trusting horse at the start:








​ 
However...he blamed cowboy hats primarily, and men secondarily. He still prefers women and there is no love lost between us after 8 years. After 8 years, he seems to be waiting for me to show up with spurs and get after him. That I don't even own spurs doesn't matter to him in the least. At the very best, he tolerates me. Sort of.

I suppose "willing compliance" risks spoiling the horse, while aversive training risks terrifying the horse. I think either approach, done by someone who can read a horse well, can work OK. For my part, at 58 and spending most of my riding time on pavement or in the desert, I prefer a low confrontation approach.


----------



## Smilie

Yes, BSMS, I have pointed out, that re training horses with past issues, presents another challenge, and why most horse trainers would rather have a colt not handled, versus one that has been handled/ridden incorrectly, so was not referring to you, but to anyone that has only themselves to blame, for both the mind of the horse they bred, and how they handled that horse and trained him.
Avna, yes,as I pointed out, I will let my horse pick his way along a trail, but, I give him that responsibility, versus him taking control, with the horse willingly again letting me guide him, when I feel it is in both our best interests.
For instance, crossing a river, all of which are strewn with boulders, I direct my horse where to cross, then give him aloose rein, trusting him to strike out for that opposite bank, picking his footing, while I stay out of his way, eyes forcued on that opposite bank
Going up a steep winding trail, with a drop off-again my horse is given her head, but I reserve the right to check her at that switch back hair pin turn, bringing her front end around, versus allowing her to scramble and perhaps go over
Big difference is giving the horse the job of picking the best way, when you yourself are not sure, and quite another for a horse to lean on that bit and take charge, unasked!


----------



## Palomine

Overthinking this. And based on this alone, not impressed with your "trainer", who as tinyliny pointed out, should be using the minimal amount of force that is needed. There is no reason for any rope twirling, unless and until horse has shown it is of the mindset of "nope..don't want to". Even then I am not a fan of rope twirling, a lash whip gets point across easier, that coupled with a pointing arm and hand with finger extended works just fine, once horse realizes what you want.

Horses can be easily trained to work off of hand gestures, or voice commands, once they are worked with.

But too many things with horses, are just flat being overthought.


----------



## Hondo

Dustbunny said:


> OP..." I will not defend myself as being right or wrong, but I simply do not and will not demand anything of a horse."
> 
> 
> How would this be possible? I demand they don't bite me, kick me or run over the top of me...just for starters. If I'm working with a horse and ask them to do something, I know they understand and are capable of doing it but simply prefer not to or are out in la-la land somewhere, I will ask with more pressure until they do it. One of the two of us has to be in control. I prefer it be me.


Hi Dustbunny!

If you read back a ways you will see that we have been discussing the notion or rule of ask, tell, and demand if there is not the proper response to a cue. Demand as was being discussed had nothing to do with how to handle aggression in a horse.

If you will check out post #24 of this thread you will see that my actions were very quick and very demanding when a lead mare showed aggression, not to me, but toward a horse I was near.

If a horse were to bite or kick a person in an aggressive act, I would say that demand is a much much too mild of a response. I believe the horse should me instantly made to think they were about to die by any means possible. Cause pain? You betcha!

But again, for not responding to a simple cue, before the demand is made, I think a person needs to figure out why the horse is not responding. Fear? Pain? Doesn't understand? Hasn't been trained? Hole in training? If all those things are taken care of, the level of demand will never be reached. Horses are simply more accommodating than that. They do so much for us and ask for so little.


----------



## Smilie

Of course, Hondo, it is assumed, when applying that rule, pain, lack of training, not understanding, is first ruled out.
Yes, horses are very giving , and most will try to please, handled and trained correctly, but lets be realistic, having seen horses that simply have learned to say 'no. to a rider, do exist, because they have learned that they can refuse to obey a cue, because that rider has allowed them to do so.
Horses are creatures of habit. Many horses balk, rear, buck, not because of any pain, or lack of understanding, but simply by learning, through negative riding, that they can do so


----------



## Hondo

Smilie said:


> because they have learned that they can refuse to obey a cue


I think you mean because they have been taught they can refuse.......

Are they to be punished for doing what they were taught?

See above hole in training...........

The horse needs to be taken back to basics and retrained. That does not mean just upping the ante in a coercive demand.

Since you agree that horses are very giving, you should see there is another avenue other than demanding.

I've read and heard many times that horses are creatures of habit. As I look around at my human companions, and myself, I question whether they are more so than us.


----------



## 6gun Kid

Hondo;9436545
I do not said:


> Not to hijack what you are saying, but my best friend (or hetero life-mate as my wife calls him), have had more than a fair few knuckledusters in the almost 40 years we have been friends!


----------



## Avna

Like I said, Hondo is arguing with people who don't have an argument with him, because of his word definitions. To him apparently 'demand' means something other than what it means to the other posters. Ditto with 'consequences'. 

Horses don't care what you call it, as long as you are clear, calm, and fair. They also don't care what you call it if you aren't.


----------



## Smilie

Avna said:


> Like I said, Hondo is arguing with people who don't have an argument with him, because of his word definitions. To him apparently 'demand' means something other than what it means to the other posters. Ditto with 'consequences'.
> 
> Horses don't care what you call it, as long as you are clear, calm, and fair. They also don't care what you call it if you aren't.


Agree
When a hole in training is created, man made or not, just going back tot he beginning is often not enough, as methods then have to be used, to first make that bad habit unsuccessful,before any real re training can begin, plus that horse will never have that clean slate of mind, as a horse that never learned that vise in the first place
For instance, using a simple example, the horse that has learned to call the human's bluff, that a simple halter and lead shank control him.
Through correct training, that horse is conditioned from the time he is halter broke, to accept that simple restraint. Once a horse does learn he can pull away, you then have to make sure he is not successful, thus use whatever it takes, to prevent him from doing so, until he no longer attempts to do so, then go back to that simple halter and lead shank
Performance horses are also expected to respond to light cues, and that only happens if , once the horse understands a cue, you use the' ask, ask louder, then demand'You always start again with just the light ask, and the horse soon learns to respond to it alone, with the rider never needing to go to that 'demand'


----------



## Bondre

Avna said:


> Like I said, Hondo is arguing with people who don't have an argument with him, because of his word definitions. To him apparently 'demand' means something other than what it means to the other posters. Ditto with 'consequences'.


I personally don't believe that you are all saying the same as Hondo but using different words. Not at all. I think the difference between what Hondo is saying and what everyone else things he is saying is so huge that everyone fails to grasp it. 

If you think about it, the whole system of horse training is built around developing aversive reflexes. 
Moving away from pressure is the basis of much training and it is an aversive reflex. Neck reining is based on an aversive reflex. Moving off the leg is an aversive reflex. In fact, aversive methods are so intertwined into horse training that it's almost impossible to consider training without using them. 

And please don't anyone start telling me how much their horse loves them as if I were attacking anyone personally or accusing them if abusing their horses. Aversive training isn't the same as abusive - but it's not the same as willing compliance either. 

There are people who try to train their horses EXCLUSIVELY using R+ training methods. Quite challenging I think as R- methods are so prevalent and hard to avoid. A horse who is trained using R+ shows willing compliance, in my opinion. He moves towards things because he wants to, in search of his reward. 

Release of pressure ISN'T A REWARD. It's an improvement in his circumstances for the horse, but not a reward, just as if I pinch you and then stop pinching, you're not going to be pleased with me for stopping. You're just going to be really annoyed that I pinched you in the first place. Horses can't afford to be really annoyed about pressure because then the pressure inflicted increases exponentially, so they have to learn to accept it and feel pleased about its absence. But that doesn't make it a reward.

I think Hondo is talking about a very profound difference in ideology here, not just splitting hairs over terminology.


----------



## bsms

The problem, as I see it, is we have very few huge and immediate rewards we can give a horse. How do you get a horse to want to do something, versus wanting to avoid a less pleasant thing - particularly when it lacks the imagination that there is a positive good to work toward?

If you want to learn to play a flute, the end result - playing a flute well - might be a huge positive. But to reach that end, you first have to learn where to put your mouth, how to hold the flute, how to finger the different notes, how to make a good sound come out instead of a poor sound - or maybe even ANY sound...there is a lot of hard work to do before the fun begins.

Same with learning karate. Lots of folks will drop out when they realize how much time is involved in stretching, strengthening, learning simple moves...lots of work before any reward.

But a horse lacks the imagination and even the desire. I enjoy a trail ride. My horse does, somewhat - but not as much as I do.

Since it is NOT abusive to use some measure of 'do this or else', why not? I couldn't raise my kids to be productive members of society without using that at times, so why would I expect to 'raise a horse' and train him to be productive? I pay $15 for a 100 lb bale of hay. I'm not willing to shell that out for horses who just stand and eat all day - but my HORSES would be pretty content to stand and eat all day!

My wife and I went for a ride today, with Bandit and Cowboy. At the end, I borrowed a line from @phantomhorse13 and told my wife, "_We spent half an hour 'out looking for Bandit's brain', but once we found it, the next hour was a lot of fun!_" And, in a sense, I think Bandit enjoyed the last hour too...but I doubt he thought the first 30 minutes were "fun". The grass in our little arena is starting to dry up, but he would have been happy to spend the entire 90 minutes grazing there instead. A habit of obedience - training - meant he went out with me anyways, and eventually found his brain and then was pretty content. But I don't know how one can create a habit of obedience in a horse without sometimes being pretty insistent about that obedience!


----------



## Smilie

Agree with BSMS.
I realize release of pressure, is negative re -enforcement, but to me, it is a proven method of horse training, and has nothing to do with abuse.
This subject has gone round and round on this subject again and again. Yes, one can also use positive re enforcement, as in clicker training, using food treats, but while there are times for such application, as in winning trust of an abused horse, I still find it a method more useful for liberty training, where only a food reward is possible, and it derived from such a use, as in performing Dolphins.
Sure, most of use use other positive rewards, such as a simple scratch on the withers, or a\good boy, or good girl, But basic horse training revolves around a horse being taught to move away from pressure, be it learning to lead, tie, or various riding cues. So, I really don't sit and agonize as to what scientific label is applied 
I want my horse to lead into a trailer, go down a trail , perform for me, while still enjoying my company, and being a 'happy horse. 
If a horse refuses to leave home, something not likely to happen, if that horse has agood foundation, I am not about to discuss with the horse, that he would rather stay in that pasture with his buddies, nor am I going to ride along, clicking and treating.
I am going to use that ask, ask louder, then demand. I really don't care what label you wish to apply, nor am I placing my horse on an analytical couch
I take very good care of my horses, whether feed of health wise. None are abused, nor avoid my company, and in fact, come up to me to be haltered and truly seem to enjoy trail rides as much as I do.
In return, I expect that horse to work for me, not forever question me as to where he will either lead or ride


----------



## Smilie

A horse develops willing compliance, because non compliance is made the wrong and difficult thing
The very herd nature of a horse, is not going to have him grant willing compliance to anyone he does not respect
So, going back tot hat neck rein example, where the horse learns to move away from that rein against his neck, seeking that 'neutral position, when that rein is off him, thus the release- how do you purpose to teach that, just using positive re-enforcement? Hang a carrot out to one side?
As stated by Palomine, horse training is becoming over thought, trying to attach some physiology teaching course, versus just using plain good horse sense, that creates a willing partner, but not an equal partner.


----------



## loosie

Only read 1st few posts so far... I personally think its very important to understand behavioural psychology. Enabling us to really understand these terms/concepts/principles is what enables us to use them most effectively **& fairly**. 

What hondo has described, and the way most horses are taught most things, is absolutely via aversive, compulsive methods. Eg. Ropes, fences etc are used to prevent the horse just escaping, then aversives ('pressure') are applied, until the desired response happens, at which instant(if trainer is any good) it is ceased - negative reinforcement. Horse then learns to respond to the 'cues' that aversives are going to happen, in order to avoid the actual unpleasantness/pain.

**I dont think there is anything wrong with using this method to teach. As with most things, i believe it is *the way* in which it is used, combined with whether a horse is trained exclusively through aversive methods, or whether/how much positive reinforcement is also used, as to whether a horse may be a truly willing partner or just a compelled beast


> horse shouldn't listen because it fears physical consequences, it should move because it respects the handler's direction, and then is aware that things can become unpleasant for them if they fail to comply with the command


I feel that the above is nothing but splitting hairs - its all the same to the horse, who doesnt care whether terms like fear or respect or aware are used.


----------



## bsms

If it is just splitting hairs....

Bandit's previous owner is a big guy who could successfully 'push him past' things that scared him. We didn't discuss it at length, but I gather Bandit would be difficult to control at those times, but the previous owner could do so. As he pointed out, since he raced Bandit, you can't have a horse in a race deciding he isn't ready to cross a stream - and he was correct, given his goals.

I'm pretty sure in those circumstances, many horses would eventually decide the rider was correct about it being safe and thus stop worrying. But Bandit did not, and would go in a few seconds from walking or trotting calmly (as best I could tell) to spinning or trying to race off sideways or bucking. So I decided I would try to teach him my judgment was worth listening to.

I won't pretend the results have been 100%. The good news is that he lets me know when he is worried, and often will go on by after a brief look or with a light squeeze of the legs. The bucking, spinning and trying to run sideways has disappeared, but perhaps because he can simply let me know he is genuinely scared. But the big explosions have gone away, and we often go on by with slack in the reins.

I submit it DOES make a difference, at least to some horses. I don't see any way to totally remove aversive training, nor a need to do so. In many cases, particularly early on, aversive training seems more practical and even better for the horse. After all, part of my re-training of Bandit included being as harsh as needed to make clear that we would not run away, and that spinning would "not profit him" any, and neither would bucking. 

It also included options for him. Horses, like kids, resist when backed into a corner. But if 2 options out of 6 were unacceptable to me, and 2 out of 6 were unacceptable to Bandit, then we still had 2 options where we could agree to work together and both finish content. And *we both trained each other* using aversive training: If he picked the 2 options I could not accept, it became unpleasant for him. If I tried to push the 2 options he could not accept, he made things unpleasant for me. But as long as we could find a mutually acceptable compromise, we BOTH got what we wanted - which involves willing compliance from us *both*. Two willing partners is a team, and it seems horses enjoy being part of a team as much as I do.

Someone wrote of Ray Hunt, *"His horses are never defeated."* Where I think Hondo and I may part company in terms of training is that I'm willing to be more forceful - adversarial, even - in rejecting options unacceptable to me than Hondo is. And others on this thread may be willing to be more adversarial than I am. But I'm pretty sure EVERYONE on this thread tries to set their horse up for success, so that their horse is never defeated.


----------



## Foxhunter

Hondo said:


> I think you mean because they have been taught they can refuse.......
> 
> Are they to be punished for doing what they were taught?
> 
> See above hole in training...........
> 
> The horse needs to be taken back to basics and retrained. That does not mean just upping the ante in a coercive demand.
> 
> Since you agree that horses are very giving, you should see there is another avenue other than demanding.
> 
> I've read and heard many times that horses are creatures of habit. As I look around at my human companions, and myself, I question whether they are more so than us.


I agree with the ideal of always being 'nice' but, when you get a horse that has learned it can be mean and nasty and attack humans, refuse to go where asked but rearing, bucking and reversing then being 'nice' is not in the picture in my book. 

You can go back to the basics, start afresh but the learned behaviour of not complying is still there and will not go away until the horse learns that the human is a) not frightened of it and b) can give as good as it gets - as would happen in a herd situation. Non compliance it's the herd leader would result in pain as the matter was sorted out. Either the horse would take a kicking from the leader or it would become boss horse. 

I took in a mare in an emergency. Only when she was delivered was an warned that she had a reputation for being really mean and nasty. I turned her out with two brood mares. She was only a turn out livery. When I went to feed them that night my mares came to the gate as I drove up on the ATV with that the new mare charged the gate, ears flat back, mouth open and meaning to get me in no uncertain terms. Had she made contact I would have had a severe injury. 
I drove back to the barn, picked up my rarely used twitch which was about half the handle of a pitchfork. I went back to the field and when the mare charged I hit her as hard as I could straight down the front of her face. My reaction being that if she wanted to hurt me I would reciprocate in no uncertain way. 

She shot off to stand under some trees, I drove in, put the feeds and hay out. She stood well back and when I walked towards her she moved away. Fine by me. 

Next day I couldn't catch her, I wanted to bring her in to handle her to see where the problems were. She followed the other two into the barns and I herded her into a stable. Then I could catch her. She was very wary of me but again I wanted that rather then attack mode. 

This was a horse that had learned she could really frighten people and when she met a person who refused to back away, she was puzzled. 

Her feet were a mess and she hadn't seen a farrier in months. I did a couple of adjustments to her neck and pelvis and turned he back out, leading her with the other two mares to the field. No problems. Next day I could catch her. 
I asked her owner's husband if I could rode her and he agreed but refused to take responsibility for her - nearly two years since she had last been ridden. 

She didn't want to go into the field with me on her back and reared. Not baby rears but vertical, I just sat on her and let her do it, she was tiring herself out I wasn't exerting any energy. She then realised that I wasn't going to get off her so decided to go. I didn't let her, made her stand there and wait for my commands. 

Oh boy, was that mare trained. She was a dressage horse and I was getting movements that I wasn't asking for just because I had got sloppy with my riding. 

I decided to just rode her around the block to cool her off and once on the road she was spookier than any of my youngsters - the slow sign written on th road was going to eat her and drains were terrifying but not as much as the sheep in a field. 

I found out that the mare had been trained as a dressage horse. In several years she had never been ridden out of the arena. She was stir crazy, 

I asked my farrier to trim her feet, which he did. After he had finished he was laughing and told me he had refused to show her because of her being downright dangerous. She did try it on with one hind leg but a quick "Eh!" from me and she corrected herself. 

That mare stayed with me for several months. I rode her out on a daily basis, took her out with hounds and can honestly say that children could lead her around. 

If I had not taken drastic action and let her know that a human could and would hurt her if she was in an attack mode, she would have ended up as dog food.


----------



## Bondre

I agree with this:
Loosie: _**I dont think there is anything wrong with using this method to teach. As with most things, i believe it is the way in which it is used, combined with whether a horse is trained exclusively through aversive methods, or whether/how much positive reinforcement is also used, as to whether a horse may be a truly willing partner or just a compelled beast_

And this:
bsms: _I don't see any way to totally remove aversive training, nor a need to do so..... And we both trained each other using aversive training..... But as long as we could find a mutually acceptable compromise, we BOTH got what we wanted - which involves willing compliance from us both. Two willing partners is a team, and it seems horses enjoy being part of a team as much as I do._

And on this theme: _ Where I think Hondo and I may part company in terms of training is that I'm willing to be more forceful - adversarial, even - in rejecting options unacceptable to me than Hondo is. And others on this thread may be willing to be more adversarial than I am. But I'm pretty sure EVERYONE on this thread tries to set their horse up for success, so that their horse is never defeated._ I find myself more or less in line with bsms. Sometimes I feel the need to get strict with my horse, but I find the spinoff of being strict at the right time and in the right way is that those moments are becoming less and less frequent. We are advancing beyond being adversarial and we are becoming a team. 

However, I use mostly R- or aversive methods because that's all I was aware existed until recently. That's how I learnt to ride. Now I am discovering that a growing body of people exists who advocate use of R+ to achieve results far beyond merely teaching tricks or doing a little bit of groundwork. They aren't on this forum (not many of them) but they're out there experimenting with new, non-aversive ways of training. It's not for everyone but I think it's recommendable that we forget received wisdom at times and take a look outside the box. I personally am fascinated by the subject since I have experienced the potential of using R+ methods with my horse when aversive methods had failed. R+ is a whole other world waiting to be explored, but it's a profoundly different mindset, not just splitting hairs over words.


----------



## loosie

Bondre said:


> However, I use mostly R- or aversive methods because that's all I was aware existed until recently. That's how I learnt to ride. Now I am discovering that a growing body of people exists who advocate use of R+ to achieve results far beyond merely teaching tricks ... I have experienced the potential of using R+ methods with my horse when aversive methods had failed. R+ is a whole other world waiting to be explored, but it's a profoundly different mindset, not just splitting hairs over words.


I'm not sure - having still not got around to reading the rest of the thread - whether yours & bsms's refs to 'splitting hairs' is about my earlier comment or not, but if they are, I don't think you understood what I was trying to get at. I was simply saying that differentitating between a horse 'fearing consequences' and 'being aware of' unpleasant ones didn't mean the latter wasn't aversive... or whatever. Or for that matter, that that was necessarily a Bad Thing to teach.

Interesting isn't it, that while people & dog training, has changed for the most part, with the understanding that came with 'behavioural science' and from marine mammal trainers(who don't really have the option to use aversive/-R), it's taken far longer to 'seep in' to the world of horses?? 

20 years ago, after I studied behavioural psych, trained some cats & chickens - for the fun of it & learning exercise(hard pressed to get away with aversive methods on them!) - & then got my own dogs for the first time, I found that it was a relatively uncommon, new idea to train dogs predominantly with +R & with little/no aversives. I remember having a very hard time finding training establishments that used 'non coercive methods'. I joined an obedience & agility club over an hour away from home, because it was the closest I could find that did so. These days however, I've found that more often than not, dog trainers use +R & avoid use of choke chains & the likes.

20+ years ago, I thought I was a relatively accomplished horse trainer. I used to 'retrain' & ride other's horses, was good at getting horses to 'bend to my wishes'. I'd been taught to use, and every experienced horseperson I knew only used aversive training though. I was stuck on the idea that 'rewards don't work for horses', that negative reinforcement was the best deal for them. 'Natural Horsemanship' was touted as 'the new deal', when really, it was just more of the same(not IMO unsound, mind) principles, packaged in a fluffier way. 

It took my experience training other species, before I decided to experiment with 'clicker training' with my horses. And suddenly I saw a whole new side of horses! I saw curious, playful, keen to learn, keen to join in animals, who were clever! But aside from a few books, websites, etc(& talking here), I've always been mostly on my own on that note. While the dog world has mostly caught up, I'm still 'the weirdo' around here for using +R with my horses. I think that's a general belief too, from what I've seen, not just local one. For a while there, I didn't admit to using rewards with the horses I trained, because of people's attitude about it.

And you know what's funniest about that attitude? I use the 'normal' methods of training too - as mentioned, I don't have a problem at all with well applied -R, even occasional outright punishment. I don't use +R on it's own much, but just to compliment the rest. I did have a play with using solely +R to train horses, but whether it was lack of skill, lack of patience... or the fact that I've never had a problem with using 'pressure/release' either... I decided that was in the 'too hard' basket, and it was much easier, more straight forward & reliable to use a combo approach. 

It's only very recently that I've seen a few others using food & other rewards to train their horses, not just as a means of spoiling them or bribing them. Of course you CAN train a horse well, using solely +R, I have no doubt. I admire those I know of who have, although I know not one person, personally who does. I just don't see a point to that, or reason not to use what is technically termed 'aversives'. Like I said, it's in the way that you use what you use, I reckon.


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

loosie said:


> While the dog world has mostly caught up, *I'm still 'the weirdo' around here* for using +R with my horses. I think that's a general belief too, from what I've seen, not just local one. For a while there, I didn't admit to using rewards with the horses I trained, because of people's attitude about it.
> 
> And you know what's funniest about that attitude? I use the 'normal' methods of training too - as mentioned, I don't have a problem at all with well applied -R, even occasional outright punishment. I don't use +R on it's own much, but just to compliment the rest.


It’s kind of a shame that more people don’t at least attempt to use primarily R+ with horses. What I have found though, is that if you spent your whole life riding and training primarily in R-, changing your established habits can be difficult.

Change, requires your automatic response (habit) to become thoughtful, until new habits replace the old. It isn’t just the horse who is trained it is us! 

A lot of people don’t see the trouble they would have to go through as worth the struggle. If the way you have always done things works, why change what isn't broken, especially when it would involve so much time and effort to re-train yourself? It's logical I suppose. 

Congratulations Loosie and Bondre for at least making that conscious effort, to learn and use R+ to replace R- as much as possible, it isn’t always easy!

I was not aware of the change in the dog training industry until I adopted a 135 lb fear biter with a thyroid issue. We had always trained our own dogs, but this one I needed help. So I got him on the right medication and once that had some time to kick in, sent him to K9 boot camp for two weeks as a live in.

When I got him back, he had sores around his neck from the choke collar being yanked and he had only bitten the trainer three times! The trainer actually kind of threw his hands up and gave up. He gave us a refund as he had given up on day 9 after the third bite. The dog had improved on some commands like sit, stay, etc. but he still went into the red zone when he felt trapped or threatened. 

Sad, I took him home resigned that if we couldn’t find a way to change his behavior, he would have to be put down before he really hurt someone. In desperation, I started thinking and researching. 

Motivated by two things; wanting him to not be euthanized and my own aversion to a dog that outweighed me, biting me, I changed my approach to him, going to all R+ methods. 

A year later, people who had not seen him since he came home, could not believe that he was the same dog. His whole body shakes with happiness when people visit. He is a big lovable mush, that loves to be touched and to touch humans (the Weimaraner lean). 

He rolls over on his back for a belly rub, which at one time, was a no-go and loves to be as close to you as he can. The extreme fear, which was so easily triggered him to bite, is gone. 

If this worked so well to quell the fear in a predatory species, I thought it might do wonders for a species that is born with a much stronger fear instinct. 

So far, so good!


----------



## Smilie

I don't believe most good trainers have ever used just R-, just focused on it's use, because it is the basis of first training horses-using pressure and release, teaching ahorse to move away from pressure, instead of into it, which iust their natural reaction, until taught otherwise
What people often miss, is the positive re enforcement given, as it is only mentioned in passing.
Just stepping off a horse, ending the training session, when a horse made a good effort, is a positive reward.
A pat on the bum, or a scratch on the withers, with a 'good boy, or good girl, right after a good performance, NOt when the placings are announced, is a positive reward, given by good riders, when they exit that show pen. Always has been
On along trail ride, just stopping, loosening the cinch, letting the horse graze, is a positive reward. There is no need to try and categorize each and every thing you do, in relationship with your horse! 
These things have always been used, but just like the term NH, or natural, not exploited by good horsemen, making people then think the wheel has been re invented by those who get hung up on labels!
Unless you use clicker training, please, someone, tell me how in the beginning, you would train ahorse, just using R+ ?????.
Pressure and release, founded on timing, creates habits that become ingrained, along with trust through respect and time.
This in turn, eliminates any need for future confrontation, or any need to apply nothing but the slightest cue. I mean, when I barely put a leg on my horse or even just think of the direction I want to ride in, once I get to the end of my laneway, with the horse happily complying, what the heck do labels mean??????
Willing compliance is created through first using pressure and release, with some R+ thrown in, which can be as simple as quiting a training session on a good note, stepping off, loosening that cinch. When my horse holds a good correct cadence jog, I will reach back with one hand, scratch the rump, and say, 'good boy or good girl' The R+ is icing on the cake, but horses learn through pressure, and most of all, the release of that pressure.
Tell me how you would teach a horse to stand tied otherwise, lead, move off a leg or rein??????
The more a horse learns to move off that pressure, the less less pressure it takes, and it is the failure of correct training, that even makes it necessary to use extreme measures, on a horse that has learned he can intimidate a rider, can use rearing, bolting, bucking and habitual spooking, or drag that human around, on the end of that lead shank.
Horses are creatures of habit. Like it or not, you train a horse , each and every time you handle or ride them, either for the good or the bad
While perhaps, some use too much R, way more people try to use only R+, and they thus create horses where strong R- must then be used, to create a nice consistent, useful horse
Horses generally rather stay with their own kind, eating grass, or a stallion would rather stay with his mares, versus wanting to be with us, like a dog, waiting and grovelling for the slightest sign of affection


----------



## Hondo

I took so long to type this out that RCD posted in ahead of me. As always, she's a class act that's difficult to follow. But here goes the post button anyhow.......

@Foxhunter That was a great story and experience. Similar but much more pronounced than the one I mention I had with lead mare Molly.

But of course that was not R+ or R-. That was plain old positive punishment in terms of self defense which is totally acceptable to me in any situation involving animals including humans.

In terms of negative reward in approaching early training of a horse, when used as a gentle communication tool I, myself, see no real problem.

But pressure can range from a disagreeable thumb in the side with no pain involved to lashes from a whip which stop at the desired response.

But still, the principle that the horse does need to learn at some point to move away from pressure, is valid. I think. Unless Bondre is onto something I've not gotten into yet.

When a horse successfully finds a way to get rid of the slight annoyance we present in the from of R-, I think it is important that an exponential dose of R+ immediately follows the release of R- in order that the larger part of the association becomes a positive memory.

I can at least imagine that the horse could come to think about low level R- as just someone talking to the horse.

It is seeming that most of our communication with horses is through body language and those light pressures could become viewed as more body language. Maybe.

Communication through body language is something I just recently delved into.

Everyone has seen and/or studied the typical 101 human positions of body language, open hands, open arms, etc.

But the concept of unconscious involuntary body language is something I had not read about.

That is where "Humans Never Lie". We can fake the learned body language but not the unconscious involuntary body language. That is controlled by how we actually feel and by what we actually think. And that is what the horse sees.

Clever Hans was so good at reading people that people trained to mask their response to him could not get past him. He was an amazing lie detector!

My interest was piqued when I heard mentioned in unBranded, "as the horse is a mirror to your soul", and now I see it was a quote from the movie "Buck".

So I'm impressed that with the level of expertise in reading human body language, particularly involuntary body language, that this may be very true. And the horse may be the only animal on the planet with this skill.

I'm drifting way way off my own topic and I see where this could be a whole new topic if it's not already been one in the past.

But I am really thinking now that being aware of what we are feeling could be a major training "tool".

This could be to some degree what Tom Dorrance means when he keeps talking about "feel".

Is it possible that he held conversations with a horse through body language that the viewer was never aware of? And possibly to some degree that Tom was even unaware of?


----------



## Foxhunter

As a trainer you have to be versatile and be aware of the horse's natural temperament. 

I am not one for using tidbits at all. Then I met Twiddle, a late filly bred for the flat. In three generations not one of her family line female had ever raced. The colts were no different to any other horse but the fillies were something else. 

Her whole attitude was to fight. She took a week to load into the horsebox to get her to us and then refused to unload. I loaded my filly alongside her and they were taken for a ride. On return Twiddle followed my filly out like a lamb. 

Doing anything with her was a fight. If my heart rate changed then she would be worse so, I had to keep my cool. Getting a bridle on was nigh impossible as she had had her ears twisted to get her to stand for the farrier. 

One day I was eating some mints, they were hard and crispy on the outside and chewy in the middle. She liked the smell and after I had got the bit in her mouth, I was using the running head of a double bridle so I could flip it over her neck and do it up and not touch her ears, I gave her a mint. She took it readily and started to chew it then did the usual thing of opening her mouth and trying to spit it out. She couldn't as it was stuck in her molars. 

Next day she couldn't get her bridle on fast enough and no sooner was it on she was searching for her mint. From that moment on I spent a small fortune on those mints, cheaper ones wouldn't do. 

She was one of the boldest horses I have ever ridden, afraid of nothing. She won seven races as a three year old. I went to see her at her owner's stud several years later. She was difficult for the workers to catch but the moment I called out "Twiddle - you want a peppymint?" She turned and came trotting back to me searching my pocket for her mints. 

I have had a few horses that had learned to fight and generally learned their own strength. In those cases I have never given them a reason to get into a battle. I will ask them and when they downright refuse, do nothing but sit on them and wait. Boredom sets in and they then decide that it is easier to what was being asked than have to stand around forever.


----------



## bsms

"...Horses don't like to be ennuye, and will rather stick at home than go out to be bored ; *they like amusement, variety, and society* : give them their share of these, but never in a pedantic way, and avoid getting into a groove of any kind, either as to time or place, especially with young animals. It is evident that all these things must be taken into account and receive due attention, whether it be our object to prevent or to get rid of some bad habit a horse may have acquired ; and a little reflection will generally suffice to point out the means of remedying something that, if left to itself, would grow into a confirmed habit, *or if attacked with the energy of folly and violence, would suddenly culminate in the grand catastrophe of restiveness...*"

On Seats and Saddles, by Francis Dwyer, Major of Hussars in the Imperial Austrian Service (*1868*)

As is often the case, that passage rattled inside my head for some time until I realized its significance. I had done a little riding while visiting ranches in the 70s and early 80s, and even took a dozen jumping lessons in 1984 - then didn't get on a horse again until I bought Mia. My world view was entirely Nike - "Just Do It!" But Mia wasn't interested in just doing it...but I found it very hard to switch over.

There was an episode of an old western TV show called "The Horse Fighter". Oddly enough, the "fighter" was actually more humane toward horses than most of the others, but I think it is significant that he was referred to as a "horse fighter" instead of a "horse trainer".

I've since become convinced that there have been horse trainers for thousands of years, and also that there are "horse fighters" today. I find it easy to slip into the "fighter" category, and probably would have stayed there if I hadn't taken up riding at 50. At 50, with the aches of life, bifocals, etc - fighting just didn't sound so good.

What I've seen in my own horses is that pressure and release, used fairly, works well. But when possible, using a more positive approach seems to work better...but HOW does one use "R+" with horses? :-?


----------



## Smilie

Many here, are also limiting their experience/approach to RE TRAINING spoiled or abused animals, where R+ used primarily, has application, versus training ahorse correctly from day one.
My horses are playful all the time, out in the field, curious in their surroundings, are playful just interacting at liberty, maybe dragging off a coat I put down, when fixing a fence in their field, ect- they are not fearful, repressed lifeless creatures, with dead expressions in their eyes, working like mindless robots!
I also give random treats at times. Charlie knows the words, \want a cookie'. It is also helpful in a halter class, when a horse that has become very relaxed int hat show ring, still stands still and nice and square, but that head gets a droopy look, ears relaxed tot he side, versus that alert animated look desired. I only have to whisper, 'cookie; and ears come up, but she still waits for that anticipated reward, versus giving me a body search for it!
Sorry, maybe many here have bought horses where only strong R- was used, but I have seen too many horses out on trails and other places, who have only had R+ used, and who then give their rider the proverbial equine finger, when 'push comes to shove'


----------



## Smilie

BSMS
'What I've seen in my own horses is that pressure and release, used fairly, works well. But when possible, using a more positive approach seems to work better...but HOW does one use "R+" with horses?'

I mentioned some ways in above posts, and the fact that they have always also been used by good trainers, just with that good training not broken down into R-and R+, any more then into traditional training and NH training!!!


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

R+/R-; P+/P- as it pertains to horses is not so much a stand-alone behavior modification technique, as it is a creation of common language between us and the horse that can be used without the benefit of visual cues coming from body language (a horse can’t see you when you are riding them). I think to only look at R/P in terms of behavior modification is where the confusion lies. The bigger picture is the creation of a mutually understood language.

Think of Helen Keller and the way her teacher used differing pressure on her palm to communicate with her. She was neither being coerced through the use of, nor was she motivated by the release of pressure. 

The recognizable pattern of pressure and release became a communication tool for Ms. Keller and so it is with the horse.


----------



## Smilie

Agree that the pressure and release is a communication cue.
Also, far as the R+ and clicker training, how is the pure food motivation, distinguished from pure willing compliance?? 
It is a known fact that horses are strongly motivated by both food and the drive to procreate (geldings and spayed mares, excluded, form the latter ) 
Thus, good horse training uses all facets of the horse himself -that of being a herd prey species, who thus derive security from both that herd and clear fair leadership, an animal, as a prey species, hard wired to read very slight body language, to instinctively flee, the assess any perceived danger from a safe distance.
Some of the horse's instinctive nature we use to our advantage, while others we teach a horse to modify, as we gain his respect and trust. It is not natural for a horse, to have a predator on his back, nor to dampen his instinctive flight reaction, nor to accept having the ability of flight taken away, by accepting to be tied, yet we teach him to accept those conditions, to make him useful to us,in all the various activities we do together with a horse.
To me, willing compliance , is a horse that happily does what I ask, with minimum cues, without swishing his tail, without gapping his mouth, without being tense in his body, and without constantly questioning where he will or will not ride or lead
I have watched Cavellia, where those horses performing at liberty, are constantly fed food rewards, which most people watching, perhaps would not even notice. Yes, I realize that as training/conditioning, far as clicker training advances, the treats are not always given with that click, with the horse supposedly working for that click alone, but I bet that horse is always still hoping for that food reward
Sorry, I don't buy that a horse can be trained by only R+, but rather by a healthy balance


----------



## jaydee

Asking, asking more firmly and increasing the pressure to the demanding stage are where the horse has already proven that it understands the cue or whatever, to my understanding, more about training and expectations
When a horse that should know better bites or kicks in a deliberate attempt to cause harm I don't ask or demand - I immediately punish. I don't care if it's doing it because it's been allowed to get away with it in the past. The only exception to that would be horses that have become defensive through abuse and hitting them only makes the situation more dangerous for the human because they have no fear of humans with whips, no way can a human with a whip inflict the same sort of pain on a horse that another horse


----------



## Avna

I have a friend who is an accomplished dog trainer. Wanting to add to her toolbox, she took a year long seminar in 'positive training' ie nothing like a negative cue is allowed in this model. I could barely believe what she told me. The dogs and their owners were *uniformly* frustrated and most of them 'failed' the final test. She was one of the ones who passed, and when she compared notes with the others who passed, they were in agreement that they all cheated. That is, they gave their dogs negative cues too, even if it was merely a facial expression or turning away. Otherwise the dogs _could not figure out_ what their handlers wanted. The learning environment was too sparse. They gave up trying to figure it out.

The environment in which all beings live is full of positive and negative 'cues'. All of us beings spend all our lives figuring out how to behave based on environmental cues like "too slippery" or "that's the long way around" "tastes like chicken!" "don't like that flapping thing" and a million more. That is all we are doing, essentially, with our horses. Giving cues. Developing a language. Of course, our horse is doing the exact same to us, all the time.


----------



## Smilie

Agree.
Good horsemen have always used a combination of R+ or R- , that fit the situation, and built a communication based on those two principles, that becomes very refined over time, as that communication is fine tuned.
They do not sit and agonize as to what label to apply, to any particular interaction with a horse, as they use the correct one, based not on some lab experiment, but rather on experience, true empathy towards a horse, but respecting the horse for the creature he is-which is not a pet, or a big dog
Many of those academic trials are run by people with little actual horse experience, in the field. Not saying that those trails are necessarily flawed, but there is also the fact, that you can 'squeeze data, until it squeals.I should know, having worked in research!
Who gets hung up with these classifications? Not horsemen, who have spent a lifetime turning out good, happy and useful horses, and just continue doing what they always have, using a great balance between R+ and R-, knowing when to use which one, but rather those that seek some kind of ABC training approach, or somehow assume, if you use anything but R+, you are abusive, do not have a great connection with your horse, and that you must be using pain, or at the minimum, discomfort, in any interaction with your horse
Dr Steve Gustafson', is an equine behaviorist, also involved in the welfare of racehorses
He is not obsessed with R+ or R-, but rather states what a horse needs, to be healthy, and that is the ability to move almost constantly, and that horses who are allowed that freedom, have a much better mindset towards training, then those that are confined
His important take home lesson, is that horses have a greaT ability to adapt, thus can accept confinement, at least part time, but we, as the human, must be careful to never exceed their ability to adapt. That to me is more the nitty gritty, then all this concern about positive versus negative re enforcement
I mean, did you raise your kid, with only positive re-enforcement, like giving them money for every chore done, or did they ever get a version of \time out' ?


----------



## Beling

Sometimes we have to remind ourselves that horses don't stand around waiting for our cues --- sometimes not even when we're riding. They DO have minds of their own, and inclinations to follow. We can set limits, or go with the flow.

With the best trainers, it seems the horses are doing exactly what they want.

So much (especially regarding what kind of pressure/rewards are used) depends on the horse; and so much also depends on the trainer, and perhaps most of all, on whether the goals are compatible with the type of horse being trained.


----------



## Avna

I guess for me the bottom line is: does it work? That is, does the horse do what I ask, with energy and calm trust? If so, I am doing something right. The horse always gives the final answer.


----------



## loosie

Reiningcatsanddogs said:


> A lot of people don’t see the trouble they would have to go through as worth the struggle. ... I changed my approach to him, going to all R+ methods.
> 
> A year later, people who had not seen him since he came home, could not believe that he was the same dog.


I should add I absolutely & totally see it as 'worth the trouble' to use solely +R where fear/bad attitudes are concerned. I too have experience in 'rehabilitating' fear aggressive dogs, and I quite simply can't understand how people even think they can fix it with force & punishment. Understanding the importance of the *attitude* behind the behaviours, and changing *motivations* for behaviours is vital, and that has absolutely carried over with my work with horses. I'm talking about 'normal' training stuff when I say I use conventional -R approaches - leg & rein aids, etc. But if I have a horse who has learned for eg to resist rein pressure due to fear or pain, I might start out at the very beginning, 'luring' them into a behaviour, so I avoid the association with 'pressure' from the outset & can then 'reteach' it with a positive attitude & motivation to it. I've 'restarted' a few 'broken' horses with no strings(ropes) attached at all, working up to using a halter for control only after they've learned that being ridden & 'following a feel' is a Good Thing.


----------



## Hondo

Smilie said:


> Agree.
> Good horsemen have always used a combination of R+ or R- , that fit the situation, and built a communication based on those two principles, that becomes very refined over time, as that communication is fine tuned.
> They do not sit and agonize as to what label to apply, to any particular interaction with a horse, as they use the correct one, based not on some lab experiment, but rather on experience, true empathy towards a horse, but respecting the horse for the creature he is-which is not a pet, or a big dog
> Many of those academic trials are run by people with little actual horse experience, in the field. Not saying that those trails are necessarily flawed, but there is also the fact, that you can 'squeeze data, until it squeals.I should know, having worked in research!
> Who gets hung up with these classifications? Not horsemen, who have spent a lifetime turning out good, happy and useful horses, and just continue doing what they always have, using a great balance between R+ and R-, knowing when to use which one, but rather those that seek some kind of ABC training approach, or somehow assume, if you use anything but R+, you are abusive, do not have a great connection with your horse, and that you must be using pain, or at the minimum, discomfort, in any interaction with your horse
> Dr Steve Gustafson', is an equine behaviorist, also involved in the welfare of racehorses
> He is not obsessed with R+ or R-, but rather states what a horse needs, to be healthy, and that is the ability to move almost constantly, and that horses who are allowed that freedom, have a much better mindset towards training, then those that are confined
> His important take home lesson, is that horses have a greaT ability to adapt, thus can accept confinement, at least part time, but we, as the human, must be careful to never exceed their ability to adapt. That to me is more the nitty gritty, then all this concern about positive versus negative re enforcement
> I mean, did you raise your kid, with only positive re-enforcement, like giving them money for every chore done, or did they ever get a version of \time out' ?


 @Smilie Other people have mentioned it and I'm going to mention it again. I hope you will look at it as me trying to be helpful.

When reading and finishing a line and returning to the left to pick up the rest of the sentence, the eye, or at least mine, sort of remembers the pattern where the line was started.

But when there is no pattern on the left side to return to, the eye does not know which line to return to and must search. After a while it becomes frustrating and many people give up trying to read the densely coupled lines. If the quoted text above were written as below, it would be much much easier for many if not all people to read.

And BTW, time oun is not R-, it's punishment.

Begin Quote:

Agree.
Good horsemen have always used a combination of R+ or R- , that fit the situation, and built a communication based on those two principles, that becomes very refined over time, as that communication is fine tuned.

They do not sit and agonize as to what label to apply, to any particular interaction with a horse, as they use the correct one, based not on some lab experiment, but rather on experience, true empathy towards a horse, but respecting the horse for the creature he is-which is not a pet, or a big dog

Many of those academic trials are run by people with little actual horse experience, in the field. Not saying that those trails are necessarily flawed, but there is also the fact, that you can 'squeeze data, until it squeals.I should know, having worked in research!

Who gets hung up with these classifications? Not horsemen, who have spent a lifetime turning out good, happy and useful horses, and just continue doing what they always have, using a great balance between R+ and R-, knowing when to use which one, but rather those that seek some kind of ABC training approach, or somehow assume, if you use anything but R+, you are abusive, do not have a great connection with your horse, and that you must be using pain, or at the minimum, discomfort, in any interaction with your horse

Dr Steve Gustafson', is an equine behaviorist, also involved in the welfare of racehorses
He is not obsessed with R+ or R-, but rather states what a horse needs, to be healthy, and that is the ability to move almost constantly, and that horses who are allowed that freedom, have a much better mindset towards training, then those that are confined

His important take home lesson, is that horses have a greaT ability to adapt, thus can accept confinement, at least part time, but we, as the human, must be careful to never exceed their ability to adapt. That to me is more the nitty gritty, then all this concern about positive versus negative re enforcement

I mean, did you raise your kid, with only positive re-enforcement, like giving them money for every chore done, or did they ever get a version of \time out' ?


----------



## loosie

Smilie said:


> Just stepping off a horse, ending the training session, when a horse made a good effort, is a positive reward.
> A pat on the bum, or a scratch on the withers, with a 'good boy, or good girl, right after a good performance,


And here is where I think understanding the specifics of 'behavioural science' is important, because IME it does make a HUGE difference. I do think that 'hair splitting' & understanding what the 'lables' actually mean, on this particular factor is incredibly relevant & helpful. To use Reining's eg of the fear aggressive dog, not appreciating the difference between positive & negative reinforcement, is where the problem most likely lay with previous trainer's failures.

To understand that first statement quoted above is indeed a reinforcement, but not a positive reinforcement, and what that difference means to the animal & how it effects their training *& attitude, emotions*. 

To understand that a scratch or a pat MAY well be a positive reinforcement for some, if a generally weak reward, but is very often a 'meh' kind of a thing, and sometimes(esp with patting/smacking) it's an UNdesirable happening - a positive punishment. 

To understand that 'good boy' - and many times, a pat - means 'good job' to the horse only if/when it is closely associated with an ACTUAL reinforcement. In behavioural terms, it is not an actual reinforcer, but a 'bridge'.

To understand the importance of timing, that an effective reinforcement, or punishment for that matter, must happen AT THE TIME OF the behaviour we are wishing to effect, not after it, even by more than a couple of seconds.



> Horses generally rather stay with their own kind, eating grass, or a stallion would rather stay with his mares, versus wanting to be with us, like a dog


Well not that I want my dogs to feel the need to 'grovel' either, and I've also known many dogs who would rather not be with people... That illustrates one HUGE difference that people who don't understand/use +R miss. It is NOT what species we're dealing with, but the way an animal is treated/trained that make them willing to be with a person, be ridden, etc. And THAT is what willingness means IMO - if the horse would rather not even be with you, I don't get how it can be said to do what we ask willingly.


----------



## Smilie

loosie said:


> I should add I absolutely & totally see it as 'worth the trouble' to use solely +R where fear/bad attitudes are concerned. I too have experience in 'rehabilitating' fear aggressive dogs, and I quite simply can't understand how people even think they can fix it with force & punishment. Understanding the importance of the *attitude* behind the behaviours, and changing *motivations* for behaviours is vital, and that has absolutely carried over with my work with horses. I'm talking about 'normal' training stuff when I say I use conventional -R approaches - leg & rein aids, etc. But if I have a horse who has learned for eg to resist rein pressure due to fear or pain, I might start out at the very beginning, 'luring' them into a behaviour, so I avoid the association with 'pressure' from the outset & can then 'reteach' it with a positive attitude & motivation to it. I've 'restarted' a few 'broken' horses with no strings(ropes) attached at all, working up to using a halter for control only after they've learned that being ridden & 'following a feel' is a Good Thing.


 Again, I do believe I said that when re training a truly abused horse, there is a time to just use R+, to gain that trust, remove the fear, as a fearful horse learns nothing
YOU USE WHAT IS CORRECT AT THAT MOMENT IN TIME< WITH ANY PARTICULAR HORSE, so, in this topic, neither an aggressive spoiled horse, nor a fearful abused horse,falls into general accepted training practices, and ditto for a fearful abused dog
Lets not keep fogging up this topic!


----------



## Hondo

And THAT is what willingness means IMO - if the horse would rather not even be with you, I don't get how it can be said to do what we ask willingly.

+1


----------



## Smilie

there is a difference, Loosie, in a horse accepting to be with me, working for me, even enjoying that activity, and a dog, that is miserable, if left behind by his special person
My dog is attached to me more then to my husband. He wants to be wherever I am
If I start to get ready to go somewhere, esp loading up the horse trailer, he starts to shadow me, hoping it is a trip he can come on, and is devastated when left behind with my husband
My horses, on the other hand, while they might prefer me looking after them, readily accept care from the person I have to look after them, and aren't fretting that I am leaving them behind.refusing at times to eat, when I am away
Look back, I made all the usual disclaimers, far as dealing with ahrose who has atrust issue, one that does not have the training to understand a cue, ect, ect. Even when dis claimers are put in here, as that constant, 'rule out any pain', we go back and back again, tot hose exceptions, already stated.
I am not so heartless, stupid, to use the ask, ask louder, then demand, on a green horse, on a horse that is fearful from past history, etc, ect. It is a no brainer, that if a horse has not been taught a cue, or does not understand something, you go back to basic building steps, use another approach, ect, and reserve that demand for a horse that understands what you are asking, but has learned, whether through no fault of his own, that he can say 'no', and in a very forceful way!


----------



## Smilie

Look, Hondo and Loosie, there is a difference between a horse content in your presence, working willingly for you, even though, given a choice, he would rather be back chowing down green grass with buddies, and a dog that "NEEDS' to be with you,, or the bottom falls out of his universe

+1[/QUOTE]


----------



## Hondo

Smilie said:


> Look, Hondo and Loosie, there is a difference between a horse content in your presence, working willingly for you, even though, given a choice, he would rather be back chowing down green grass with buddies, and a dog that "NEEDS' to be with you,, or the bottom falls out of his universe


Really? Really?

Is there no such thing as a horse leaving the herd to go be with a particular human that has entered the field?

This never happens? Really?


----------



## bsms

I never read the book or saw the movie, but when it comes to horses, I find myself thinking, "*He's Just Not That Into You*".

I try to make riding pleasurable for my horse as well, and somewhat succeed. I do think horses enjoy being part of a team, and find it easier in some ways to team up with the odd looking monkey who walks on two legs than with other horses. But if I have any success, in truth, part of the reason is Bandit lives in a corral with two other horses that he doesn't really like all that much.








​
If Bandit lived on 20 acres of nice pasture, he might be hard to catch. And if I wanted to simply LEAD him instead of mounting up...it wouldn't break his heart. He's not the Black Stallion, and I'm not Alec Ramsay.

He often seems to take an interest in his surroundings during our rides. When other horses are with us, he views "us" as the herd leader and I think he values my inputs...somewhat. I suspect he thinks he owns me, which may be closer to the truth than I like to admit, given who spends the most time working for whom! 

"_...a horse content in your presence, working willingly for you, even though, given a choice, he would rather be back chowing down green grass with buddies..._" - @*Smilie* 

I tend to think that is really about as good as it gets. For most of us. If there is some secret way to make it better, I'd love to know it. And "_...a horse content in your presence, working willingly for you_..." is well ahead of the life a lot of horses lead.


----------



## Avna

Hondo said:


> Really? Really?
> 
> Is there no such thing as a horse leaving the herd to go be with a particular human that has entered the field?
> 
> This never happens? Really?


Not the same at all. I have not heard of nor experienced the kind of dependence a one-person dog has on a person, with horses. Horses prefer their own kind and can also have human beings with whom they are close. The reverse is true of dogs. Any one of my dogs would leave behind the others to be with me without a backward glance, although they enjoy each others' company. They are both social species but dogs have arranged their lives around human beings for something like 30,000 years. Dogs opted out of being wolves, in order to throw in their lot with us. They volunteered.

Horses have only been domesticated for at most 6000 years, and none of that time was spent becoming part of a human social circle.


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

I would have to disagree. 

This horse prefers humans over his herd. 










Given a chance to leave them and follow a human, he drops them like a hot potato. "later dudes! I'm outta here!"

Up at the house he is a half mile away from his herd. He knows perfectly well how to get back to them and is free to do so if he chooses. There are two mares right next door and he is free to go over there as well, but he doesn't. 

I snapped that picture after my daughter had walked into the house and the horse tried to follow her inside. I had to stop him (shiny wood floors and unshod hooves are not a good combo). When she appeared in the window he headed right over to her and just stood there. He could have gone back to the pasture whenever he wanted, instead he hung around with us. 

I have other horses if you take them up to the house and let them loose, they will head right back down the second you sit down some place...given the free choice.

This one and Oliver though, they stick around even if they are the only horses with us. I can weed the garden, sweep the walk and they just wait and follow me around. About 10% of the time they will eventually choose to head back down to the herd. I will follow them and let them back in when they do that. Coincidentally, they were both trained using primarily positive reinforcement that did not involve treats, just a lot of patience and wither scratches (they dislike pats). 

I believe horses are capable of wanting to be with their "human" over the herd, but it depends on the self confidence of the horse. They need to feel safe.


----------



## Smilie

Hondo said:


> Really? Really?
> 
> Is there no such thing as a horse leaving the herd to go be with a particular human that has entered the field?
> 
> This never happens? Really?


Yes it does, but lets get away from the Black stallion mythology, where that stallion leaves his herd of mares to be with that boy.
A horse, coming up to you out of the herd, come on, horses do that all the time, so try not to get over bent on it, as they do so for many reasons, often, because that day, they even know you have no intention to work them, might have a treat, or simply being friendly
Does not mean they sit at the gate and whinney endlessly, as you leave, nor that they would follow you , regardless of where you went, including out into a storm, like my dog, who is petrified of thunder
Charlie nickers to me each time I get her out of the pasture, when I come up to her. Yes, she might be greeting me, or happy to have her grazing muzzle off again, and to go back into the corral with Smilie. She knows my footsteps, when stalled at a show, and while she has been quiet as other people enter the barn, pass her stall, she nickers the minute she hears my foot steps. I like to believe it is because she loves me, but realize it could be just as well as I am that familiar'herd' member she gets confidence from, esp in strange surroundings, or knows that I am the one that will hang that hay net, fill the water bucket, give her that beet pulp, and take her home again
Hollywood has done a great deal in the creation of that Black stallion myth, where a wild un tamed stallion works only for a boy or girl (take your pick), gladly leave equine herd members, not for a short greeting, a pat a scratch, but chose captivity, ignor hormones, just for the love of that boy or girl.
Hey, for all those using regulmate, calming agents, heck, even a bridle or halter, throw them all away, and that horse will follow you through fire, 
Why worry about hobble training? Hondo is just going to stick around, like a faithful dog!Gasp, what is hobble restraint even. It sure is not R+


----------



## Smilie

Reiningcatsanddogs said:


> I would have to disagree.
> 
> This horse prefers humans over his herd.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Given a chance to leave them and follow a human, he drops them like a hot potato. "later dudes! I'm outta here!"
> 
> Up at the house he is a half mile away from his herd. He knows perfectly well how to get back to them and is free to do so if he chooses. There are two mares right next door and he is free to go over there as well, but he doesn't.
> 
> I snapped that picture after my daughter had walked into the house and the horse tried to follow her inside. I had to stop him (shiny wood floors and unshod hooves are not a good combo). When she appeared in the window he headed right over to her and just stood there. He could have gone back to the pasture whenever he wanted, instead he hung around with us.
> 
> I have other horses if you take them up to the house and let them loose, they will head right back down the second you sit down some place...given the free choice.
> 
> This one and Oliver though, they stick around even if they are the only horses with us. I can weed the garden, sweep the walk and they just wait and follow me around. About 10% of the time they will eventually choose to head back down to the herd. I will follow them and let them back in when they do that. Coincidentally, they were both trained using primarily positive reinforcement that did not involve treats, just a lot of patience and wither scratches (they dislike pats).
> 
> I believe horses are capable of wanting to be with their "human" over the herd, but it depends on the self confidence of the horse. They need to feel safe.


 Have you taken him out to wilderness, left him outside your tent, and found him there in the morning?
Many horses that are quite herd independent, will follow people around, in familiar surroundings,, perhaps out of some attachment, often combined with having had 'special treatment', perhaps waiting for a treat, but that does not mean, if you were to walk somewhere that is out of the horse;s comfort zone, he will follow you, like a dog. Chances are, he will head home to his equine buddies
Sure, Einstein used to come up and hang out with me as I did garden work, but that did not mean I would turn him loose out in the mountains, and expect him to stay with me like a dog, esp if some horses came along, going the other way.
Interpretation ,reading into your relationship with your horse, can create what you wish to be absolute truth, when , you just might be looking through the same glasses as a love smitten man or woman-you se what you want to see, versus reality


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

No. No tent. I don't sleep in a tent when I backwoods camp, but I have taken him on a picnic and not tied. He stuck around just fine, better than my dogs actually. If you go inside a tent and leave a horse alone, he can't very well be with you, so of course he will seek other companionship that he thinks is accessible. 

We go walk out of his comfort zone on foot quite often and he follows just fine. I'd say the interior of a house is pretty far out of most horse's comfort zones but he was going to follow my daughter anyway; he actually got two feet in the foyer before she stopped and realized he was following her through the door.

It could also be that when people have done things for one way for so long that they are frightened of trying anything new in the event that it is discovered that there is something more that they were missing all this time.....resistance to change is natural; that too is reality.


----------



## loosie

Smilie said:


> Again, I do believe I said that when re training a truly abused horse, there is a time to just use R+, to gain that trust, remove the fear, as a fearful horse learns nothing
> YOU USE WHAT IS CORRECT AT THAT MOMENT IN TIME< WITH ANY PARTICULAR HORSE, so, in this topic, neither an aggressive spoiled horse, nor a fearful abused horse,falls into general accepted training practices, and ditto for a fearful abused dog
> Lets not keep fogging up this topic!


Pardon if that's 'fogging'. I didn't realise the thread was only meant to be about 'general' training sorry. As I said, not reading all the posts, just giving my 2c worth on what I'm reading & on my experience & understanding. But if we are only talking 'general' stuff, I also feel that giving a horse(or dog, or child...) lots of positive reinforcement when they're beginning training can 'condition' a great attitude, or 'work ethic', as some put it. To make learning fun, rewarding, not stressful... to minimise/avoid punishing mistakes, really makes a huge difference to the attitude of the animal, for what comes later too. First experiences really count. So while I do use a 'combo', I use predominantly positive reinforcement in early training too.


----------



## loosie

Smilie said:


> there is a difference, Loosie, in a horse accepting to be with me, working for me, even enjoying that activity, and a dog, that is miserable, if left behind


Yeah, of course dogs are different & are extra 'attached' to people, compared to any other animal. However, horses can absolutely choose willingly to 'hang out' with people & play their 'games' too, is what I was getting at. And if they have to be coerced into doing so, that, IMO is not 'willing'.



> Even when dis claimers are put in here, as that constant, 'rule out any pain', we go back and back again, tot hose exceptions, already stated.
> I am not so heartless, stupid, to use the ask, ask louder, then demand, on a green horse,


FWIW, I only 'know' you here, but I have never got the idea you're in the least heartless or stupid. I'm obviously missing the relevance of your above comments, not reading previous stuff. Again, my posts are only in response to Hondo's initial thread starter, and the few posts that I've read & quoted from - which just happen to be mostly yours - not at all picking on you either Smilie, just that what you've written has illustrated some misunderstandings & differences in the way I think is all.


----------



## loosie

bsms said:


> I tend to think that is really about as good as it gets. For most of us. If there is some secret way to make it better, I'd love to know it. And "_...a horse content in your presence, working willingly for you_..." is well ahead of the life a lot of horses lead.


And there, I believe, is the crux. And it is no secret. The principles have been taught publicly at least since Skinner came along in... was it around 1930's?? I sus eons longer in some circles though - and yet still so many people don't get that it's even conceivable with a horse. 

**I am not at all berating a relationship that is 'good' according to Smilie's or Bsms's experiences. I do not at all think that is something to belittle at all. But as good as it gets? No, I expect, and get more than that, and for _me personally_(again, not judging those who don't want it...) would be looking at what_* I*_ was doing wrong and work to change that, if my horses didn't want to be with me. 

I do think comparing horses to dogs in this regard isn't very relevant tho - yes, they are different. I also don't believe belittling ideas of possible better relationships by referring to them as Disney fantasies is helpful either.


----------



## Hondo

I have read that according to advanced brain research allowed by MRI's, it has been determined that dogs are actually wolf puppies that have matured physically but not mentally.

Wolf puppies seek affection and like to please, apparently. Children are the same if not ruined. Affection seekers and pleasers. Maybe a survival instinct? I have heard people jokingly say that if babies were not so cute they might likely never reach adulthood.

I don't recall the details without looking it up in the book I have, but it was about a section or area of the brain that did not develop in the dog as in the adult wolf. 

So yes, I agree, comparing dogs and horses is pointless other than saying one is not the other and suggesting to nubies that the horse be considered and studied as an entirely unique animal species apart from dogs.

I am impressed that the main reason horses seek the herd is not so much to be with their buddies but for the safety in numbers. I read somewhere that when there is danger about, horses will vie with one another for the central position in the herd for increased safety.

When I first started interacting with Hondo he would go scampering back to the herd when I turned him loose if I did not return him to the herd which I usually did.

Later on I could turn him loose and he would go grazing along nonchalantly toward where figured the herd was. In both cases the herd would not be in sight.

I walk right up to him a few times a day in his 60 acre field. Same if he is with the herd in a 600 acre field.

If I were out in the wilderness I would be using hobbles or some restraint not for keeping him from returning to the herd but from fleeing sensed danger.

Packers I've read often just turn the horses loose providing they have an "anchor horse" restrained by some method, with the anchor horse being a lead mare or horse with a similar status.

I've watched uNbranded a few times as I bought the DVD. They left many of their horses loose and only had one very big occasion of the horses taking off when they became frightened of a motorcycle.

I'm not sure that a human could ever become an anchor horse without spending an unduly portion of time with the horses. Much much more than a few hours each day.

I have been told, but completely unverified, perhaps some here have read so, that in days of antiquity warriors pretty much lived with their steeds and a bond was developed toward the human that surpassed what normally happens today.


----------



## Smilie

I am not denying a strong bond with a horse, as I have had one with several horses, esp Einstein, who my adult sons referred to as my 'third and favorite son'
Yes, outfitters, and even us, when we packed in, would make sure lead horses were picketed, and then left some others just loose, bUT when those lead horses ever got loose and left, guess where the rest of the horses went!
Einstein would do for me, what he would do for no one else. Did he love me? I sure hope so, and putting him down,w as one of the hardest things I ever did in my life
Did I use both R+ and R- in training him-yes, in the right combo, at the right time, and I doubt anyone here has a stronger bond with a horse then I did with Einstein. 
Smilie and Charlies are both close seconds in my heart, and Carmen is also special, having carried me on many mountain miles, and in fact, taking me on a day ride today
So, does it matter what terms we apply, but rather that we allow the horse to be the noble beast that he is, forge our own relationship with that horse, which serves both of us well
I can go on and on, HOndo, giving examples that prove the bond I have enjoyed with my horses, having them do for me, what you have yet to achieve with Hondo. I still keep in mind, that a horse is not a dog, and allow that difference, some of which differences explains that interaction with a horse

If you like what you are achieving with Hondo, then why worry about terminology/methods?
I happen to love my special horses, just ask my hubby, and he would be abit surprised, reading what I have written here, when forced to be realistic about the true understanding I have, of basic nature of horses, as I always tell him that my horses love me.


----------



## Foxhunter

The biggest difference between dogs and horses and the 'loyalty' is that dogs live by the hearth and are with us most of the time. 

I had a new born mini donkey that lived indoors because I couldn't care for him at night without having to drive several miles. He was with me most of the day and when I was giving lessons he would be in the arena just watching and mooching around. He had plenty of interaction with the horses and several of them would fight each other to be his best friend but Diddle Eye, was only interested in people. 

When he was older and remained at the stables he would lie down and wriggle under the fence and take himself into the pub where he would spend all evening - he was never dirty inside! He did however become addicted to tobacco and would eat all the cigarett buts from the ash trays and if he could get hold of a packet of cigarettes they were gone in a jiffy! 

Given half a chance he would get into my car standing between the front and back seats. 

He certainly preferred people to other equines including other donkeys. 

I also had a premature lamb that lived indoors adopted by my Border Terrier who actually came into milk and wouldmallow her to suckle suffering being tossed in the air as the lamb butted her to get the milk down as they would with a ewe. When I put Rachel out with other bottle lambs she refused to eat and would lay in a corner doing her best to die. The dog would be lying outside the stable door and also refused to eat. Maisey had never cared about he pups as she did that lamb. 

I even brought another weak lamb indoors to see if the pair would bond but no such luck. Eventually Rachel was to big to get out through the wire and had to stay out with the other lambs given a chance she would escape and come running straight to the house to find either the dog or me. If I walked the dogs through their field Rachel would want to come too and would run around with the dogs. She would not drive from any dog regardless of how rough they were with her. Mind you, didn't need dogs with her in the flock, call her and she would come running and the rest would follow. This was very handy until she escaped and brought all her friends indoors!


----------



## Hondo

Foxhunter said:


> This was very handy until she escaped and brought all her friends indoors!


Ha ha. No pics? 

Did they do a sleep over?


----------



## Foxhunter

I can tell you HONDO that most sheep poop can be vacuumed up but the pee is another matter! 

I spent ages goi g through my photo bucket pictures looking for a picture of amaisey and Rachel on the sofa but couldn't find it. Sorry.


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

Foxhunter, that is a most interesting revelation! 

The two horses I mentioned that prefer to stick around with the humans are the two I spent hours every day for months, choosing to be with them, with no other purpose in mind. We have a picnic table in the pasture and I would grab a book sit and read or just sit and watch them. Neither of them were rideable for a while, so it seemed like a good way to get to know them. It wasn't long before they were following me around working on fences, washing out trough's, harvesting pecans, whatever I was doing around the place. 

Very interesting!


----------



## bsms

loosie said:


> And there, I believe, is the crux. And it is no secret. The principles have been taught publicly at least since Skinner came along in... was it around 1930's?? I sus eons longer in some circles though - and yet still so many people don't get that it's even conceivable with a horse.
> 
> **I am not at all berating a relationship that is 'good' according to Smilie's or Bsms's experiences. I do not at all think that is something to belittle at all. But as good as it gets? No, I expect, and get more than that, and for _me personally_(again, not judging those who don't want it...) would be looking at what_* I*_ was doing wrong and work to change that, if my horses didn't want to be with me...


 - underlining mine for emphasis



Reiningcatsanddogs said:


> ...It could also be that when people have done things for one way for so long that they are frightened of trying anything new in the event that it is discovered that there is something more that they were missing all this time.....resistance to change is natural; that too is reality.


Having only ridden for 8 years, and having spent most of that time searching for ways to work WITH a horse, I doubt I'm stuck in the mud or resistant to change.

And while I will out & out PUNISH my dogs at times, it doesn't change the fact that my Border Collie was nicknamed "Jack the Slipper" because of his tendency to sleep with his head on my feet. They sleep around our bed, and I haven't punished any of them in a year or more.

Dogs just respond differently than any horse I've met. And my dogs are around me most of the day, unlike my horses. My horses live in my back yard, about 60 feet from my back door, but they are not next to me most of the day. Nor will they ever live in the house with me.

While the principles "_have been taught publicly at least since Skinner came along in... was it around 1930's??_", I haven't noticed anyone on this thread discussing *HOW* to train beyond willing compliance - and willing compliance is what both Smilie & I are talking about. Willing compliance, not enthusiastic compliance. I see a lot of "willing compliance" from my horses. When I say it is time to leave the grass in our arena - and horses who live on a dry lot ADORE having grass available - they don't buck, rear, spin, pin their ears, etc. I don't beat them, spur them, kick them. I do sometimes need to use the reins to say we are not going to turn around and go back to grazing, but only with Bandit - and Bandit is more independent in his thinking than Trooper & Cowboy combined - 10 fold. That is who he is. It is his nature. But I'm not jerking on his face, and 10 feet down the road he accepts it and willingly moves forward. Not enthusiastically. He prefers grazing to trail riding, and I don't blame him.

@*Smilie* and I have often disagreed, sometimes very strenuously, but I don't think she packs into the mountains and crosses rivers on reluctant, resistant horses. Nor do I believe her horses have their personality dominated out of them - although I have met a number of horses who did!

Nor do I hitch my leg up on top of the saddle so Bandit & I can squeeze between cactus on a reluctant, resistant horse - a horse I don't trust to keep US safe and to behave responsibly even if he encounters some cactus. When I see a bunch of needles sliding inches from Bandit's thighs, and I have one leg on top of his back...I'm trusting him in a way I never trusted Mia.

When I come to a tougher spot - and none of my riding is really challenging, but some of it is tougher for Bandit than others - I like to let him take a look. If he accepts responsibility for OUR moving on, I'll feel it in his back and we go. If he tells me he can't make it, I don't push him because I don't want him trying to quit halfway through!

Willing compliance is one thing. The single-minded devotion of a dog is quite another. "Jack the Slipper" is rather timid, but that is deceptive. When he was 6 months old, my youngest was in the corral when Jack decided the 3 horses were threatening her. They were not, of course, but the 6 month old puppy THOUGHT they were - so he raced into the corral, put himself between her and the horses, and made it clear to over 2500 lbs of horses that if they wanted to harm my daughter, they'd have to deal with HIM first!

I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for a horse to take on opponents 50-100 times his size to protect me or mine! That is not their nature. 

I've taken to telling folks that it is important to '*ride the horse's mind*' - that if you ride the mind, then staying on the body is easy. My way of going past scary stuff involves slack in the reins and giving the horse choices - because I've learned on Mia and on Bandit that a horse with choices isn't inclined to explode. A key to how I want to ride is wrapped up in the phrase "*mutually acceptable compromise*" - where maybe I don't get everything I want, and the horse doesn't get everything he wants, but together we come up with options acceptable to us both - and then perform them together. I just feel safer, MUCH safer, when my horse and I are working as a team. But a mutually acceptable compromise implies NEITHER side is getting 100% of what it wants...

And I'm not going to pretend. If Bandit was loose and eating grass in our little arena right now, and I took a walk, he would stay in the arena and eat. He wouldn't follow me out onto the trails or go jogging with me for the sheer pleasure of my company. He would on a lead line, but he will not leave green grass and follow me for the joy of my company - nor would I expect him to! He's a horse. I accept him for who and what he is, not for what he never will be.

If looking for mutually acceptable compromises and being happy with "willing compliance" versus the enthusiasm of my dogs makes me a substandard rider, then I'd LOVE to hear specific suggestions or specific training principles on how to turn Bandit into a gelded version of The Black Stallion - how to generate enthusiastic devotion in our horses!


----------



## Foxhunter

What I have found is that the person who is firm but fair will gain the trust of any animal whether dog, horse or human. 

My mother never minced her words when it came to anything to do with discipline or correction. A cousin was coming through the house on roller skates. Mum waited for his father to stop him but he didn't and told mum that Colin wouldn't take any notice. Mum stopped him and told him outsodemwas for the skates and if he came through again she would knock his block off. When he went out his father told mum that if she hit him he would hit her back to which Mum said "He will have to deal with Fred!" (Dad) 

He came through again and Mum grabbed him by the shirt and using a stick of rhubarb she was preparing for supper, she slapped him several times across the face with it until the juice was dripping off her arm and his chin. 
Colin immediately removed the skates, handed them to mum, wiped his face on her apron and said, "You wanted something down the town, I'll go for you."

His father's face was a picture. Later Colin got into trouble and he ran away to come to talk it over with Mum. 

I have found it the same with corrections, some will need a tough lesson, others very little, it depends on their temperament. 

As for the dog training only using P+ it all seems to take a heck of a time to get results. I reckon that if I cannot get a dog to walk to heel within 10 minutes of taking its leash then I am doing something wrong.


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

bsms said:


> - I'd LOVE to hear specific suggestions or specific training principles on how to turn Bandit into a gelded version of The Black Stallion - how to generate enthusiastic devotion in our horses!



BSMS, I know I have given you specific examples of how to help develop willingness with your horse, not on this thread but on others. 

Your response has always been ....but....and then you don't give it a try because you have always talked yourself out of it or posted a quote from somewhere that is more in line with your comfort level and belief system which you would rather try. 

There is absolutely nothing wrong with that as one should work with a horse in the way they are comfortable and within their frame of perception. You can take my examples or you can leave them, no skin off my nose and no offense taken.

However, to say that there have never been any specifics offered I think is mistaken, they just are not to your preferences or within your frame of reference.


----------



## bsms

Reiningcatsanddogs said:


> BSMS, I know I have given you specific examples of how to help develop willingness with your horse, not on this thread but on others....
> 
> ...However, to say that there have never been any specifics offered I think is mistaken, they just are not to your preferences or within your frame of reference.


Suggestions on how to train a horse to get enthusiastic compliance, without even resorting to pressure & release, would be the most important thing anyone on HF could write about horses. Ever.

I've GOT "willing compliance", sometimes using pressure & release, sometimes using boundaries and giving the horse options within those boundaries.

But if you or anyone else on this thread knows how to generate enthusiastic compliance, _without using pressure and release at all_, I'd LOVE to see it. That advice needs to become a "sticky" on the horse training subsection! It needs to become a book, and a DVD, and a movie, and YouTube videos, so everyone can have a horse who is not just willing, but enthused to do whatever his rider wants.

"*Firm but fair*" makes sense to me. It works with my horses as well as anything else, and it works with my dogs, and it worked with my kids, and it worked with my subordinates in the military. However, "firm but fair" DOES include "firm" - and I've needed that, with horses and dogs and kids and other humans. Firm tends to involve some degree of adversarial behavior - setting boundaries, and using some sort of action to enforce those boundaries. Firm requires that MY will be respected by the other, and taken into account.


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

BSMS, Oh, I see, you want someone to tell you how to communicate via mental telepathy. I am sure there is a book out there somewhere, though I would suggest you look into Dorrance's concept of indirect feel, its about as close as you will get.


----------



## bsms

From post #1:



Hondo said:


> ..."See that?" "He knows if he doesn't move I'll hit him."
> 
> To the casual observer, it might have appeared the horse had moved willingly.
> 
> Did he move willingly? Or by aversive reflex? Or is there a difference? Or in the long run does it make any difference?


He moved because he preferred moving to what would happen if he did not move. Does it make a difference? Maybe. Maybe not. If, after learning to do what the human says, the horse realizes that what the human says makes sense, then the horse will WANT to do what the human says.

That is the foundation of my approach to Bandit's fear - to show him, over time and many instances, that my opinion is worth listening to because I KNOW more than Bandit. We are not there yet, and may not ever get there totally - but we've made a lot of progress. But in order to make that progress, he needed to learn his previously learned responses - spinning, running sideways, or bucking - were not helpful to him.

IOW, I did what Tom Dorrance seemed to teach, and what Tom Roberts taught:

"Pain inflicted by me does not seem to be the answer. Discomfort inflicted by the horse to himself is a good teaching tool. Back to Tom and his idea of allowing the horse to be comfortable when he is doing what you want and causing him to be uncomfortable when he is not. (Getting in his way for undesired behavior, and staying out of his way for desired behavior.)" - Tom's Students Visit about tom, in "True Unity" by Tom Dorrance.

"How do you get a horse to go away from the barn?

You wouldn't try to take him away from the barn; you'd just make it difficult for him to hang around there. You would make it difficult by not letting his feet stop - just keep his feet moving...You've made the wrong thing difficult and the right thing easy." - page 52, Ray Hunt

"This gentle discouragement of “quiet persistence” is something that horses seem to find irresistible. Whenever you are in doubt as to what course to follow, mounted or dismounted, revert to “Quiet Persistence.” Your quiet persistence is the real “That will profit you not.” It discourages the horse without punishing him.

Punishment does have its place in the training scheme, with some horses more clearly than with others – but even then it should be used only occasionally. Do not revert to punishment when you are trying to teach the horse something new. It upsets the horse and destroys the calmness so essential to his taking-in a new lesson. So punishments are “out” when teaching any new lesson." - Tom Roberts

Tom Dorrance and Ray Hunt and Tom Roberts all seem to include an approach I describe as setting boundaries - fences that don't chase horses. In order to set that boundary, you pretty much need to say "_X is not a good choice. I reject it._" That means saying "No" to the horse. It is hard to say no in a totally positive manner, and I see no need to do so. *It doesn't matter if you say "No" if you then let the horse find the "Yes"*.

Maybe I'm totally misunderstanding what the two Toms and Mr Hunt tried to teach. But I see no sign the Dorrance brothers or Ray Hunt taught that "_aversive reflex...in the long run...make any difference_".

It can, if the rider only demands. But it will not, if the rider sets boundaries, demands those boundaries be respected, and then allows the horse the freedom to find the correct answer on his own.

The end result - and I believe some people can get there using a much more dominant approach than I like to use - is a horse who does things because it makes sense to the horse to do them. A horse who understands "_There's a purpose and a meaning behind each thing you ask the horse to do_". When you reach that stage, and it is a journey, then you have "_Let your idea become the horse's idea_." (Ray Hunt quotes)


----------



## Hondo

I'm a bit confused and perplexed about when and why the enthusiastic compliance came into the picture. Has anyone suggested a goal of enthusiastic compliance? Or that they have recieved that from a horse? Is there any relationship at all between willing and enthusiastic? I think not.

I don't think it is a bait and switch tactic but it might appear to some to be so.


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

BSMS, I wasn't talking about Tom, I was talking about Bill and that will become apparent if you "google" the concept of indirect feel.

Look into it, it's a crucial piece of the puzzle.


----------



## loosie

Hondo said:


> Ha ha. No pics?
> 
> Did they do a sleep over?


Dont be ridiculous! Of course not, it was a sheep over! Ha ha ha ha..... hmm.


----------



## jaydee

It would be rather naïve to imagine that you'd get the same level of 'bonding' (not the word I'm really looking for) with every horse. So much depends on it's start in life and how its routinely treated
We knew that Flo was hand reared and never saw another horse until we bought her age 3 so that fact combined with the fact that I spend a lot of time with our horses = a horse that remained happier in the company of humans than with other horses even though until she died in her 20's she was part of our horsey 'herd'
Jazzy who we know nothing about prior to her being bought by someone who was involved in an equestrian college might have had a similar start though the people we bought her off said that she was very negative when they got her and could be difficult they'd done a great job with her. If she's allowed she will always choose to hang out with us in the barn over being outside in the paddocks and all the time we're over there she'll be hanging over the fence in the hope that someone will let her in. If you go in the field to work on anything she'll leave the other horses and follow you around.


----------



## loosie

Hondo said:


> I'm a bit confused and perplexed about when and why the enthusiastic compliance came into the picture. Has anyone suggested a goal of enthusiastic compliance?


i think bsms is referring to 'enthusiastic' as the horse choosing, without compulsion, to be with its owner. As opposed to choosing because its the easier option. And that just takes offering the horse a good deal. That means different things in different situations. So your horse doesnt usually get grass, so thats the most important thing in his life? Let him understand he will get better grass when hes with you, for eg.


----------



## Hondo

loosie said:


> Let him understand he will get better grass when hes with you, for eg.


Hondo does know that when we go out he will get to sample the native flora along the way instead of the mostly boring bermuda grass in the field.

And he does. And I think that makes a difference.

He's pretty willing but not enthusiastic. If he were enthusiastic, I might think twice about getting on him


----------



## bsms

loosie said:


> i think bsms is referring to 'enthusiastic' as the horse choosing, without compulsion, to be with its owner...So your horse doesnt usually get grass, so thats the most important thing in his life? Let him understand he will get better grass when hes with you, for eg.


My horse will choose, at times, to be with me. On the whole, he seems to like me better than the other horses, but not as well as food. He's a horse, not a dog - and my dogs would leave their food in a heartbeat to join me on a walk.

The power of WE is strong in dogs. It is easy to teach a dog to be enthusiastic about a lot of things. And horses learn enthusiasm, too, at times. Depends on the horse and the event. But a dog will get a lot more excited about joining me than my horse will. I don't see any likelihood that I will ever get Bandit as enthusiastic about trail riding as my dogs are about walks - and that may be a good thing.

My horse does get to eat grass while tacking up. And when we get back. What he sometimes is less thrilled about is leaving the grass to go walk for 90 minutes in the desert. He's reasonably willing - I don't beat him to get him to go out - but he'd rather stay and eat. It would not disappoint him if I hand grazed him and never rode. But it would disappoint me, and it is possible for us to reach a mutually acceptable compromise.

BTW - I don't prevent Bandit from grabbing bites along the way. It is Bandit who usually chooses not to. Cowboy, OTOH, views a trail ride as an all you can eat buffet. But since he keeps moving and is uncommonly sensible and forward, we don't care. All of my horses are very good at eating with a bit.

But I've yet to find a trainer anywhere - including the Dorrance brothers - who don't use some variation of pressure and release for some of their training. The GOAL of the training is a willing team mate...but the process often includes a horse acting a certain way because the option the horse prefers is not allowed: "Getting in his way for undesired behavior, and staying out of his way for desired behavior."

And if the horse has previously learned dangerous behaviors - bolting, for example - then "getting in his way" may well involve some punishment.


----------



## Foxhunter

Hondo said:


> Ha ha. No pics?
> 
> Did they do a sleep over?


Finally found it! 
Rachel is on top of her 'mother' the other lamb was the one I brought inside in the hopes of getting Rachel to learn she was a sheep. 

Rachel was some 10/12 weeks older than the other so you can guess how small she was when she arrived.


----------



## Foxhunter

bsms said:


> Suggestions on how to train a horse to get enthusiastic compliance, without even resorting to pressure & release, would be the most important thing anyone on HF could write about horses. Ever.
> 
> I've GOT "willing compliance", sometimes using pressure & release, sometimes using boundaries and giving the horse options within those boundaries.


This is something that is possible *but, *it is a combination of many things and a lot of it a feel and to some extent a psychic balance between horse and human. Some people naturally have this, some can learn it and others will never get it. It is not something that can be read about and put into practise it is a feel, an understanding an instinct an empathy.

Watch someone like Lorenzo who has several horses loose on the beach and they all stick with him, that is a bonding similar to a person walking with a pack of dogs off leash and them staying with them. Of course it takes training and that most likely involves pressure and release. Though watching how the foals and yearlings are taken out with the trained horses, they will learn a lot from just being there.







The mare I hit down the face was an advanced dressage horse, until I rode her I didn't realise just how sloppy my Roding had got because I had been riding racehorses for years. It was an eye opener and off I went to take some lessons to get me back into shape.


----------



## Hondo

Thanks for the pics!! Awesomely cute.

Moments ago while walking across the field I was thinking...........

One particular human doesn't necessarily want to be with another particular human unless they have a very close and strong bond. And even then there will be times when human A wants to go do something without human B.

Wolfs submit to the pack leader. Fawn over him. Belly up. Lick his lips. I think dogs are even more likely or stronger in this aspect since they are still juveniles. If the pack leader has just given one of the pack a strong canine lashing, the groveling and fawning may even be stronger.

So most dogs pretty much follow that except for livestock guard dogs lime my Meka. She wants to go and be with me, but sort of on the terms of a Siamese Cat. She never comes bounding. None of that breed does.

Dogs, except livestock guard dogs, are different than any other animal at least to some extent.

So to talk about whether horses are like dogs or not is a non-topic.

I'm thinking, at this moment in time, that the horses desire to be with us (or not) parallels whether two humans want to be around each other.

There's been a lot of strong opposing positions on this thread but all in all it has been very illuminating - to me.


----------



## gottatrot

Hondo said:


> There's been a lot of strong opposing positions on this thread but all in all it has been very illuminating - to me.


I agree, finally read all the way through and many good points to think about.

I have seen horses enthusiastic about work, but only if it was something they appreciated naturally like breeding or running. But if we want horses to do things that are not their idea, the best I've seen is willingness. Horses are extraordinary this way, however, in that they will become willing to do many things that are not their idea and not in their planned schedule for the day. They accept nearly anything if we ask them to do it routinely, including very hard work.

I don't think of a horse's willingness to be with a human as equating with their willingness to work. My one mare dislikes work, preferring to eat 24/7. She will never step a foot away from a human and will often come when you call her. My other mare will sometimes walk away and will not come away from herd mates when called. Yet once she gets working, she enjoys it and even gets enthusastic about it at times. The one that comes when you call her does not like grooming or attention as much, and the one that does not come will stand and appreciates grooming very much. They were both conditioned differently; one was taught to be caught and that humans are always safe from a young age. The other was taught to run from being caught and humans can hurt you, and that still lingers in her mind after years of safety.

Some horses appear to work with enthusiasm, but once you study them you can see they have learned to respond quickly to cues through negative reinforcement, so their enthusiasm is false. If allowed to relax, their responses become less sharp.


----------



## Smilie

Just got back from the mountains, so guilty of skimming posts
There is a huge difference between not wanting to be with you, and happy to have your company/work with you, accepting you as as leader, partner, in lieu of an equine herd member. Just because a horse would rather be with his own kind,most of the time, given a choice, does not mean he does not want to be with you, when you do ride or interact with that horse
A horse that does not want to be with you, is hard to catch, does not want to leave home, is spooky, because his security is back in that field, calling to his buddies.
None of my horses do that. they are easy to catch, ride out on a loose rein, either alone or with another horse, never call, never are hesitant to leave home
Any animal can become a 'pet', and, as a kid, I had a pet chicken, that I rescued from a chicken hawk. That chicken followed me into the house, if allowed
I had pet heifers, before I had a horse, that I rode, and hooked to my slede
None of that changes, as to what a horse is, and many horses are made into the proverbial 'barnyard pet', that trainers dread
Heck, when I was 13, I created a one person horse-a draft filly, born at our farm. That filly would give you a front leg, to shake, and I just got on and rode her, plus hooked her up to cutter-she did all that, and I knew zero about training horses.
BUT she also was a one person horse, and would chase my brother , and any other man, who came into the barnyard


----------



## Smilie

loosie said:


> i think bsms is referring to 'enthusiastic' as the horse choosing, without compulsion, to be with its owner. As opposed to choosing because its the easier option. And that just takes offering the horse a good deal. That means different things in different situations. So your horse doesnt usually get grass, so thats the most important thing in his life? Let him understand he will get better grass when hes with you, for eg.


AHH, yes, and how do you separate chosing to be with you, unconditionally, and chosing to be with you because , better grass, treats, grooming itchy places ect?

We all know, or most of use anyway, that orphan young animals will bond with people, to the point they chose them over their own kind-which is really not that positive in most cases, and people who have raised orphan foals, are well aware of this fact
How does it get much better, Loosie?
Again, I will use Einstein as an example. I was there when he was born. When I had breast cancer< I started him under saddle, while on chemo. He was very easy to train. I think I rode him in the round pen twice, then out in the open fields
His trust in me was absolute, tot he point he charged abull moose, when I asked him to. I worn neither spurs, used a crop, or any other force. In fact, when he saw that bull moose, in rut, that we had to pass, he just stopped, turned his head, looked back at me, as if to ask, 'now what'?
Bull moose are stupid,e sp in rut, and I knew if we tried to run past, he might charge. I thus untied my coat from the back of my saddle, waved it in the air, and asked Einstein to mock charge that moose. Without a hesitation, he did.
He came when I called, even when the pasture grass was high. I could go on and on, of the trail miles we rode together, his show awards, ect.
I wrote a poem, a few years before I had to put him down, as I knew that day was coming.
I fed him oats, something he had not been allowed, for many years, waiting for my vet to come. I held him, while he trustingly allowed that needle, that would forever take him away, even though My hubby said he would hold him. I had to be there.
How much R+versus R- I used, training him, I never really sat back and thought about it, but please don't insult me by saying it can get better-a lot better!


----------



## Smilie

Far as a horse staying with you, while you stop for lunch-means not much, as we also do it all the time,giving the horses a chance to graze while we eat our lunch.
Most horses will happily stay there, esp while still hungry, with a buddy and you in sight
Give then a couple of hours to get full, wander some distance from you, while grazing, or take one horse out alone, and see how long they stick around

Far as a horse trying to follow someone right into a house-well, there is a very fine line, between that horse just being bonded, and being that proverbial barnyard pet
We used to have horses in for both training and breeding. Most times, when one of those horses, was declared to 'just love people', they were spoiled. Sure, they came up to that corral fence, but if led somewhere they did not wish to go, would walk all over you. Obviously, most of those horses had only R+ used on them

lunch break





\smilie looks quite happy to be with me!




"preferring their own kind', most times, is not synonymous with not wanting to be with you, nor is not wanting to be with their own kind, necessarily a good thing. Talk to some trainers who got one of these 'just loves people', type of horse to train!


----------



## Smilie

Foxhunter said:


> This is something that is possible *but, *it is a combination of many things and a lot of it a feel and to some extent a psychic balance between horse and human. Some people naturally have this, some can learn it and others will never get it. It is not something that can be read about and put into practise it is a feel, an understanding an instinct an empathy.
> 
> Watch someone like Lorenzo who has several horses loose on the beach and they all stick with him, that is a bonding similar to a person walking with a pack of dogs off leash and them staying with them. Of course it takes training and that most likely involves pressure and release. Though watching how the foals and yearlings are taken out with the trained horses, they will learn a lot from just being there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You only have to watch Cavelia, to see some very impressive liberty work. BUT, all those horses are stallions and geldings, no mares
> I also saw a lot of R+ in the form of food rewards, and one young stallion,'doing his own thing', for awhile
> Very nice, impressive, BUT, let some predator run through that group, add an in heat mare, and see how well that liberty work continues!
> Liberty work, to me, is entertainment, but does not have that much practical application for someone that just wants a safe horse to ride and enjoy


----------



## Hondo

Smilie said:


> or take one horse out alone, and see how long they stick around


Do that all the time with Hondo doing trail work. Never has offered to leave. He does seem to get worried if I get out of sight for too long, but relaxes when I'm back in sight. So I try to keep him close enough to be able to keep visual track of me.

This has often extended into 4-5 hours.


----------



## Foxhunter

Lorenzo is training on the Camargue where there are wild horses so no doubt he has encountered them what happens - who knows? Not a lot I would think or he wouldn't do it. 

Either way, I have absolutely no doubt that any one of Lorenzo's horses would go to hell and back for him.


----------



## Foxhunter

Smilie said:


> Give then a couple of hours to get full, wander some distance from you, while grazing, or take one horse out alone, and see how long they stick around!


Do not necessarily agree with you on this. 

I have had horses stick with me all day when I have been out working on fencing. They had the chance to go back to other horses but chose to stand around/graze in the immediate area I have been working. 

I have had some brilliant horses for following hounds, my last, Rufus was a troubled horse when he arrived but, we gained a total trust and I could get off to open a gate and stand there with him loose whilst the field galloped through the gate following hounds in full cry. He would wait until I was mounted before following as fast as his legs could carry him. 

Another troubled TB that came to me to freshen him up. This horse had thrown all he could at me and I ignored it all knowing he had been chastised for it before. He soon come around and was so bold following hounds. I came a purler off him over a large hedge, he actually came down, I couldn't hold my reins as he took off. I called out to him and at the end of the field he turned and trotted back to me. 
Following hounds is one of the most exciting things for a horse to do, a stampede of sorts and with the hounds 'speaking' makes it more exciting than racing or anything else I can think of so, for a horse to have the chance to follow on or return to their 'human' says that there is a very special bond between them if they do ignore all that is going on.


----------



## jaydee

A couple of our horses get way too enthusiastic about going off on a trail ride/hack, they'll be marching on the spot if they've got to wait around for too long. If we're riding straight off the yard they always aim for 'out' and not for the barn so must enjoy it. We don't get the same 'enthusiasm' for schooling in the arena work though they do go willingly because we try to make it enjoyable for them and not just a training drudge
My old boss' horse always knew when it was a hunting day because she'd be plaited up and if you left the stable door bolt without a clip on it she'd open it and take herself out to the trailer or horsebox whichever she found first and stand by it, if the ramp was down she'd load herself


----------



## Smilie

We;;, sure, my horses also hang around when I'm fencing, doing stuff, but I am not about to be packed 7 hours into wilderness, and just leave horses loose, hoping they will stick around, like a dog!
Far as liberty work, it is conditioned response, much like having a horse think an ordinary halter or lead shank controls him, and the same principle of conditioning, is used, in those bridless demos, that, plus working on the horse;s herd mentality, and them being creatures of habit
Again, Hondo, why are you worried about hobble training, if your horse will stick around, like a dog, come back when called, no matter where you are?
Sure, many horses will 'hang out with you. I have sat in the fields with my foals and had them come up to me, hang out. I have left Einstein, and Smilie (the latter, with a grazing muzzle) out on the lawn, and they hang around me grazing
Does not mean I will trust them 100 % , like a dog,to stick around over night, in wilderness. Nope, mine get tied


----------



## Smilie

Foxhunter said:


> Do not necessarily agree with you on this.
> 
> I have had horses stick with me all day when I have been out working on fencing. They had the chance to go back to other horses but chose to stand around/graze in the immediate area I have been working.
> 
> I have had some brilliant horses for following hounds, my last, Rufus was a troubled horse when he arrived but, we gained a total trust and I could get off to open a gate and stand there with him loose whilst the field galloped through the gate following hounds in full cry. He would wait until I was mounted before following as fast as his legs could carry him.
> 
> Another troubled TB that came to me to freshen him up. This horse had thrown all he could at me and I ignored it all knowing he had been chastised for it before. He soon come around and was so bold following hounds. I came a purler off him over a large hedge, he actually came down, I couldn't hold my reins as he took off. I called out to him and at the end of the field he turned and trotted back to me.
> Following hounds is one of the most exciting things for a horse to do, a stampede of sorts and with the hounds 'speaking' makes it more exciting than racing or anything else I can think of so, for a horse to have the chance to follow on or return to their 'human' says that there is a very special bond between them if they do ignore all that is going on.


It can also be a conditioned response, much like the word, 'whoa'
Once our entire herd got out in our large hay field, lush with alfalfa re growth. They were having a great time, not eager to be caught!
As they were merrily galloping off, I yelled, "Einstein, whoa' , and he stopped, long enough for me to halter him, and then use him to round up his buddies
It upsets a good horse, when the rider comes off, and they get security when things become again, as they should be, thus in that moment, of excitement, often will come back to that security
Not saying horses don't do some extraordinary things at times, but we as humans also tend to interpret those actions into what we want to see
For instance, when my reining mare, who could be hot, esp at age three, fell with me, as I was training her in a slippy snowy field, and where I suffered a concussion, that had me thinking less them clearly, she brought me carefully back home, by herself, as I could not re call that ride back.
Last thing I remembered, is wondering as to which leg she had fallen on, then deciding I could still mount and practice some rollbacks, along the fence, then found myself back in our backyard, with my son, standing on the deck, calling my husband, telling him, 'you better get out here, as when I ask mom what is wrong, all she says is 'I can't remember'
That mare must have walked home very carefully, after deciding I was not 'with it'


----------



## Smilie

Horsesa re also creatures of habit.
There are stories of retired Mill wheel horses, walking circles in the appointed time that they used to turn that wheel\Retired fire horses, jumping a fence, to run after the fire wagon.
Heck, there are accounts of horses running back into a burning barn, after having been safely led out, as that stall is their security , that they run to, in time of panic
Lots of stories of show horses, that don't want to be left behind, but you have to wonder at times, did they really love showing that much, or , is it a routine that gives them a sense of security, or, perhaps a combo


----------



## Smilie

Lastly, there is also the fact, that when we allow an animal to become too habituated with people, at the expense of deprivation of their own kind, we cause them to be dis functional , in part, as the creature they are designed to be
Thus, orphan foals don't know how to interact with their own kind, and even have a tendency that applies tot he phrase, 'familiarity breeds contempt'
Wild animals raised in captivity, can't be returned tot he wild, in most cases
Thus, much as I love my horses, I allow them to be the creature they were designed to be, living like a horse, with their own kind
I want a horse to be happy to be with me, when I work with him, ride him, ect, but I also want him to be a horse, not a big dog


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

Smilie,

I do not see Hondo or Loosie on here asking how to fix a behavior problem with their horses; neither am I. They appear to be perfectly happy with their horses, even thrilled with the way they are turning out, just as you obviously are with yours. They have as much right to feel a sense of accomplishment for the good behavior of their animals as you do, even though they have successfully used techniques that differ from yours.

I must say that your use of “pets” as a derogatory term is inappropriate because it was obviously meant to be demeaning to the skills and understanding of the owner. 

The term recreational rider/horse owner (who does not desire to show or breed horses and thus owns "pets") is not synonymous with “idiot who owns crappy horses and knows nothing” like you seem to allude. FYI my horses do not “walk all over me” or anyone else. They do however retain their curiosity for the world around them and enjoy the company of humans. 

They are hardly dysfunctional. Oliver takes over every herd he has ever been put in with, even those who are primarily mares. I think if he was unbalanced, they would hardly let him lead. If anything, the confidence he has built up interacting with humans bolsters his position as leader. The horses that I have who are dysfunctional all came from the misuse of punishment and pressure by people who had enough "experience" training to know better, but were far more interested in getting quick results at any cost.

The attitude you are projecting of looking down your nose towards people like Hondo, Loosie, Bondre and, seemingly everyone else who use and explore alternative training methods is indicative of a narrow view of the world. 

Hondo for instance, makes a living working on a working cattle ranch, every day, right now, today, as we speak, not thirty years ago. He spends his working hours with and around horses. Somehow though, his experiences and observations get discounted; not only that but defiled, mocked and his horses are a “pet” even though they bring him a paycheck? Having never done the kind of work for pay that he does, I am very interested to hear his perspective, thoughts and observations. It is one of the reasons this forum exists. If only one person's experiences and perspective counted for anything, this would be a blog instead of a forum. 

Loosie as a farrier, works with many different horses that are not her own. She didn't breed them, birth them, halter train them or back them; she does however have to deal daily with other people's missteps. The fact that she chooses to use the training methods she does with her own horses, given her experiences with other people's horses, I find very telling. I feel she also has much to contribute to the conversation. The fact that she trains using treat rewards and clicker training, in no way discounts the value of her experiences and successes. If anything it bolsters the argument that clicker training is a good tool to have in one's (hopefully) ever expanding tool box.

Are there horses out there that have been allowed to become dangerous because people didn’t know how to correct the little missteps before they became big ones? Yep. I still ride some of those for people to help them out. They are usually a fairly easy fix. I don't see any indication that there are any of those types of horse owners here in this discussion. On the contrary, they all seem to have horses that are quite well behaved, despite using alternative techniques!

There are also an equal number of horses out there who have become dangerous because they have been scared to death by inappropriately used heavy handed tactics and need to be re-taught that pressure does not have to equal pain.

In every way, those fear based types of horses are much more difficult to work with because they have developed phobias which can manifest unpredictably and need an even more conscientiously, steady and fair hand. 

Many rescues here in Texas, land of testosterone, are overflowing with them. 50% of the horses in my pasture right now fit into that latter category.

This is not an either or discussion but rather a “both”. I don’t see anyone on this thread who has advocated the complete avoidance of pressure-release as a means of establishing communication or using punishment when appropriate. Nor do I see anyone here complaining about how poorly behaved their horses are, actually they all seem rather pleased with their animals. 

What is being queried is once communication has been established how best to create a riding partner who is beyond simple demonstrative obedience and how they can become the most willing partner possible.


----------



## gottatrot

Reiningcatsanddogs said:


> Are there horses out there that have been allowed to become dangerous because people didn’t know how to correct the little missteps before they became big ones? Yep. I still ride some of those for people to help them out. They are usually a fairly easy fix. I don't see any indication that there are any of those types of horse owners here in this discussion. On the contrary, they all seem to have horses that are quite well behaved, despite using alternative techniques!
> 
> There are also an equal number of horses out there who have become dangerous because they have been scared to death by inappropriately used heavy handed tactics and need to be re-taught that pressure does not have to equal pain.
> 
> In every way, those fear based types of horses are much more difficult to work with because they have developed phobias which can manifest unpredictably and need an even more conscientiously, steady and fair hand.
> 
> Many rescues here in Texas, land of testosterone, are overflowing with them. 50% of the horses in my pasture right now fit into that latter category.


This is something I have wanted to point out, but you did it much better than I could. 

Many people seem to point to spoiled horses being the worst and the cause of most horses ending up uncontrollable and heading for auction. I am not sure how we could find any figures to know for sure, but my experience very much matches @reiningcatsanddog's, in that most of these horses are easily retrained and only a very unfortunate set of circumstances and owners would have these horses ending up discarded permanently.

A spoiled horse, one that has been allowed to run all over or push around their owner is an easy fix. All they need is an experienced horse person to show them where the boundaries are. It is a natural place to be for a horse. They were allowed to do what they wanted in a herd, and now they meet a stronger leader who tells them "this is your place and here are your boundaries." They easily accept that, it is part of horse nature. A spoiled horse is not a ruined horse.

Horses that have been mistreated with heavy handed tactics in my experience are far more difficult to deal with. They retain memories of their treatment years later, and often have phobias as Reining says. They might never be able to be handled by any except the most experienced handlers and riders. They have learned that their life may suddenly become unsafe, and that fear and pain might attack them out of the blue. They are wary, often reactive, and require years of solid handling before they can become solid themselves.
These horses are far more likely to be given up on and considered ruined than a horse that has simply been spoiled by a too permissive owner.


----------



## Smilie

Reining, don't get bent out of shape!
If you go back several posts, on this endless thread, often going nowhere, you will note that I said, if you are getting the results you wish, with your horses, then use it, without worrying about labels.
It was not I, then went into all the dog examples, including abused dogs
Labels mean zero, as theory is never the same as hands on experience, learning feel , timing, and understanding the very nature of horses, then applying techniques that accept the horse for what he is, a noble creature, that has served man, but still a herd/prey species
I have a great connection with my horses, so perhaps I have a right to be offended, when the idea is put out, that because I at times use R-, pressure and release, I lack that 'soul'connection with my horses
By the way, maybe not being an 'official' barefoot trimmer (not farrier), I have gone down much of the journey that Loosie has, but she of course, having made barefoot trimming her 'job', is more adapt then I am
Sorry, I don't believe in clicker training, and think it belongs to situations where food rewards are the only method, like in performing dolphins, and liberty horses. 
Does not mean that I don't think there is application, far as in abused horses, but I'm not about to be bashed, stating there is a better way, because I treat a horse like a horse
I respect Hondo, whom has his horse at a working ranch, and has done a lot in gaining trust in a horse that had no trust in humans, but when he states that those people on that working ranch declared Hondo not safe to ride above a walk, I am not convinced of the horsemanship at that ranch!


----------



## Smilie

Again Reining, you know zero about me, nor the way I interact with horses, but I';m quite sure, having , lived, breathed horses all my life, that I perhaps learned something along that curve, in a span of many years, with many horses.
I do not believe in, nor ever have used abusive training techniques, but, I am pretty positive, that today, when horses are mainly recreational animals, that many more are condemned to slaughter, being unwanted, due to being spoiled, then there ever are, horses that are dangerous, un predicable, due to abuse
Of course, if you bought one of the latter, then your scope of vision, is very narrow
Go to any all breed horse auction, the number of horses, going through there, heading to the meat pen, are mainly fueled by horses , just never handled, taught basic useful handling, horses that have become spoiled, then the truly abused fearful horse.
We all a are allowed and encouraged to use what works on our horses. I believe I have never posted one topic that was against using just R+, or mainly R+
However, I have aright to be defensive, if that is projected as the 'enlightened modern training module , and if you use the pressure and release, the ask, ask louder, then demand, on a horse that understands as to what you are asking, then you are somehow abusive, your horses won't wish to be with you, and you lack that \connection' with your horse, who is, working in fear, hating to be with you


----------



## Smilie

Well, Gotta trot, you need to get out more!
I have seen some truly dangerous horses, that were spoiled.
How about a young stud, taught it was okay to charge his owner, who was playing 'tag with him. The owner was playing but that stud got serious
How about the horse that rears, and goes over backwards, because he has learned that he can balk?
Yes, a fearful horse, can be very un predicable, as he responds out of fear, and lack of trust. That type of horse needs to learn trust, first, before any training can begin
Great, using whatever methods work, including food rewards!
However, I am pretty positive, and will put money up, that proves the number of dangerous horses today, are mainly the result of being spoiled.
I mean, all you have to do, is read some of the posts here and elsewhere, on horse forums!


----------



## Smilie

By the way , Reinin, I have every respect for both Loosie and Hondo.
Heck, Hondo might be the best horseman on that ranch, as he got through to horse Hondo, while those ranch hands did not
I have no problem with anything Loosie said, either, otherwise then perhaps taking the 'better way', personally
If you have a problem, with me saying that horse trying to follow your daughter into the house, enters the grey area between 'barnyard pet, and truly attached yo your daughter, come out and say so!


----------



## Hondo

One of the early founders of this ranch died two years ago. As a newborn he was carried on the back of a mule in a basket over serious single track, which I've ridden, by his mother riding to the original homestead. (BTW, she was inducted into the Texas Cowgirl Hall of Fame)

His father was dragged to death when he was 11 so he had to grow up early. They were raising angora goats in those days, about 10,000. John spent many nights sleeping on the ground with his horse.

This particular horse would lie down to sleep. When it was cold, John would often scoot up against his back for warmth.

He told about one night he woke up and the horses legs were across him. It was bitterly cold but John fearing the horse might startle and step on him slipped out of his sleeping bag and when clear pulled his sleeping bag out from under the horse's legs and went to the other side till morning.

I heard that story first hand from him several times and never tired of hearing it.

John used no hobbles, drag line, high line, low line, four way, or three way. Just used John.


----------



## Hondo

@ Smilie;

I do not see where gottatrot indicated in anyway that spoiled horses were never ever sent to the gallows. She did indicate that by her experience MORE became serious problems as a result of rough handling than by being spoiled.

And she certainly DID NOT even remotely suggest that anybody on this forum was guilty of that kind of handling.

Thank you Smilie, for the kind words regarding my successes with Hondo.


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

Smilie said:


> Again Reining, you know zero about me, nor the way I interact with horses, but I';m quite sure, having , lived, breathed horses all my life, that I perhaps learned something along that curve, in a span of many years, with many horses.


Right back at you Smilie….although, while you were busy eating, sleeping and breathing horses in your younger years, I was busy formally studying all about cognition, neurology and how it all works together, in not just one species but many......as well as recognizing and treating abnormalities, so with all of the posting you have done over the years, I might know a little bit more about you than you think. :wink: Horses have been a part of my life for forty years, just not the only part of my life. 

I buy those damaged horses quite intentionally Smilie, because I am capable of helping them. People ask me to work with their screwed up horses precisely for that reason. Gotta trot is correct.

If you don't care to deal with a horse like that, then don't. It does make life simpler. I choose a different path.


----------



## Smilie

well, Reinin, I never had the luxury of just being with horses, but fitted that in, like you, with a 'real job'
I was a lab tech for many years, with about 10 years and no horses while living In Calgary, setting up a coagulation lab at a major teaching hospital, then working in cancer research and oncology
Many times, in those early years, I trained young horses, after we moved to the country, in the dark, after work, often by moonlight, in snowy fields
I like to think that I also contributed something useful, working up a rare bleeding disorders, reading bone marrows on leukemic children, determining the right amount of cyro precipitate to give a hemophiliac, needing surgery, to raise his factor 8 to a safe level
So, try not to assume that I am just a country bumpkin=okay?
You don't know me, and I don't know you. 
I grew up loving horses long before I ever was even near horses, as a young child, growing up in post war Germany. Before I could have a horse, I trained a heifer to ride, back as a kid, on the farm
You chose a different field of science, but I like to believe, all those times, on call back, performing emergency procedures,often sleep deprived, in the wee hours, producing test results, that then directed treatment, was every bit as usefull as your field.


----------



## Smilie

Hondo, you are welcome, and I am sincere. You worked with a horse that had no trust, thus one that had harsh methods used, and gained his trust, and he has become your partner
You used what worked for you and Hondo, and if you are happy, Hondo is happy, then why worry about labels?
As I said in a previous post, a good horseman uses the right combo of R+ and R-, according to the needs of a particular horse, and his goals with that horse.


----------



## Foxhunter

I have never been the best rider in the world when it comes to position et al, I have always been round shouldered so that doesn't help. However I found in my early years what I was not just good at but loved more than anything was the messed up animals didn't matter if it was a horse or a dog, let me get with them and I would be absolutely determined to be able to turn them around and get those more experienced people to eat humble pie. 

I have no qualifications outside of horses and working with animals has given me a good outlook on life and people. It has given me the ability to read people, to see the body language as automatically as I can read a horse or a dog. 

What I have learned with training is that one has to be versatile, to be able in an instant to adapt one method to suit that animal. If it isn't working then what are you doing wrong?

I learned from watching as well as doing. At shows I would spend more time watching top riders, not in the arena but in the warm up area, you learn more. 

Two things I was told, firstly you cannot teach anything unless the recipient wants to learn and you can learn off anyone - even if it is how not to do something.


----------



## Hondo

A little bit of a light went on when reading a particular section of True Unity yesterday.

It was a section of unedited recording and Tom was talking about feel, timing, and when the horse was ready.

Not sure if this fits anywhere in this thread but it's going everywhere anyhow so here goes.

I taught high school math for seven year back in another lifetime. I would watch carefully for signs of recognition of what I was trying to describe. Signs such as a slight widening of the eyes or a mouth that would open slightly more in an "aha" instant.

I would always pause to let the new insight soak in a little more so as not to spoil it.

With an average of over 150 students each day, reading where the students were at a particular instant by their body language and particularly their facial expressions became almost a reflex and would guide me in my particular approach. Even more when working with a single student.

I like to think I was fairly good at it.

It struck me when reading Tom Dorrance that he must be guided in his dealings with a horse in much the same way and why he presents few if any ABC rules for dealing with a horse and never approaches two horses in quite the same way.

To be able to read and understand horses as well as Tom Dorrance is a lofty goal that I can only pursue but never hope to approach.

It'd be pretty cool to be able to hear his take on the thread title.

Maybe I'll start trying to remember to ask: What would Tom do?


----------



## Hondo

To the last post I'd like to add:

It has seemed to me that the human student best learns with an open and relaxed mind and that R-, P+, and P- all tend to interfere with the "learning mind frame" as I think of it.

It seems it would be the same with horses and why it is best when possible to search for ways to avoid interfering with receptiveness and learning.


----------



## Foxhunter

When my niece was about seven she came with me to collect a new horse in the horsebox. As we were driving home so she told me how much money she had. She was trying to add nine to the total but without using her fingers couldn't do it. I told her to add ten and take away one but she couldn't get that so I told her that when adding nine the first number got one bigger and the last one smaller. She understood that straight away. No matter what numbers I threw at her she answered swiftly and correctly. 

It is like that with teaching animals, what seems like a simple way of teaching is just not understood, explaining in a different way and it is learned easily.


----------



## bsms

Foxhunter said:


> ...What I have learned with training is that one has to be versatile, to be able in an instant to adapt one method to suit that animal. If it isn't working then what are you doing wrong?......


Seems to me this is key. Gottatrot compared it once to a science experiment - you tried things, and if it worked, you went on. If it didn't, you tried to figure out WHY it went wrong and made changes.

When I was flying, I was taught a person had two bags to reach inside when things got challenging: a bag of luck, and a bag of skill. When beginning, if something didn't work, you HAD to reach into your bag of luck - because you didn't have much skill to draw on! 

But no one knows how big their bag of luck is, and when you use it too many times...well, then you are "out of luck"! So the goal was to pick up enough skill - techniques that allow you to do something - so that you would never have to reach into the bag of luck too many times.

I think that describes riding - and ALL riding involves training horses. The bigger your bag of skills, the better your chances. And while those skills cannnot be practiced until actually used, they CAN be learned about by reading, listening and observing. 

Mia never tried a buck on me. Ever. When Bandit did, it shocked me. No horse had ever bucked with me before. But I had read advice about pulling the head up because it makes it harder for the horse to buck well - and I did. Not as well as I would now, after having had a little experience, but at least I wasn't on a bucking horse trying to figure out what to do next! And it worked. Got his head up, and his buck became hops, and that wasn't working - so HE stopped. And then we went on.

I'll never, ever have the feel or instincts available to someone who has lived around horses their entire life. Won't happen. But part of the value of HF is picking up ideas that WILL help me, someday, when things aren't going right, to figure out "What next?" Panic hits - for horse or rider - when one doesn't know how to handle a situation. As long as you have options to try, you keep trying. That is why it is important to give a nervous horse options - having options prevents explosions. And having options keeps a rider from melting down when things go wrong. Horse and rider both need options.

And I've noticed this, in my defense: A lot of very experienced riders only have one way to handle things. They have their method, and they try to force it on every horse and every situation. That may be why I've had people with 40+ years of riding tell me all horses are adversarial - because they have tried to force one method on every horse, and many horses rebelled. The adversarial relationship was one they imposed on the horse by their own inflexibility.

More than R+ or R-, I think observing what is going on and making adjustments - "_If it isn't working then what are you doing wrong?_" - is what allows a person to train a horse. Some of us need more time, but horses are forgiving. They will keep trying for a person who keeps an open mind and who is genuinely trying.



Hondo said:


> ...I would watch carefully for signs of recognition of what I was trying to describe. Signs such as a slight widening of the eyes or a mouth that would open slightly more in an "aha" instant.
> 
> I would always pause to let the new insight soak in a little more so as not to spoil it....


I was re-reading Tom Robert's "Horse Control - The Young Horse". One of his principles for teaching new things was "*End of lesson*". He said that when the horse was starting to get the idea, it was important to take a break. Do something else for a few minutes, or just stop and rest a while. "End of lesson". He said that allowed the horse to absorb something and make it his own.

Tom Dorrance mentions it too, although not quite as clearly. He said if you kept pressing the horse to perfect that step, then the horse could become confused about what the correct answer really was. If you weren't careful (if I understood him right), then instead of cementing the idea, you would drive it out entirely.

It certainly is true that when Mia was nervous, I'd try to push her just a little further to cement the idea that "_It isn't scary_" - and too often, ended up reinforcing her fear. That was why I started seeing more improvement when I used Tom Robert's approach of slack reins, or saying, '_Let's take one step together, and then I'll tell you to turn around and we'll go think about it_'. End of lesson. A STRONG release of pressure, followed by a time to think and let it soak in. And like Tom Robert described, she was often much better at something the next day. It was as if she thought about it overnight. Me? It can take me MONTHS to absorb something I read about or heard. So a horse who learns things overnight is a pretty darn good pupil!

Folks can argue about R+ or R-, but I think both will work if you introduce the idea to the horse, leave him some options, and then let HIM choose the right answer - and then back off and let HIM learn the lesson. The student needs to learn the lesson. The teacher cannot make the student learn.


----------



## jaydee

As someone who spent so many years from my early teens onwards working on dealer type yards and on livery yards I've had just about every type of horse there is to deal with and lots of them
I can say without any hesitation that spoilt, overly pampered horses are way easier to retrain than a horse that's being treated with too heavy a hand. The spoilt horse usually takes nothing more than some firm fair discipline to remind it of it's place but a horse that's been treated too aggressively is always just a few steps away from returning to being fearful again and a horse that's learnt to be defensive is even worse.
My horses get treats as do many others without them ever becoming a problem
Clicker training isn't all about using treats - in fact the treat part of it is often removed once the horse understands the 'feel good', positive meaning of the click when used as a 'focus'
As with everything else, its someone there to use if all other things fail.


----------



## Hondo

Maybe the click of the clicker is like a gold star to elementary students? A praising and recognition, ......just a thought.


----------



## jaydee

It works in many ways Hondo and its something you seem to be able to tweak to suit your own requirements.
I found it really effective with Lou who came to us in a pretty bad mental state after being with someone who'd been too forceful and aggressive with her - possibly trying to do that force a square peg into a round hole thing. Since then I've found it useful for Honey when she's struggling to understand something and starts to get anxious no matter how patient I am when she wants to please very badly but doesn't know how to do wants being asked of her and for any of the horses when they have those occasional zoned out moments and seem to go 'off with the fairies'
I very rarely treat when I use it.


----------



## Avna

No, clicker is not a gold star. Clicker training is simply a way to mark the exact moment of the desired behavior. It's like the game "hotter colder". It involves the animal guessing how to get a reward. Done right, it is an astonishingly fast way to create a finished behavior (through 'chaining' smaller behaviors together). For example just as an experiment I taught one of my dogs to run across the room and sit on a telephone book. Took about 15 minutes. 

There are plenty of ways to do it wrong, including 'luring', failing to make the reward irregular (which consolidates the behavior), and others. 

Clicker has one big hole: it cannot REQUIRE obedience. It's all voluntary. Any time there is a better reward on offer, the animal can always opt for that instead. So for things which absolutely must be obeyed, you need another technique for backup. And this too must be practiced. Dog cannot opt to chase the squirrel across the street, horse cannot decide that staying with the herd is actually more rewarding today. Clicker is a great tool. But it's just one tool.


----------



## Hondo

jaydee said:


> I've found it useful for Honey when she's struggling to understand something and starts to get anxious no matter how patient I am when she wants to please very badly but doesn't know how to do wants being asked of her


Awwww.......in those cases the clicker is a big ole hug! 

I was a little tongue in cheek about the gold star. Temple Grandin likes clicker training simply because it's easier to reduce the time span between the response and reward to almost nothing.

I wonder if clicker training has been tried on humans? Bet it could have "some" effect.

I wonder how much training there is in the "like" button?

I wonder if the clicker could be associated with a P+ and then used for punishment for undesirable behavior?

I wonder.............


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

Clicker training for humans started out being used for people with profound issues and is now moving into the mainstream for other things.

Clicking with Kids | Karen Pryor Clicker Training


----------



## loosie

Wow, lots more to catch up with, since I last was here... Very basically I find the *attitude* of the horse is way different & IMO very important to me when using +R as opposed to not.


----------



## loosie

Smilie said:


> AHH, yes, and how do you separate chosing to be with you, unconditionally, and chosing to be with you because , better grass, treats, grooming itchy places ect?


I don't believe 'unconditionally' has much, if anything to do with it - with dogs, humans, whatever. For the vast majority of... everything, it's all conditional. I'm talking about the 'conditions' being different between 'I am doing this because it's more difficult for me if I don't' and 'I am doing this because it is fun/rewarding and Good Stuff happens'. As with any training, it can become 'unconditional' of sorts... or rather, can become conditioned, become automatic. For eg. the horse first does something because it is rewarded for it each time, it is directly associated with A Good Thing, but it's not just the behaviour that becomes learned, but the emotions, the attitude. So the behaviour itself becomes the Good Thing.



> How does it get much better, Loosie?


The 'enthusiastic'(as bsms put it) *attitude/emotion* behind the behaviour is 'better' IMHO. That matters very much to me.



> How much R+versus R- I used, training him, I never really sat back and thought about it, but please don't insult me by saying it can get better-a lot better!


Firstly, this is MY OPINION, and I'm no more 'insulting' you than by you telling me how stupid you think 'clicker training' is. That is YOUR OPINION and you're entitled to it. Secondly, to say 'it can be better' was in response, directly, to the WORDS bsms wrote, not to you. And thridly, I tried to convey that I was not offering it as a 'judgement' on what others do, but what is important to ME. So... no need for offense. ;-)


----------



## loosie

Reiningcatsanddogs said:


> I must say that your use of “pets” as a derogatory term is inappropriate because it was obviously meant to be demeaning to the skills and understanding of the owner.
> ...The attitude you are projecting of looking down your nose towards people like Hondo, Loosie, Bondre and, seemingly everyone else who use and explore alternative training methods is indicative of a narrow view of the world.


Thanks Reining, was trying to... take a deep breath & just let Smilie have her opinion, but yes, since she is taking offense to me, thanks for pointing out how she comes across. Perhaps she doesn't intend/realise this... 

And yes, I'm PROUD to say that my horses are just as much 'pets'(synonymous with friends who enjoy eachother's company IMO) as my dogs. ;-) For my part, I really don't understand the whole attitude of 'horses should not be treated as pets'. Unless they're solely 'beasts of burden' or 'livestock', any animal can be a 'pet' or not.


----------



## bsms

loosie said:


> ...I'm talking about the 'conditions' being different between 'I am doing this because it's more difficult for me if I don't' and 'I am doing this because it is fun/rewarding and Good Stuff happens'...


I think the point that gets overlooked is that one might initially say, "Do this or else" with the end result being "Boy, that was fun!" My son didn't like being force fed, until he tried spaghetti a second time (under threat) and realized it was good eats!

For me, the hardest part of jogging is the first 1/2 mile. Once I get out and knock out the first half mile, it almost always becomes fun - and as a human, I connect those two through time. Bandit seems to enjoy trail rides once we get out. The first 10 minutes aren't a thrill to him, but then he stops thinking about the green grass he left behind and starts looking around, thinking, making some of the decisions (not all) - and life is good.

When there are a couple hundred yards of real rocky stuff he needs to cross on our way home, he often doesn't like going - which becomes a "Go or else" situation. But there really isn't any way for him to have fun crossing owwwyyy rocks - but the alternative might be back tracking a couple of miles - so yes, he would want to do it my way if he could fully understand. But he doesn't. 

That doesn't mean I whip him on. It just means I urge him enough for him to know it is very important to me - and then he does it. Sometimes, when something is very important to HIM, I back down. 

As @Avna mentioned, "_Any time there is a better reward on offer, the animal can always opt for that instead. So for things which absolutely must be obeyed, you need another technique for backup_." In 45 years, I've never found a way to make the first half mile of a run fun. And I cannot make everything about riding so fun that my horse will always do it for his own joy. 

The closest I've come to figuring something out is the "WE" - that horses like being part of a team, almost regardless of what the team is doing. That is why I try to give my horse some options, and to make some decisions - then he IS a part of a team, WE are working TOGETHER, and the pleasure of being part of a team becomes a positive reward. But it is a somewhat weak and tenuous reward, compared to the immediate reward of comfortable feet rather than crossing a rocky spot!


----------



## Smilie

loosie said:


> Thanks Reining, was trying to... take a deep breath & just let Smilie have her opinion, but yes, since she is taking offense to me, thanks for pointing out how she comes across. Perhaps she doesn't intend/realise this...
> 
> And yes, I'm PROUD to say that my horses are just as much 'pets'(synonymous with friends who enjoy eachother's company IMO) as my dogs. ;-) For my part, I really don't understand the whole attitude of 'horses should not be treated as pets'. Unless they're solely 'beasts of burden' or 'livestock', any animal can be a 'pet' or not.


 Go back and read again, regarding Reinin, and see who is looking down whose nose!
I explained, until blue in the face, about using what is right for any horse, good horsemen always having used the correct balance of R+ and R-, have agreed that abused horses can't have the pressure and release used, until they learn trust, for which clicker training is a great tool. BUT horses also that have never been mis treated, abused, can and do at times say 'no', in a very definite way.Yes, I probably am guilty in treating my favorite horses as pets at times, but

the rational part of me, does keep in mind what a horse is.


----------



## loosie

Smilie said:


> ...I believe I have never posted one topic that was against using just R+, or mainly R+ ...
> However, I have aright to be defensive, if that is projected ... pressure and release, ... somehow abusive, your horses won't wish to be with you


Smilie, I haven't read every word since(or many before) page 12 or some such. I read all of what you replied to me, who was replying to bsms & I read all of reining's response to that, among other bits tho. As it seems that you're getting 'defensive' against my words, I'll give my take on the above...

I didn't read into reining's words, that she thought -R methods are abusive. It was you however, that said horses prefer to be with other horses than people, and compared them to dogs in this manner(I train dogs too BTW, believe me, it's not automatic for dogs either). But whether it's your intention or not, you do indeed come across as quite... condescending, derogatory about 'positive training', and I didn't feel that reining was judging your horsemanship, but only your comments on other's alternative opinions. I also get the idea from what you've written, on this thread & elsewhere, that your judgements on behavioural concepts & practices are based on at least some misunderstanding. 

Obviously written words are very easy to misinterpret, so I think reading/replying 'charitably' is very important.


----------



## Smilie

No, Loosie, while I was training horses according to Reinin, she was studying behavioral science, to 'help people-ie that reads I am an un educated country bumpkin, just doing things the good ole way -ie training perhaps with force, intimidation, creating horses that don't want to be with me, work for me, and most of all, contributing nothing to society.
Well, I worked as a lab tech, at a major teaching hospital, worked with leukemic children, reading bone marrows, did cancer research, so hardly did nothing, had horses handed to me
I admit being more into 'hard science, new tools created to fight abnormal cells, this replacing invasive procedures like chemo, radiation, surgery, learning more about metabolic pathways, esp having an IR horse, but I am not completely ignorance of brain research, learning behavior
I also believe, just like training needs a good blend of R+ and R-, so does it also need a blend of learning theories and practical horsemanship.
Therefore, the writings of Evidence Based Horsemanship, where a blend of the experience of someone who has trained thousands of working horses, is melded with that of a neurobiologist
Also, I never disputed as to whether a spoiled horse was, or was not more difficult to re=train then an abused horse
I merely stated that the approach of training had to differ between the two, and also from just basic horse training, on a horse never abused or spoiled
I did say, and remain firm on the point, that we have more problem horses today, that are spoiled then abused
If mainly R+ works for you-go for it, 
I have also posted enough pictures, that show I still work my horses, winter, spring or summer, that they are happy and ride on any trail, that they were safe horse my kids rode out, so must have done something right!

http://www.evidence-basedhorsemanship.com/Lastly, Loosie, never once did I say I did not respect your opinions, esp when it comes to natural hoofcare. If reinin tried to put words into my mouth, for her own agenda, so be i
Yes, I differ abit on the amount of clicker training R+ you use, but I also know from reading your posts, that you use that reward with correct timing, and also the pressure and release, when you feel you need to.
End of story!


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

No Smilie, I was not insinuating that you were a country bumpkin. I was pointing out to you, that my professional education and experience allows me to develop pretty accurate psychological profiles of people from what they do and what they say. It was a big part of my career, thus, I may know more about you than you realize. 

There are five goals in psychology; Observe, describe, explain, predict and change behavior. Humans or horses....


----------



## tinyliny

I'm not sure if this will help or not, but, I think Reining is responding, Smilie, to a perceived feeling that you dis-value any approach to horse keeping/training that isn't focused on producing a competitive or 'using' horse, such as you produce.

I feel that I can see, to a certain extent, both sides. I mean, I have a real respect, and even awe, for the way you train your horses, Smilie, to be adaptable, dependable and usable in some pretty demandign situations. I have to stand back and say, "I could never do that". 

but, I also get a bit irritated, nay, shall I say 'offended' , when you say with patent asssurance that you are certain that NH is pretty much worthless and a hoax and only produces spoiled horses and a way for hucksters to make money, ets. . . meaning you have Zero respect for it. . . . it sounds a bit like you have a preconceived notion that just shuts out anyone that ISN'T like you in their approach. To me, that sounds a bit arrogant. it's not surprising that it rubs people the wrong way. you could be missing out on some pretty awesome stuff by assuming that anything outside of what you see as ok, is just all fluff and rainbow farts.


----------



## Hondo

bsms said:


> That doesn't mean I whip him on. It just means I urge him enough for him to know it is very important to me - and then he does it. Sometimes, when something is very important to HIM, I back down.


This I particularly like. I do lots of urging and so does Hondo, on laid back trail rides. And he knows the difference when we are just out for a stroll as opposed to actually doing something.

Urging is a good word. Something friends often do with one another.



bsms said:


> When there are a couple hundred yards of real rocky stuff he needs to cross on our way home, he often doesn't like going - which becomes a "Go or else" situation. But there really isn't any way for him to have fun crossing owwwyyy rocks - but the alternative might be back tracking a couple of miles - so yes, he would want to do it my way if he could fully understand. But he doesn't.


This worries me but maybe it shouldn't. Hondo is very thin soled and may always be although there's still hope that when his foot is fully regrown while a proper breakover is maintained, there is still a slight chance he may become comfortable in rocks barefoot.

Until then, I have personally, for myself, decided I was just not going to ride him anywhere that made his feet ouchy. I have been impressed with the stoicism of horses and worry that if he shows pain, it is likely much worse than he indicates. By nature they try to mask discomfort, as I'm sure you've also read, in order to not become a target of predators.

Hondo was always a little awkward in boots. There's been enough come off at the worse possible time that I think he has become worried about them somewhat.

He has always stumbled a few times on rides, boots or no boots. I've been told, "All horses stumble".

When I started using Ground Controls with a proper breakover location cut into them, it was an eye opener. He seldom stumbled on a ride and often has went without nary a stumble. And he'll look at a rock strewn path and just stomp right up the middle.

Didn't have to be Ground Controls I don't think, could have been any breakover shoe. I just like the added sole protection of the Ground Controls and a little bit more shock absorption which I suspect is negligible at a walk.

I don't know the distances, your horse's actual level of hesitancy, so your situation may be different than mine. I just wanted to share some of my experience with Hondo's ouchy feet.

Edit: I have actually gotten off Hondo and lead him through rock fields in the past.


----------



## bsms

I need to find out what Ground Controls are. Never heard of them.

ALL my riding, when off pavement, involves rocky ground. Typically, there will be 100-150 yards of decent trail, then 50 yards of rocks. If you don't cross the rocks, you can't go anywhere. The trails are as hard as concrete, so the rocks pointing up out of them are like rocks set in concrete. When possible, my wife and I now leave the trail and cut across the desert at the rocky spots because the surrounding dirt of the desert has a little give to it. It is less owwyyy than the dirt paths. But the cactus doesn't always allow us to do that.

Cowboy has incredible hooves. He never stumbles. Trooper is very stoic. He almost never stumbles, but the rider needs to take care of his feet while riding - because Trooper will destroy his hooves cantering over rocks if his rider asks. Bandit has stronger hooves than Trooper, but not as strong as Cowboy. And happily, he is NOT as stoic and obedient as Trooper, so he WILL object at times. That is a good thing! He's just telling me he needs help. He also stumbles sometimes. Significantly, he almost never stumbles when we are crossing raw desert.

There are some pretty nasty cacti around here that have vicious spines but are hard to see until you are almost on top of them, so going across raw desert means going at a walk, and backtracking a lot because it sometimes is impassable. But the horses prefer raw desert to paved roads, and they prefer paved roads to the trails. Now that Bandit is getting used to it, he sometimes starts to veer off the trail on his own, seeking softer raw desert footing! And when he does, that is fine by me. I view it as learning and exercising good judgment.

The local tack & feed doesn't even sell hoof boots. They had too many returned by riders who say their horses cant keep them on, so they quit selling them. And I've yet to meet a local rider who has used them successfully. If there is something that might help Bandit to not stumble or worry, or help Trooper's hooves...that would be huge. My wife and I have been talking about buying a trailer so we could trailer the horses across 3-4 miles of paved road (and neighborhoods) to get to a section of desert with much better ground...but our daily rides will always be primarily in the area near us.

And that is why I call washes 'The Interstates of the Desert". Drop into one, take it as long as it is headed your way, then exit:










I guess a good thing about it is it means horses can and should make choices while riding. If the horse says he needs to slow, the rider needs to honor it. If the horses says he wants to leave the trail, he probably has a reason. And by honoring the horse's choices, when possible, he truly becomes a part of a team whose goal is crossing a section of land. They seem to understand and accept responsibility for that, and enjoy being given real choices. It is a natural R+ (maybe).

My wife is very much a novice rider. Cowboy is a BLM mustang with a lot of experience (and at least 6 previous owners!). She gives him a lot of freedom in deciding HOW to follow Bandit & I. In return, he demonstrates good judgment and takes care of them both. I think that is why the bitter and arena-sour ex-lesson horse is such a great trail horse for us - he WANTS to make decisions, with support and encouragement from his rider. But a bossy rider will get him ****y fast...

BTW Hondo, I also will dismount when the ground gets rocky enough. I'm an extra 165 lbs on top of Bandit's 800 lbs. Getting off can help his feet, and usually helps us both to relax for 5 minutes anyways. I've come to view dismounting at times as part of good riding technique. It is part of being a team.

PS - I'm probably the least experienced person on this thread. But I try hard and pay attention to my horse. I think that is sufficient to participate in discussions like these. Like a lot of people on HF, I can't claim expertise. But what I've tried and seen is still valid. Not authoritative, but genuine. If something works well with my horse, it might work for someone else. That seems sufficient.​


----------



## bsms

Hmmmm...

"_*Ground Control*_ shoes are in the 10th year of production. These polyurethane shoes were developed by Kristy Watson from Boerne, Texas, after her favorite horse was injured by a metal horseshoe.

Ground Control shoes are solid rim shoes with a center bar that is open on either side. They come in sizes 000 to 2, in one universal shape that can be trimmed to fit all shapes of feet. Available in clear, black and hot pink, they retail from $19 to $21 per pair and are available online."











https://www.americanfarriers.com/ar...-metal-horseshoes-fuels-a-growth-in-their-use

Looks like something to think about.


----------



## Smilie

tinyliny said:


> I'm not sure if this will help or not, but, I think Reining is responding, Smilie, to a perceived feeling that you dis-value any approach to horse keeping/training that isn't focused on producing a competitive or 'using' horse, such as you produce.
> 
> I feel that I can see, to a certain extent, both sides. I mean, I have a real respect, and even awe, for the way you train your horses, Smilie, to be adaptable, dependable and usable in some pretty demandign situations. I have to stand back and say, "I could never do that".
> 
> but, I also get a bit irritated, nay, shall I say 'offended' , when you say with patent asssurance that you are certain that NH is pretty much worthless and a hoax and only produces spoiled horses and a way for hucksters to make money, ets. . . meaning you have Zero respect for it. . . . it sounds a bit like you have a preconceived notion that just shuts out anyone that ISN'T like you in their approach. To me, that sounds a bit arrogant. it's not surprising that it rubs people the wrong way. you could be missing out on some pretty awesome stuff by assuming that anything outside of what you see as ok, is just all fluff and rainbow farts.


Well, obviously, my stance comes across incorrectly, inspite of the fact that I have given numerous examples of very close connection I have had with horses
I do not discard all NH methods, and in fact, use many of them, without applying labels. I read much of their work, including that of Canada's own Chris Irwin. I see none of them just advocating positive re -enforcement, at all times, and that is where the disagreement arises, by people using/reading incorrect application-whether it be over flexing, round penning, getting hung up in join up, without even truly recognizing as to what it is
No, i truly believe in being as'gentle with a hrose as possible, but also as firm as needed. I do not agree with those that wish only to apply the first part of that equation (again, not taking of an abused or fearful horse )and entirely assume all NH completely rejects the 'but also, as firm as needed, to make that horse a good citizen.'
I have attended many equine conferences, where vets researching equine learning, behavior are given Like in all things,as in training methods, I use what makes sense, seems to have solid data, and throw the rest out


----------



## Smilie

tinyliny said:


> I'm not sure if this will help or not, but, I think Reining is responding, Smilie, to a perceived feeling that you dis-value any approach to horse keeping/training that isn't focused on producing a competitive or 'using' horse, such as you produce.
> 
> I feel that I can see, to a certain extent, both sides. I mean, I have a real respect, and even awe, for the way you train your horses, Smilie, to be adaptable, dependable and usable in some pretty demandign situations. I have to stand back and say, "I could never do that".
> 
> but, I also get a bit irritated, nay, shall I say 'offended' , when you say with patent asssurance that you are certain that NH is pretty much worthless and a hoax and only produces spoiled horses and a way for hucksters to make money, ets. . . meaning you have Zero respect for it. . . . it sounds a bit like you have a preconceived notion that just shuts out anyone that ISN'T like you in their approach. To me, that sounds a bit arrogant. it's not surprising that it rubs people the wrong way. you could be missing out on some pretty awesome stuff by assuming that anything outside of what you see as ok, is just all fluff and rainbow farts.



Well, obviously, my stance comes across incorrectly, inspite of the fact that I have given numerous examples of very close connection I have had with horses
I do not discard all NH methods, and in fact, use many of them, without applying labels. I read much of their work, including that of Canada's own Chris Irwin. I see none of them just advocating positive re -enforcement, at all times, and that is where the disagreement arises, by people using/reading incorrect application-whether it be over flexing, round penning, getting hung up in join up, without even truly recognizing as to what it is
No, i truly believe in being as'gentle with a hrose as possible, but also as firm as needed. I do not agree with those that wish only to apply the first part of that equation (again, not taking of an abused or fearful horse )and entirely assume all NH completely rejects the 'but also, as firm as needed, to make that horse a good citizen.'
I have attended many equine conferences, where vets researching equine learning, behavior are give talks. Like in all things,as in training methods, I use what makes sense, seems to have solid data, and throw the rest out
For instance, Dr Sid Gustaveson, who specializes in equine behavior, is very strong on the position that horses are evolved to being able to move almost constantly,, for their physical and mental health, yet many here, where regular stalling is an accepted practice, completely toss that out the window, and instead, treat sterio typi behavior, accept that treating equine ulcers, versus preventing clinical significant ones, is just part of owning horses
Even after a previous long mountain ride, my horses will walk up to me in the pasture, to be haltered, =so hardly horses that don't wish to be with me, just because I use a combination of R+ and R-, so I have just as much of aright, to be offended, when it is implied, intended or not, that my horses can't possibly want to work for me, out of willing compliance, I don't have just as deep a connection with my horses, , ect, ect, ect


----------



## Bondre

I came across this on fb in a discussion on positive reinforcement and couldn't resist sharing it here. Interestingly, the issue was a horse that refused to move forwards, and this was the very same problem I had with my horse that sent me searching for alternatives to R- methods. I used clicker training successfully: so much easier to remotivate a stale or scared horse using R+ than just keep increasing the pressure until you both bust.


----------



## Smilie

And, no argument, far as using R+ on ascared or abused horse. I have made that disclaimer many, many times, along with ruling out any pain, which includes, metal [pain'


----------



## Smilie

Don't know where this post went to, as I posted it separately, since this topic was developing too many \tentacles 
There is a middle point, far as being too harsh with ahrose, and overly permissive, failing to give any clear boundaries. This article below, merely gives a point of view when the ;killing them with kindness' by providing no consistent leadership to a horse, afraid to ever use 'ask, ask louder, then demand,, results in a horse that is a 'poor citizen, every much as an abused horse, whether easier to re-train or not.
Neither extreme is correct, and that has been my entire point.


Horses actually get a great sense of security in fair, firm, clear leadership. The don't do well with grey areas

I also reject the idea, that since I do use pressure and release, as applicable, my horses somehow lack the bond and affection some here claim they have , with their horses, being superior, because they entirely reject ever using any R- enforcement. I like, that person in that article, at one point, as a kid, used only R+, and created a one person horse, that was a pet, for me, but if asked to do anything by anyone else, would act aggressive
Not saying that I don't love my horses like pets, and in fact, truth be told, even though my dog shows me more outright devotion, am more affectionate towards my horses, as I am a horse person first.
However, I do not treat my horses like pets, as that term truly implies

Opening paragraph, then link to article

'For ten years, I’ve been in the horse adoption profession. Before that, I had several years of other horse-related experience — ranging from owning horses, acting as a working student in assorted barns, teaching beginner riding lessons, and exercising horses for pay. As you can imagine, I’ve seen many types of horses, owners, and trainers over that time. And I have come to the conclusion that it is actually is a form of mistreatment to love horses so much that you spoil them.'

Good Intentions and Cruelty to Horses - LOPE

I think the entire problem , far as this topic, is not understanding exactly what either side is saying, and most here probably agree more then disagree, once it gets down tot he nitty gritty


----------



## Hondo

@bsms

If you go to their website you'll see that Ground Control horse shoes are now in their 16th year of production.

Home

Yep, as you know, I'm in the desert also. But at 3,500 feet there is a different thorn problem but still a thorn problem. Plus all the embedded rocks. I often literally say aloud, "Your feet buddy, your choice". 

I've tried both Hondo and Rimmey barefoot on the front recently and both were ouchy. I've been riding with them barefoot on the hinds for about one month over some pretty bad stuff with no complaints. All ratios on the hinds are really good.

I've chosen the GC's mostly because I want Hondo to have 24/7 proper breakover location and that can't be done at present without leaving him very ouchy. It's been two years since I began trimming him and have gotten nowhere, or not nearly as far as I should have.

Plus I'm not comfortable with placing a nail up high and they won't hold well down low. I am comfortable with placing a screw that exits between 1/4-3/8" up while not touching the sole and they do hold.

The GC does not have a breakover placed back as does the Natural Balance steel shoe but I carefully cut one using a sawzall with the shoe in a jig.

Hondo's front and hind heels have spread about 1/2" since the breakover has been correct. But the fronts are still stretched.

Where you ride, I think just about any boot would work ok at a walk. Foot form and boot fit is all important. Some boots just won't fit a particular form, or at least not well.

I like the gloves, but at first the fit kit needs to be used. And one needs to be certain on how to measure.

Valley Vet usually has the best price on easycare boots although I did see a lower price recently on the 2016 gloves on Distance Depot.

Good on you for dismounting in the ouchy stuff. I've had your same experience with Hondo wanting to cut across through the softer stuff even when it looks (to me) as being rockier. Your feet your choice.


----------



## Hondo

Smilie said:


> Well, obviously, my stance comes across incorrectly, in spite of the fact


I'm going to cautiously enter a thought, just a thought.

I think it may not be as much what you believe and what your experience has been but that it may sometimes be offered as too much of a stance rather than a shared experience and opinion that is open to discussion.

Offering a stance is like taking a stand which doesn't seem conducive to an open free exchange of information and experiences which I think the forum is all about.

On another topic, the thing about as "soft as possible and as firm as necessary" is that some people tend to take firm as necessary and run with it as a way to justify what you would call abuse.

That terminology is as much of a label as any other group of words and is misread by many. As firm as necessary is just so subjective as to mean so many different things to so many different people is the basis of my objection.

For every person posting, there is usually upteen reading.

Edit: On your last post.......I, at least, have never ever seen anything posted that I interpreted as suggesting you were anything other than kind to your horses. Just because some people have experimented with +R successfully doest not mean that they think all who use R- are mean to their horses. Please!


----------



## bsms

"_Your feet buddy, your choice_"

I couldn't count the times I've told Bandit, "_You've got to watch your own feet. I can't do it for you. Do what you need to do and I'll back you_."


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

I thought many of you might find this useful.










This [Plutchik wheel] is one of many models of emotion but the base emotions are fairly well accepted by the majority. One of his explicit precepts is that this applies to both human and animals.

How to read:

The second loop out is what is generally the accepted as the 8 basic emotions (some identify six, some ten) These are emotions shared by all creatures that have a limbic system (sometimes mis called the lizard or primitive brain).

The center segments and the outlying band are related emotions, though not a simple intensification or mellowing of the base and believed present in familiar form for animals with a cerebral neocortex.

The final, outermost band between the petals of the flower are what are considered complex emotions, while the components necessary to form those emotions are provided by the limbic system, in humans, the complex emotions seem to originate in many different areas of the brain and then come together dependent upon many combinations of variables; from the way the individual brain is wired to processes sensory input to past learned experiences.


----------



## jaydee

I'm sure that a lot of the people that do over react when correcting a horse to the point where it does become abuse do so as much out of fear than anything else
I also think that some people behave that way because they get an odd form of pleasure out of it - being able to do inflict punishment on an animal as large and strong as a horse gives them a sense of empowerment


----------



## Smilie

Hondo said:


> I'm going to cautiously enter a thought, just a thought.
> 
> I think it may not be as much what you believe and what your experience has been but that it may sometimes be offered as too much of a stance rather than a shared experience and opinion that is open to discussion.
> 
> Offering a stance is like taking a stand which doesn't seem conducive to an open free exchange of information and experiences which I think the forum is all about.
> 
> On another topic, the thing about as "soft as possible and as firm as necessary" is that some people tend to take firm as necessary and run with it as a way to justify what you would call abuse.
> 
> That terminology is as much of a label as any other group of words and is misread by many. As firm as necessary is just so subjective as to mean so many different things to so many different people is the basis of my objection.
> 
> For every person posting, there is usually upteen reading.
> 
> Edit: On your last post.......I, at least, have never ever seen anything posted that I interpreted as suggesting you were anything other than kind to your horses. Just because some people have experimented with +R successfully doest not mean that they think all who use R- are mean to their horses. Please!


 Thanks, Hondo, for explaining how I might come across, far as stance, but do you not see, where just like some might take my 'firm as possible', meaning to actually include pain and abuse, I might in turn, take the other end of the spectrum, into the realm of spoiling, where a horse is never truly given any guidelines that make them a 'good citizen?


----------



## Smilie

Reinin, I will address your wheel more thoroughly , once I have the time to really study it
There is the fact, that horses lack the part of the brain that allows higher thinking,reasoning. I will need to take the time to refer back to my book on "evidence based Horsemanship, to make sure I get that brain functions correct
Thus, I truly believe that you cannot just interpolate the way humans learn, to the way horses learn, 100%
There is absolutely no objection on my part, that many people over react when correcting a horse, and do in fact, actually inflict both fear and pain, but I also believe there are just as many on the other end of the spectrum, that spoil a horse, by fearing to ever correct that horse, just wanting to use R+, as they fear to do otherwise, will make the horse 'not love them"


----------



## Hondo

jaydee said:


> I also think that some people behave that way because they get an odd form of pleasure out of it - being able to do inflict punishment on an animal as large and strong as a horse gives them a sense of empowerment


I think that's called sadism. They do it to small animals and people too.


----------



## Hondo

Smilie said:


> Thanks, Hondo, for explaining how I might come across, far as stance, but do you not see, where just like some might take my 'firm as possible', meaning to actually include pain and abuse, I might in turn, take the other end of the spectrum, into the realm of spoiling, where a horse is never truly given any guidelines that make them a 'good citizen?


No, actually I do not.

Soft as possible and as firm as necessary are both attached to the notion of getting results from training. Because the notion is results oriented, I do not see a parallel at all between causing spoiled horses and abused horses.

I would say, if you are getting results with soft, go a little softer with no limit providing results are obtained.

But I would not in a minute say that about firm as necessary. If not getting results, keep getting firmer until you do.

While we're at this, as you have a ton of experience, what, or how would you describe the upper limit of firmness before one stops and decides something is wrong with this picture?

And this is not a debate win/lose situation where winner takes all. Hopefully a win-win where everybody concerned benefits and takes at least something home.


----------



## Hondo

Smilie said:


> There is absolutely no objection on my part, that many people over react when correcting a horse, and do in fact, actually inflict both fear and pain, but I also believe there are just as many on the other end of the spectrum, that spoil a horse, by fearing to ever correct that horse, just wanting to use R+, as they fear to do otherwise, will make the horse 'not love them"


See smilie, there you go again. You "seem" to suggest that anybody who wants to use only R+ does so only because they want their horse to "love" them.

I, and I'll betcha a lot of others as well, view that as very derogatory attitude toward people who attempt R+ only.

Do you believe there are, "just as many on the other end of the spectrum" based on your experience/observations or some other?

Again, no offense smilie, but sometimes you do come across as, "I'm here, been there done that, I know what I'm doing, have ribbons to prove it", "there is really nothing left for me to learn." "I am here simply to share what I know about horses." "I have been wrong earlier in my life but it has been a long long time."

I say this with no malice in my heart.

Even Tom Dorrance said he was learning right up until the last.


----------



## Smilie

Hondo said:


> I think that's called sadism. They do it to small animals and people too.


now, we are getting into the realms of psychopaths/sociopaths, and not 'normal ' brain activity, where that former person derives a sense of power or even pleasure, from inflicting pain on others. Way, way off track, far as pressure and release, as it pertains to 'normal people training horses"


----------



## Smilie

Again HOndo, I also get the implied idea, just reading responses, that if anyone does use R-, they only use that, their horses don't have anywhere near the bond with them, as those that chose to use only R+, and, that their horses only submit to being with them, versus actually enjoying that partnership, plus the horses are trained through force, rather then understanding,empathy and relating to a horse, in a 'language' that he learned through eons of evolution, as a herd/prey species


----------



## bsms

Hondo said:


> ...I, and I'll betcha a lot of others as well, view that as very derogatory attitude toward people who attempt R+ only...


Has anyone ever even TRIED using R+ ONLY with a horse? If so, what results have they documented, and is there a reasonable chance an average person could duplicate those results?

And apart from a science experiment, why would someone take that approach UNLESS they thought using R- methods was either ineffective or morally objectionable? And since, in many cases, R- methods do result in a confident, willing and even eager horse, would not their objection NEED to be moral? [Note - excepting genuinely abused horses]

And if they find using R- methods morally objectionable, is it not reasonable for those of us who disagree to want to know their basis for objecting, when it seems entirely possible to train happy horses while including R- techniques?

As often and as strongly as @*Smilie* and I have disagreed, I understand her frustration. I'd bet money she has horses who are trained, willing and even enthusiastic much of the time using techniques that folks are treating as cave-man tactics. At least, my impression in reading this thread is that using R+ techniques = good person who cares about horses, and using R- techniques = bad person who has not experienced what a good relationship with a horse means. It is like I've wandered into a competition to see who loves their horse the most!

It might not be intentional, but I kind of get the feeling that admitting I've popped Bandit in the gut with my heels - did it yesterday, in the wash, when he was about to get booger-brained about some dead branches he needed to go past - that behavior like that means I'm abusive, that I'm too stupid or uncaring to belong on a horse, that I ought to sell my 3 and go back to dirt bikes...:icon_rolleyes:

FWIW, after I popped him with my heels, he snorted - and then walked on by without a glance at the dead branches piled on one side. But based on 17months of riding him, if I had not, he would have turned those branches into fire-breathing dragons. He's done it before.

And what is kinder to the horse - pop him in the gut and go on without a worry, or let him build a head full of fear over something he knows, deep down, doesn't merit fear?


----------



## Smilie

Again HOndo, I also get the implied idea, just reading responses, that if anyone does use R-, they only use that, their horses don't have anywhere near the bond with them, as those that chose to use only R+, and, that their horses only submit to being with them, versus actually enjoying that partnership, plus the horses are trained through force, rather then through understanding,empathy and relating to a horse, in a 'language' that he learned through eons of evolution, as a herd/prey species
Sorry, Hondo, if you get the impression that I think that I have nothing left to learn. The fact that I attend annual Horse breeder and owner conferences, refutes that. I do take from all those seminars, countless books I read on all subjects, pertaining to horses, keep taking clinics whenever I can, because I am well aware of the fact that learning about horses is a life time Journey
I do, take from those seminars, just like from clinics, what works for me and my horses.
Even hard science, clinical trials often refute former accepted knowledge, with new trials. The same principle applies to what is now 'believed how horses learn, using often lab settings. Heck, we don't even fully understand how the human brain works, so to believe that any definitive knowledge of how
horses learn, is 100% correct, is just not so
I also see a tendency for some,e sp those that have taken some psychology courses, worked with abused horses, tend to simply trash all traditional horse training principles, and only embrace R+ and assume they have some mind meld with their horses that transcends what a horse evolved to be, and a connection that eludes anyone else.
In the end, horses don't lie ( I believe that comes from Chris Irwin, and a title of one of his books)
If your horse works for you, the way you want him to, trusts you, works with a willing attitude, then whatever you are using, is correct for you and your horse.
I read just just works of well known traditional trainers, but that of people like Rashid, Buck B, Irwin, and a host of others. Just like when going to clinics, though, I take from each what works for me and my horses
I guess perception via these sites, without seeing how people interact with their horses, can often be flawed, and I'll just have to live under that burden, as I have always been someone that has expressed what they believed, versus worrying about being popular!


----------



## Smilie

Thankyou, BSMS, for understanding what I have been trying to say, along with my frustrations!


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

Smilie, I simply stated that people might find it interesting, it was not an invitation to you to waste your time or mine. 

I read that book the first year it was published and have had more than enough time to review it in a professional capacity so I am already quite familiar with it. As a matter of fact, I have recommended here on the forum that people read it. Not because it is correct or absolute, but because it provides a semi-clear explanation of ONE perspective.

If you understand even the most basic constructs about psychology and neurosciences then you know that there are different sects of it. NONE of which have all of the information to provide the whole picture. If we did, then no one would ever suffer depression, anxiety or mental illness. As an example, they cannot even agree on a definition of what emotion is.

One of the biggest faults of that book is a common difficulty in understanding horses in general. The information gathered as to what parts of the brain do (which by the way is constantly changing), is taken from humans and transferred to other animals with a different evolutionary history. 

Evolution provides for necessary variations according to the needs of a particular species right down to physiology of individual cells such as neurons and synapses as well as whole segments of the brain. 

To take what is known of one species and apply it to another without also doing the requisite tests to the same depth of analysis on the species to which you are applying it is flawed science. Until that is done, the application is suspect at best. It unfortunately, leaves us no closer to arriving at a conclusion than before.

That book is educational and I recommend people read it but, like most other books, it only provides one person’s perspective from the limited information they have on hand.


----------



## Smilie

No intention to waste either of our time.
If your horses are safe for you to ride safe for your daughter, are happy, then why worry? Whatever you are doing must be right for the relationship you enjoy with your horses.
Allow that what I do with my horses, must also be correct, and I do not need to grab a clicker and start clicking, although I certainly believe in positive re enforcement, give treats at the right time
While I don't use treats to catch horses, I will reward a horse after he is haltered, and led to the barn, giving that horse some beet pulp,ect

The horse's learning processes break down into three components: cognition (mental ability ) Ethology (the natural behavior, like the flight response )and psychology (learned behavior) 
The human brain is different from the horse's brain because it has a dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, which enables reasoning

Understanding Horse Psychology

I am not arguing with you, trying to convert you from whatever you are doing , far as interacting with your horses, but just wanting the acceptance that perhaps using the correct balance of R+ and R- , on horses with no past baggage, produces a horse every bit as willing and a horse that enjoys working for you, as one that is predominantly trained using just R+
Far as mentioning what I do/done with my horses, it is only an application of practicality to pure theory \They even had to do that with the atomic bomb!


----------



## gottatrot

If I had some strong moral objection to R- training, I suppose I would try only R+. Frankly, I think some who would only try R+ would do it because they saw it as the most natural approach. But I believe when I see horses training each other, that they use both R+ and R- approaches fairly equally. So wouldn't this then be the most natural approach? 

Some would say yes, but horses kick each other hard enough to injure, so that justifies using harsh methods with a horse. Of course I would disagree with that line of thinking.

Personally, I've had many times where using my own "science experiements" I have been unable to see how an R+ or an R- approach could possibly work. 
An example where R- did not work at all: My mare Halla had been taught to be impossible to get close to in a field. People had lassoed her, tricked her with treats, taken other horses out and then put them back in while keeping her, and chased her around endlessly. Her experiences after getting caught had been negative, being tied up short for hours and isolated.

I tried an R- approach one time, and quickly saw that would never work. The only way to train her to be caught was to only reward her for a positive change. Each slow positive change such as letting me get closer was rewarded with me turning and walking away, eventually when I got close enough I got her a treat and then left, and then put a hand on her before also leaving. Finally I would halter her, give a treat and release her, and eventually take her out of the field for a few seconds before returning her to it.
I don't see how she could have been taught to get caught by any R- methods at all.

But there are also many times when I don't see how I can clearly teach a horse something without applying pressure, and then removing it when the correct goal is reached. How could I have ever taught this same horse that I wanted her to move in a straight line, by somehow rewarding her at the moment from her back? The only way I knew to teach her was to pressure her (without pain) into the position I wanted, and then rewarding her by a time of pressure free riding when she was doing it correctly. This is a very easy and well understood way to teach horses, and trying to do it by only R+ would be difficult.

When I first started riding Amore, she was terrified frequently and pressure made her panic. So I did try some R+ methods with her. I taught her to stop with no pressure by giving her a treat incidentally when I said a command and she stopped, and soon learned that you don't want a horse to slam on the brakes if they hear a rustle behind them that _might_ be a tidbit coming their way. I'd like to experiment more with different methods, it is very educational.


----------



## Hondo

@Smilie There is not one single person on this thread that has not mentioned using -R. Every single one. THAT is documentable.

So how do you get the impression that people suggest those who use -R use ONLY -R??? That'd be every poster on this thread!

@bms; RCD mentioned having used R+ exclusively on one horse. If I understood correctly. A recovery horse that could not handle any R-

I don't think R+ training is anything new.

It is very very easy to do on kids if you raise them yourself. They want so badly to please.

I actually trained a pony that my youngest son's grandfather gave him when he was only about 6. I knew nothing about training or R+/- at the time except some from General Psychology and Developmental Psychology. But I didn't even think about that stuff with Moonshine. I just interacted with him. Messed with him. Leaned on him. Stood a stool by him and laid over his back. Finally sat on him. We had to move because of jobs situation and had to sell him. But I never ever quarreled with him at all about anything and he learned a lot.

I have not been patient enough or self controlled enough to use R+ on Hondo exclusively. But all R- seems to have sabotaged our relationship. That said, he had lots of R- before we got together so that makes it a little different which is also your experience. Unless you throw "urging" in with R- and as mentioned I do a lot of that. Arguing and urging. He always gives in nicely if he knows I really want to do what I'm asking.

As gottatrot eluded to, I think it may be a mistake to pattern our training on herd interactions. That has worked and probably pretty well for many people, but I think the horse has us humans over on an entirely different bandwidth/frequency than his herd mates. He has this symbiotic relationship with this predator that doesn't seem bent on eating him and provides good stuff for him instead.

Reading stuff on body language the other day. They had a pie diagram/graph. Communication was over 50% body language, then the spoken word and tonality, then written. I think written was down to about 7%. So we could all be in agreement about everything and not even know it.


----------



## Hondo

I'm personally really glad to hear all of the discussion on the ins and outs whens and how much on R+/- but remember that was not the original topic which was a horse reacting out of fear of consequences as compared to just being willing in the spirit of getting along.

It's actually a little bit hard for me to think of using pressure/release as R- when the pressure is so light as to be a form of communication which I think it is. I just don't think it should be included under the same symbol as whipping a horse around a round pen until he gives up and faces his agressor.

From what I've read it seems that a horse eventually considers a slight pressure as a game. "They want me to do something, I wonder what? I'll try this". At least that's how some trainers seem to speak of it.

They don't know anything about being pulled by a rope until they are pulled. Oh? That means go where the rope goes. That kind of slight pressure I can see would be hard to avoid. But that is not what was happening in my first post/description.

And I'm pretty certain there is 100% agreement that a fearful response is not the proper objective of training/teaching.


----------



## Smilie

Hondo, you did mention that you would never demand anything of a horse
Also, the fact remains that any R- or esp 'demand' implies abuse or pain-not so
Trottin, I think you will see that I did mention that a horseman reads what a particular horse needs, far as R-, R+ or the right combo, so , I agree with the way you handled that example, as that horse came with past 'history' -thus your approach has to reflect that past history.
Also, there is the idea projected to me anyway, as I can read into things as well as the next person, that Tom dorrance principles are ignored by people like me, and his reference to kinder and better ways ,w as directed towards training methods commonly used on the range in those days, and none of which I, or any traditional trainer I have ever taken clinics from, suggests
In Tom's day, un broke horses, never taught to give to pressure, were simply snubbed up, left to fight it out. They were also roped, hobbled, blind folded, and then bucked out, once hobbles and blind fold were removed, with not a cue as to how to respond to any rein pressure
Thus, you have to take his comments in reference to the times, and not apply them towards good accepted training today


----------



## loosie

jaydee said:


> I'm sure that a lot of the people that do over react when correcting a horse to the point where it does become abuse do so as much out of fear than anything else
> I also think that some people behave that way because they get an odd form of pleasure


Yeah, I think fear is a(maybe_ the_) major _motivator_ (you must dominate this powerful, dangerous animal & show him who's boss...) but it is ignorance & misunderstanding, either under this motivation or otherwise, that I think is THE biggie. (You can never hurt a horse as much as they can hurt eachother, therefore anything you do is acceptable...). Heck, even whacking the horse for a fear reaction can be seen as 'abusive'... particularly to the horse:-? and how often do horses(& dogs ime) get punished for this type of thing??

Yeah, I know there are those warped people out there, who derive pleasure from being abusive - to animals or people... but I truly think intentional cruelty is extremely rare, compared to the above, those who claim to 'love' their horses but will jab them with a bit, attack them with a crop, force them into terrifying situations, hurtful tack... etc, etc.


----------



## Smilie

To get back on track, concerning this topic, I think everyone here is well aware that there are abusive people out there, who feel they must dominate a horse out of down right physical force, fear, even pain, but that has zero to do with the original topic, which was willing compliance.
So, to sum thing sup, far as I'm concerned, willing compliance is a learned behavior, using communication tools the horse evolved to understand, being a herd prey species, in a fair manner that creates trust and respect in a horse
Whether mainly R+ , R- or a combo is used, depends on past history of the horse, but fear or abuse is never part of that package
The horse thus responds willingly to cues he understands, in a relaxed and trusting manner, instead of having a ;make me attitude
While working for a treat, is a clear form of communication, and has it;s definate uses, esp on an abused horse, that needs to learn trust, it also does not it itself, indicate ' willing compliance, as you can't separate that 'compliance from the antisipated food reward
There is a time, on a horse , that has no past baggage, understands a request, but fails to comply , to use the 'ask, ask louder, then demand' while then always giving the horse in the future, a chance to respond to that very light ask first, to then make that willing compliance an ingrained response. Horses are creatures of habit
You don't shout , when a whisper works.
I do believe , it was tOm Dorrance himself, where I got the quote,'be as gentle with a horse as possible, but also as firm as needed, to make that horse a'good citizen'
Willing compliance is not following you around at leisure, although nothing wrong with that, but it is responding to a request, that he understands, and one that is asked using the lightest aid possible, in a willing manner, with no sign of stress, such as tail swishing, mouth gaping, tense body, ect, but with soft eyes, relaxed body and willing attitude.
That's my story, and nothing more I don't know hoe physical pain, force, intimidation, horse not wanting to be with you, ect, ect, ever became part of this thread
Use what works, for you and the horse you are working with. If the horse is happy, not stressed and  does the job you want, even if just hanging out, then those methods are right for you and that horse.


----------



## Foxhunter

bsms said:


> Has anyone ever even TRIED using R+ ONLY with a horse? If so, what results have they documented, and is there a reasonable chance an average person could duplicate those results?


Would it be possible to train using only R+? I doubt it as it is going very much against nature.

A simple example would be if a R+ trainer was leading a horse and it started to pull a correction of taking a contact on the rope would be a correction or a hand on a horse to stop it moving into you would be a correction moving away from the horse's movement could lead to far worse things. Even using a voice to correct would surely be R-

So, I do not see how it is possible. 

In a herd/pack animals learn from corrections. The foal learns at a very early age. Mum eating her feed and foal wants to suckle will first stand square making the udder difficult to get to, of foal persists she will move her quarters into the foal to push it away, if it still persists then she will either lift a hind leg to it or punch bite it on the butt. It is one of the first lessons a foal learns. 

You can bet your bottom dollar that the mare that doesn't correct her foal ends up with a bossy, obnoxious foal that will have little respect for people or its mother. 

I bred a litter of pups from my Border Terrier. They were about 4 weeks old and running about in the yard. My old Border Collie was sun bathing and the pups 'attacked' her, jumping all over her and finding the long hair on her tail a good thing to practise hanging onto. The old dog put up with it and played for quite some time and then had enough. She got up to move away. Four pups returned to their mother, three persisted. The old dog turned on them and bowled them over. Two ran back to Mum the third continued to annoy so the old girl really fixed it, had it on its back without biting but certainly letting it know that she was not going to suffer it. That pup, when released ran back to his mum who immediately got up and walked away as if to say, "You were told, warned and ignored, don't come running to me when you didn't do as you were told." 

Horses are much the same, pesky foals will be put in their place with the right amount of force by other horses in the herd if they transgress.

I always liked the old saying, 'It takes a couple to make a child and a village to make a man.'


----------



## loosie

Bondre said:


> I came across this on fb in a discussion on positive reinforcement and couldn't resist sharing it here.


Ha ha! Your quote reminds me of one a dog trainer I worked with used to spout, that I also thought was a keeper... 

"For one to be an effective trainer, one must be smarter than the animal in question. That is why some breeds are harder to train than others!" 

That line doesn't go down well when someone's dog is... patently _not_ 'desiring to please' them! :twisted:

I've had no experience with mules(except riding in a canyon somewhere when I visited the States as a teenager...) but lots of experience with donkeys, and I always maintained donkeys are 'stubborn' because they're... smarter than the average bear! That 'stubborn' in people is usually thought of as 'persistence' which is thought of as a good trait of intelligent people. ;-)


----------



## loosie

Smilie said:


> I might in turn, take the other end of the spectrum, into the realm of spoiling, where a horse is never truly given any guidelines that make them a 'good citizen?


So... what you seem to be saying is, maybe the* assumption *that 'NH' & 'positive training' generally produces 'spoiled' and never effectively trained animals is no more correct than* assuming* you're about being cruel by using 'pressure'. ;-)


----------



## loosie

Smilie said:


> There is the fact, that horses lack the part of the brain that allows higher thinking,reasoning.


Yeah, and, regardless of neurobiology, there's also the fact that so many people lack thinking & reasoning skills too...  :winetime:


----------



## Foxhunter

I have had many a sour horse - usually from race trainers. Horses that are refusing to go on the gallops or to start at a race (jumpers start behind tapes and not from starting gates) My job is to sweeten them up. 

I have never used clicker training nor pure R+ even if they will not go without another horse in front of them I have taken them out with hounds. Nothing like it for sweetening a horse up and getting some work intomthem without them realising it.

One horse had for this was fine at the Meet but when everyone moved off he went into reverse. After 30 minutes of going backwards round and round a field he condescended to follow where they had gone. I never got cross, never tried to stop him from reversing, just sat on him. We caught up with the Foeld and as soon as they moved off backwards we went. 

Only after several hunts did he begin to think that it might be interesting to follow closer and see what was going on. It was a boring day and another woman and I went off to jump come cross country fences that were near. After that this horse loved hounds, he was a brilliant and clever hunter. We kept him at home and Point to Pointed him. His owners and the man who had race trained him came tomsee him run. I was leading him around the paddock when the trainer told my boss that the horse needed two people to lead him as he would freak out. 
He was totally relaxed and striving around as if he did it every day. 

At the start he jumped off with the rest, led all the way around and won by 12 lengths still on the bridle. He would n four races on the trot with no sign of him balking. 

He went into training but with a smaller trainer who treated horses as individuals and won some good races.

Nothing like hounds to sweeten a horse.


----------



## loosie

bsms said:


> Has anyone ever even TRIED using R+ ONLY with a horse? If so, what results have they documented, and is there a reasonable chance an average person could duplicate those results?


If by 'anyone' you mean... anyone, then yes, I have seen a demo at Equitana, among others I've seen on vids, where solely +R was used, and yes, results were definitely there to be seen. There is definitely a 'reasonable chance' that anyone can duplicate this, just as they could 'reasonably' duplicate other training tactics. 

If by 'anyone' you mean anyone here on this thread... yes, I've tried myself. And yes, succeeded with the basics, do understand the whys & wherefores & do use solely +R with some animals/situations. But, as I've already said, as you put it, I have no moral problem with -R, I got frustrated with using it for 'normal' training, when I could add just a little 'pressure' in the right places to make it all happen so much quicker & easier. Not sure if anyone else here is a +R only trainer any more so than I have been.



> And apart from a science experiment, why would someone take that approach UNLESS they thought using R- methods was either ineffective or morally objectionable?


That is precisely it, IMO. And on the 'other side' I also see(here & in 'real life') SO many people with a strong attitude against using actual +R, due either to lack of understanding what it is('the only reward a horse(or dog) needs is release of pressure & a Good Boy'...), or due to a belief that 'the horse(or dog) should work for you Because You Said, not for rewards' which IMHO can also only be a 'moral', rather than rational stand too. Each to his own tho, everyone's entitled to their own morals, so long as they don't impinge on or harm others IMO. 



> that folks are treating as cave-man tactics. At least, my impression in reading this thread is that using R+ techniques = good person who cares about horses, and using R- techniques = bad person who has not experienced what a good relationship with a horse means.


As this thread has kind of... run away with itself, I never did get to catch up with those 8 or so early pages. I have also not read every word of every post since. But the above is far from the idea I get from what I have read, personally. But perhaps this is because I come from a 'combo approach' kind of attitude, that I'd feel 'set upon' if I didn't use +R, I don't know...


----------



## loosie

What I have 'heard' here... not that anyone NEEDS to 'grab a clicker', but that it is valuable to learn, and that perhaps(not assuming automatically...) if you haven't learned the method fully, then you don't understand it well enough to have a strong opinion on it. 

Strong opinions against c/t... or whatever, stated here, do indeed very often come across like trying to 'convert' people. Of course, to hold a strong belief means we'd naturally like others to hold it too. I think that's where we have to choose our words very carefully, in order to remain respectful and considerate of alternate opinions too. 

And nowhere here have I 'heard' anyone at all argue against using a 'balance' of +R & -R in 'normal' training. On that note though, re the 'it can be better' comment, I took from what I read, that we weren't talking about 'balance' but about using -R without any significant +R - the 'release of pressure/pat/praise is adequate' type attitude. It does seem to be a very common belief, and people commonly misunderstand what actual +R is & how it can create a different *attitude*. This is one subject I do have strong opinions about personally, of which I was trying to explain why it matters/is different to me.


----------



## loosie

Smilie said:


> Also, the fact remains that any R- or esp 'demand' implies abuse or pain ... Tom dorrance principles are ignored by people like me, and his reference to kinder and better ways ,w as directed towards training methods commonly used on the range in those days, and none of which I, or any traditional trainer I have ever taken clinics from, suggests


Huh?? See I don't get where on earth those 'facts' came from - nowhere have I seen it written here. Altho when reading posts without punctuation, more than the average misunderstandings can be made... 

FWIW, while I haven't read my Tom Dorrance books recently, I don't recall him being particularly into +R at all...


----------



## loosie

Foxhunter said:


> A simple example would be if a R+ trainer was leading a horse and it started to pull a correction of taking a contact on the rope would be a correction or a hand on a horse to stop it moving into you would be a correction moving away from the horse's movement could lead to far worse things. Even using a voice to correct would surely be R-


Talking behaviourally, positive punishment is something unpleasant that's _added_ in order to _weaken/reduce_ the likelihood of that behaviour in future. Based on that behavioural 'fact', the practice of using -R necessarily includes the use of +P - there must be some unpleasant stimuli the horse is motivated to get 'release' from. Any amount of touch stimuli or sound _*could*_ be perceived as unpleasant 'pressure' to the horse, depending on it's experiences. Or light stimuli - the slightly firmer feel of pressure on a halter, the touch of a leg on a side, a vocal or other sound could be felt as nothing unpleasant whatsoever. Therefore it is not a +P of which -R can come out of. So 'cues' aren't necessarily +P/-R

In your above eg, if the horse pulled back and the handler did not put any pressure on the rope, tried to stop it, just went with it/allowed the rope to slide, then this is not necessarily 'pressure'. When the horse stopped pulling, and was rewarded +R for that, then it would be more likely to stop sooner in the future.

Perhaps it's easier to understand if we use leg aids as an eg... If the horse has been sat upon & legs dangled down, touching his sides, he may be quite comfortable with this. If then, every time he went to move in a certain direction(whether of his own accord, or to begin with, lured there or such), that leg touched him in a particular manner & he was +Red, he would soon associate that feeling with that movement, and be motivated not by discomfort, but by the +R.

It CAN be done & HAS been done. I just personally don't see the point & IME it's not the easiest way. I still admire people who can achieve it tho.



> You can bet your bottom dollar that the mare that doesn't correct her foal ends up with a bossy, obnoxious foal that will have little respect for people or its mother.


Of course, in application you also need to ensure that the Wrong behaviour is not reinforced at all. Need to ensure it doesn't work, or at worst only works weakly, and the alternate Right behaviour works far better for the horse, in order for the Wrong behaviour to extinguish. And in application, IME, it is far easier, more effective to add a little -R to the mix. But it is* possible* to do without. I've done so with other animals(chickens, ducks, cats...) too, who take -R/+P to heart(& the wrong way) a lot more than horses.


----------



## Hondo

This is the bottom line I woke up to this morning. I look at them as* MY OWN* hard and fast rules. I believe in them deeply and am not very likely to be dissuaded from them. On the other hand, I do not insist that any other agree.

1. R- in training as a communication device is acceptable and may even be necessary providing it produces absolutely no pain and no fear.

2. P+ is to be used only for self defense. And a horse understands the difference in self defense against his/her attacks as opposed to attacks directed at him/her. The first produces no fear where the second may produce both fear and defensive actions by the horse.

3. If a horse is attacking from self defense and fear, the use of P+ should be avoided if possible by not placing one's self in a position to be attacked. The horse must learn there is nothing to fear before the horse can be further worked with properly.

4. If a horse is attacking in effort to establish dominance, a strong P+ must be used that should include pain. To repeat, a defense under these circumstances produces no fear in the horse.

5. All training must be guided at all times by the avoidance of producing fear in the horse.


----------



## Foxhunter

All the R+ R- P+ P- has taken me way back to algebra lessons! :think: :lol:


----------



## Foxhunter

HONDO

You asked the question and had the answer all the time - well put.


----------



## Hondo

Foxhunter said:


> HONDO
> 
> You asked the question and had the answer all the time - well put.


If I did have the answer all the time, I only discovered in the course of this thread.

If asked, I can help with algebra lessons!


----------



## Smilie

loosie said:


> So... what you seem to be saying is, maybe the* assumption *that 'NH' & 'positive training' generally produces 'spoiled' and never effectively trained animals is no more correct than* assuming* you're about being cruel by using 'pressure'. ;-)


No, you are missing what I am trying to say.
Good R+ training does not result in spoiling, nor does good R- result in pain or abuse.
Much of the argument here , has involved people trying to use extreme examples, taking tht R- to the max, using abusive techniques, that no one here , esp me, advocates or supports.
My point was merely that applying the same logic taking R+ to the max, and wrongly applied, would go in the extreme in that direction , and produce a spoiled horse, with neither being correct, far as the proper use of either R+ or R-. I have no intention of seeming to support R- used is the wrong manner, then you using R+ in the wrong way. That was my point


----------



## jaydee

Probably too much of my life was spent at UK horse auctions because I've seen an awful lot of cruelty being used in the name of 'teaching a horse to do as it's told'. It's everywhere though and on the increase based on the reports on read almost every week in one UK horse magazine
Occasionally I've had to use some form of quite hard punishment on a horse that was going to be dangerous unless very firmly corrected but on the whole unless you go out of your way to buy a very belligerent or challenging horse there isn't a lot of need to be using R- in your training. 
How often do people resort to using it because they're the one's that have failed? A lot of the time a horse doesn't do something the way you want it to be done its the training method that's at fault - or the way it's been used, as in incorrectly or inappropriately. The handler/owner at some point didn't make the right thing easy, understandable or didn't have enough patience to do those things


----------



## Smilie

loosie said:


> What I have 'heard' here... not that anyone NEEDS to 'grab a clicker', but that it is valuable to learn, and that perhaps(not assuming automatically...) if you haven't learned the method fully, then you don't understand it well enough to have a strong opinion on it.
> 
> Strong opinions against c/t... or whatever, stated here, do indeed very often come across like trying to 'convert' people. Of course, to hold a strong belief means we'd naturally like others to hold it too. I think that's where we have to choose our words very carefully, in order to remain respectful and considerate of alternate opinions too.
> 
> And nowhere here have I 'heard' anyone at all argue against using a 'balance' of +R & -R in 'normal' training. On that note though, re the 'it can be better' comment, I took from what I read, that we weren't talking about 'balance' but about using -R without any significant +R - the 'release of pressure/pat/praise is adequate' type attitude. It does seem to be a very
> 
> common belief, and people commonly misunderstand what actual +R is & how it can create a different *attitude*. This is one subject I do have strong opinions about personally, of which I was trying to explain why it matters/is different to me.



Wrong , Loosie.\
Go back enough posts, esp near the beginning, and I mentioned many times in using the right balance of R+ and R- , and in the combo right for a particular horse, esp those with past history, where you need to at first use mainly R+, to help over come fear issues
Actually, much of this endless msi understanding, could have been prevented, by people actually going back and reading everything!
I certainly use a combo, which does not involve clicker training, per say, but I will give a random food reward, such as some beet pulp, after a horse is haltered and led back tot he barn, , or maybe a cookie, after a good ride
I also use scratch at the withers, simply letting a horse stand and rest, or getting off and putting th ehorse away, after a good effort
Perhaps you would condemn me less, actually reading all the posts,where I certainly over and over again, suggested to use the correct combo of R+ and R-!


----------



## Hondo

Using the right balance of R-/R+ means very little if anything to a person trying to learn. If it's the "right" balance, how could it be "wrong"?

But what does the right balance actually mean?

For myself, I think I have found the correct guide to the "right balance".


----------



## Smilie

loosie said:


> Yeah, and, regardless of neurobiology, there's also the fact that so many people lack thinking & reasoning skills too...  :winetime:


Again, this post was in response to one of Reinins,and others, where horse learning was compared, to be the same as that of a dog or man, and not because I consider horses dumb brutes, and all people to be using their brain,
versus brute strength

Read Chris Irwin and he goes into why training a dog is different, based on the very nature of the two species, which you have to take into account, along with just pure learning pathways> In fact, the quote above, is incomplete, as you left out the other facets that influence the learning of a horse, such as his very herd/prey inborn instincts
Chris goes into the fact that the dog, like us , is a predator, that forms pacts to increase their efficiency in taking down prey, while horses form herds as a prey species for safety, and these factors alone, influence learning and behavioral curves, with horses indeed feeling secure in clear and fair leadership
My quote and reference was merely in response that all creatures learn the same, and while is is perhaps true at the very basic level, there are other influences, as in the very nature of that animal, prey or predator, and in the case of man, brain structure itself-okay?


----------



## bsms

loosie said:


> ...And on the 'other side' I also see(here & in 'real life') SO many people with a strong attitude against using actual +R, due either to lack of understanding what it is('the only reward a horse(or dog) needs is release of pressure & a Good Boy'...)...But perhaps this is because I come from a 'combo approach' kind of attitude, that I'd feel 'set upon' if I didn't use +R, I don't know...


I think a huge number of horse owners use R+ without calling it that or thinking about it. On the ranch Trooper came from, he was used for sheep instead of cattle - because he seemed to enjoy being around the sheep. His sire was a somewhat dangerous stallion until my friend realized there were two things the stallion liked - going for 50+ mile rides, and working very rough cattle. So he started using the stallion for those sorts of work, and the stallion realized humans enabled him to do things he liked. He eventually became my friends favorite horse, and eventually was used by their teens - but not until the stallion understood working WITH people allowed him to do things he enjoyed.

Cowboy was given to us free because no one at the place where he was a lesson horse wanted him. He had been up for free for several months with no takers. He was a pretty bitter, arena-sour lesson horse. But we eventually found he LOVES going out on trails with the other horses - if he is ridden by a rider who lets him make some of the decisions. We now consider him to be our best trail horse, and in many ways simply our best horse. My wife only recently started riding, and she is learning to ride by riding Cowboy in the desert. If he gets left behind, like he was yesterday...oh boy! He got more exercise racing around the corral and kicking and jumping than he would have going out with us. His hooves are harder than the rocks, and he views the desert as a giant, all-you-can-eat buffet, spread out before him! My wife will sometimes steer him to a spot with something he likes to eat, just so he can grab a bite. In return, when she needs him to do something physically hard - he does it. With enthusiasm! They are a team, riding together.

I don't think many eager horses are created by trying to limit oneself to R+. And most owners don't even think about it. But a lot of owners DO try to find a horse who enjoys the sort of riding the owner enjoys.

When I started handling Bandit's stronger fears by taking him a little way away, then dismounting and showing him, slowly, that the scary thing wasn't scary, I was told he would soon learn to take advantage of me - that horses don't like to be ridden and by dismounting I was "rewarding him". It didn't work that way. Heck, I dismount and walk about once an hour anyway - but Bandit shows no sign that he doesn't want to be ridden. He dislikes being afraid and he dislikes parts of trails that hurt his feet. Can't blame him for either! 

Apart from that, he enjoys getting out. In his mind, at least, he is in charge of the herd. He is guiding them, with help from me, through the desert. The grass in our little arena is an immediate reward, and he'd prefer immediate gratification. But once out, he enjoys being in charge...so once we're 1/4 mile or more out, he's happy enough.

I realize it is also common for horse owners to say their horses' desires are irrelevant. It is common, including on this forum, to see "_My horse has 23 hours a day to stand and eat. So for MY hour, he can make me happy. IT'S HIS JOB!_" No amount of R+ initial training will survive being ridden regularly by someone who believes the horse's JOB is to make the rider happy - at anything the rider wants to do, anytime the rider feels like doing it.

Horse sense used to be a synonym for common sense. If someone had "horse sense", you might fool them for a while, but they would eventually see the truth of the matter. I don't think horses have changed. My horses can see through me, given time. If I want them to enjoy being with me, they eventually respond. Even Trooper, who doesn't like me much, likes me a lot better if I ride him regularly. And if someone believes their horse's job is to make them happy, then horses will figure that out as well. In that situation, R- might be the rider's only option to compel obedience from a horse who would much rather be somewhere else.

For most horses, I don't think R+/R- for teaching cues matters a whole lot. What matters is what happens AFTER the horse learns the cues. Does the rider treat the horse with respect? Do they include "Please" and "Thank you" in their cues? Are they willing to make compromises with their horse? Do they genuinely care about their horse's welfare? Heck, do they even know their horse has a mind and is capable of thought? Are they teachers or trainers? *Do they ride the horse's mind, or just sit on top of his body?* 

In the long run, I think those questions have more to do with a positive approach to horses than how we teach them what a cue means.


----------



## Smilie

Hondo said:


> Using the right balance of R-/R+ means very little if anything to a person trying to learn. If it's the "right" balance, how could it be "wrong"?
> 
> But what does the right balance actually mean?
> 
> For myself, I think I have found the correct guide to the "right balance".


So, use it. Did I not tell you, that with Hondo;s past history, and you gaining his trust, that you are using what is right for him?


----------



## bsms

jaydee said:


> ...How often do people resort to using it because they're the one's that have failed? A lot of the time a horse doesn't do something the way you want it to be done its the training method that's at fault - or the way it's been used...


"In place of first putting the blame on the horse, which is only natural, the rider ought perhaps begin by trying to find out if he himself is not the culprit." James Fillis, 1890.

There certainly IS a lot of "blame the horse first" going on! Lots of riders ought to be tossed off their horses and given motorcycles or ATVs - something with neither feelings nor thought! It was one of the reasons I stopped taking group riding lessons. It was painful to see horses being ridden by people who didn't seem to know the horses were alive. :angrily_smileys:

@*Smilie* : Chris Irwin used to have a ton of free videos on Statelinetack. I watched him and listened to his explanations during my first months of owning a horse, and he was a HUGE help! I'd have been lost without his video teachings.


----------



## Smilie

I should get off this topic, but , sigh, feel I need to give an example of how the physical brain difference of a horse from a man, can affect behavior and ultimately the learning process.
A horse, doe snot stick his leg through a barb wire fence, and then reason like a human, should he pull back, he is going to tear up his leg. Instead, he reacts instinctively, as a flight animal
We, can however, help him to over come that instinctive reaction, by teaching him to accept leg restraint, so it becomes a learned behavior, even when he sticks that leg into a fence
A horse also does not reason, gee, last time I ate that lush grass/grain, whatever, I got laminitis, so will refrain. Thus, it becomes our responsibility to keep that horse safe from founder
Willing compliance, for me, is a learned behavior using the right combo of R+ and R-, so that it becomes an ingrained reaction for a horse, creating a good and willing good work ethics
Compliance implies that you first ask a horse to do something, with the horse then complying,hopefully in a willing and happy manner, built on trust, repetition, fairness
The cue can be just a voice cue, a look or a soft aid.Horses do learn to willingly move their hips over, with you simply looking at that hip, while saying over


----------



## Smilie

BSMS, i have had the chance to watch Chris in person several times. Once was at Spruce Meadows, during the Masters, where he gave a demo.
I have his book, 'Horses Don't lie' If you don't have it, I think you would enjoy reading it


----------



## bsms

Smilie said:


> ...I have his book, 'Horses Don't lie' If you don't have it, I think you would enjoy reading it


Ordered. Less than $6 including shipping!

If it hadn't been for his videos, my horses might have killed me in frustration when I first got them. Simple things like how to approach a horse, how to lead a horse during its first step, how you pick up and support a hoof, what the horse's expression means...it would have taken me YEARS to learn what he taught me by video in weeks!

And I've noticed that HORSES NOTICE those small things, and they treat them as huge things! I had some emotionally shut-down lesson horses turn and stare at me, and a light come on in their eyes, simply by approaching them nicely, leading them correctly and cleaning their hooves in a supportive manner! Do the small things right, and by the time you get in the saddle, the horse will be thinking, "_Maybe this is a person I can work with!_" 

I owe Chris Irwin a big debt, and I never even met the man!


----------



## Smilie

He is a neat guy, just not as well known, as many that are more out there, like Buck, B, ect
Chris once started he really doesn't in particular like the term "horse Whisperer applied to him, even though he has a real connection with horses, and like many of these other great horsemen, gotten through to horses that others have given up on, having that 'gift'


----------



## loosie

Smilie said:


> No, you are missing what I am trying to say.
> Good R+ training does not result in spoiling, nor does good R- result in pain or abuse.


That's just what I said I thought you said?? What did I miss??


----------



## Smilie

loosie said:


> That's just what I said I thought you said?? What did I miss??


Hi Loosie
I must have mis read your reply, as I thought you assumed that I considered all R+ training to result in a spoiled horse, versus just comparing the extreme view of both R+ and R-, being incorrect
Sorry about that, and I did PM you, just to clear up some misconceptions you might have derived from my posts, by not reading the entire thread from the beginning.


----------



## Smilie

bSMS, talking of horses noticing the slightest things, which they do, as a prey species, I have a recent good example!
Smilie and Charlie are both together in the drylott over night. In the morning< I often let Smilie out on the back lawn with her grazing muzzle, and Charlie with just her halter and lead shank, while I make up their beet pulp
Anyway, both were grazing around a tree, near the trailer, when Smilie took off snorting and bucking, with Charlie at her heels
I had forgotten about that huge hornet nest, near the bottom of that tree.
Hubby like to collect things, thus, when the weather cooled enough, he harvested that nest, with the intention of hanging it up, after leaving it in the freezer for awhile
He came into the house, and asked me as to which horses had been stung by those hornets. Apparently, when he walked by that corral,carrying that hornet nest, both Smilie and Charlie ran to the far side, snorting!


----------



## loosie

Smilie said:


> Wrong , Loosie.\ ...
> Actually, much of this endless msi understanding, could have been prevented, by people actually going back and reading everything!


No, it's not wrong. It is what *I have heard*, as I said. No, I don't need to read everything, because I'm only responding to what I* have* read. You are telling me I'm wrong again, without paying attention to what was actually written... or rather, it seems, you're reading between lines, words that just aren't there. As far as I can see, a lot of what you're feeling 'condemned' about is misunderstood *perceptions* of disagreements with you, when there aren't any. 

Now, I will leave all that there, and get back on track, to what I initially tried to get across, that I think is SO important to understand.... I am using your words again Smilie, only because I find they're in front of me again, not as a personal attack on you - it isn't in the least. They are also words I've seen commonly elsewhere, not at all just from you. Again, *I do appreciate* that quite possibly it is just the way you put things here, perhaps *how I understand it may not be what you mean*, so not assuming your meanings. I'm just *using the words that are presented* to convey my thoughts... 



> I will give a random food reward, such as some beet pulp, after a horse is haltered and led back tot he barn, , or maybe a cookie, after a good ride


If I had to pick one factor of training that is MOST VITALLY important to understand, it is timing of 'consequences'. The above to me, sounds like an eg of NOT using food treats as +R for certain behaviours, but just giving 'random food' separate from(after) the 'good' behaviours. It is what gives me the idea people very often just don't understand how to use +R appropriately. People generally understand that timing is so vitally important in 'removing pressure' in the_ instant_ of the behaviour, but it seems they think it somehow that doesn't apply to +R - that you can 'reward' a horse separate to a behaviour and the horse will associate the 2. It is just as important to reinforce a horse **at the time of** the behaviour you want to effect, whether you use 'positive' or 'negative'.



> I also use scratch at the withers, simply letting a horse stand and rest, or getting off and putting th ehorse away, after a good effort


Again just taking the _words that are written_, not trying to read between...

These sorts of words are what give me the idea people very often misunderstand what +R/-R actually means. Eg. A scratch on the wither _may well _be positive reinforcement(something the horse actually desires). But frequently it isn't, or it's a very weak +R at best. Sometimes it may even be UNdesirable, UNpleasant to the horse. We need to consider what, at any given time, for any particular horse is desirable/undesirable, and how 'strong' it may be, if we are to understand how to use _effective_ +R. 

People often give egs of letting a horse rest, quitting 'work', letting a horse go, or otherwise 'releasing pressure' as positive reinforcement. There is absolutely no doubt they are valuable 'training tools', but they are egs of *negative* reinforcement, not +R. Remember, positive reinforcement is the _addition_ of something _desirable_. Negative reinforcement is the_ removal_ of something _UN_desirable.

People often also talk about patting(as in light smacking) & praise as egs of +R, of which they're not, although they can *become associated* with +R if they happen repeatedly at the same time as something desirable. That is what is called a 'bridging signal' behaviourally, and is what people use a clicker or whistle(or voice) or such for. As such, if people judge 'clicker training' as worthless, stupid, and yet use praise, it just shows they do not understand the principles behind 'c/t'.


----------



## Smilie

Okay, far as that treat, after the horse is haltered, I don;t use treats to catch a horse, but reward that horse after he walks up to me, and is easy to halter. Being haltered, then becomes a positive thing, to the point my horses often try to beat each other to sticking their head in that halter,esp in winter.
Far as that 'good boy, or good girl, or scratch on the withers, I darn well know about timing, and see it used incorrectly all the time
For instance, after a class is over, and the horses are standing in a line up, and the a rider has a favorable placing announced, he will exit that arena, while patting his horse. The horse has no idea as to why he is having that positive feedback, and can connect it to the wrong thing-leaving that arena
The time to have given that horse apositive feedback, was the moment the horse completed that pattern, irregardless of placing, if he gave you an honest and good ride.
I am not un aware of timing, although I do use it more with pressure and release
I have read enough about clicker training, that I think you sell me short, far as not understanding it
Yes, at first the click is given, with that food reward, as soon as the horse gives a correct response. Over time, the click alone is used at times, to let the horse know he responded correctly, and the food reward becomes random.
I just have never had a use for it, and not saying there is none,e sp working with an abused horses, or teaching liberty work, where obviously, you are not going to give either a leg or rein release
Perhaps then, on my horses, that have neither a history of abuse, or of being spoiled, I do use mainly pressure and release, thus classified as R-BUT my horses are happy, loved, work well, are bonded to me like any horse trained with R+ empathize, using empathy, feeling, timing , fairness, and , these factors have served those fathers of NH just fine!
The fact remains, that horses, as a herd species, seek and desire clear and fair leadership. The language of Equus, does snot involve treating fellow herd members, but rather is a language based on body language and herd order
That very language, is based on pressure and release, with that pressure only needing be be asserted strongly once, and then body language so subtle, it is hardly noticed, is used after that. Alead mare , only has to flick an ear, give a look .
Horses also don't hold grudges. Ever see a dominant horse put another horse in his place, then moments later, they are grazing side by side?
In fact, tell me as to how, or what I missed by not using clicker training?
My horses certainly are bonded to me. Even when Einstein or now Charlie were grazing on good pasture, if I called their name, walked up to me, they always greeted me with a nicker
I am not going to be repetitive, by giving examples of trust and love I have shared with my horses, nor the bond I have enjoyed, to the point of loosing a special horse, was like loosing a family member
Please tell me what I am missing??
If I can acknowledge that clicker training has application at times, esp with abused horses, can you not also acknowledge that not using it, creates just as happy horses that become lifetime friends and companions, enjoying what you do together, with neither stress or aversion?????
I am sure Tom Dorrance, and others, never sat and agonized whether some interaction with their horses was either R+ or R-, but just used horse sense, taking into account as to what a horse is, then using empathy, timing, fairness and clear leadership, which builds trust


----------



## loosie

bsms said:


> For most horses, I don't think R+/R- for teaching cues matters a whole lot. What matters is what happens AFTER the horse learns the cues. Does the rider treat the horse with respect? Do they include "Please" and "Thank you" in their cues? Are they willing to make compromises with their horse?...
> In the long run, I think those questions have more to do with a positive approach to horses than how we teach them what a cue means.


Absolutely agree that what happens after(or around) the teaching specific cues is vital. Also agree, to a degree, that whether (well applied & appropriate for the animal/situation) -R or +R is used, it's probably not going to make a lot of difference to the basic understanding/learning of a specific behaviour. But I do believe it makes a big difference to the *attitude/emotions* behind the behaviour, and that's what I was trying to convey was an important factor to me. What I feel is 'better' than what you get in absence of +R.


----------



## Smilie

Oops, for got the target part! 
I have actually sat in a few clicker training seminars, as a great variety of speakers are invited every year to the horse breeder and Owner's conference
I have also taken in talks by Grandin, some linda Tellington Jones. Just like taking any clinic, I use what works, makes practical sense to me, as anyone else sure is free to do.
I can see application for clicker training, esp ground work, as on a horse hard to de worm, catch, needs to learn trust, liberty work, etc.
Since I have raised most of the horses I trained, have not needed to work with ahorse, who had no trust, who was perhaps sensitive around the ears, who was hard to catch, ect, ect, so saw no need to use clicker training, although I certainly accept those that feel it's use has application for them-t o use it, same as taking techniques from any trainer, that works for you and your horses
However, if someone can tell me what better connection they achieved with their horse, esp under saddle, using clicker training< i truly would like to know, as I really don't think I could have enjoyed any better bond or connection, with my special horses , than I have done
I can give a horse a pat, a good boy, or good girl, IMMediately after completing a pattern, but I can't exactly click and treat-what am I missing?
If my definition of R+ fails scientific definition, so be it-as my horses certainly understand, and that is what counts!
By the way, Loosie, the emotions and attitude of my horses has always been just fine.


----------



## loosie

Smilie said:


> Okay, far as that treat, after the horse is haltered, I don;t use treats to catch a horse, but reward that horse after he walks up to me, and is easy to halter.


See?? My assumption(from other stuff you've written) that it was just the way you wrote it, and you understand the value of timing perfectly well, was well founded! Likewise, I was not assuming you didn't understand clicker training personally, as have emphasised. But I only have your written words, which can very easily be construed to lead to those assumptions though. Regardless, we can still use your words & how they come across, to convey to others the importance/mistakes of timing & understanding, without it being personal. I tried very hard to convey that was my meaning, that there's no need to feel 'sold short' about it.



> The language of Equus, does snot involve treating fellow herd members,


I understand that very well and am in no way debating the importance of their natural behaviour, instincts, etc. I don't think anyone with any inkling of what is a 'horse' would. But I just don't hold the view that that is an argument against the worth of +R, whether food treats or otherwise.

In fact, tell me as to how, or what I missed by not using clicker training?



> If I can acknowledge that clicker training has application at times, esp with abused horses, can you not also acknowledge that not using it, creates just as happy horses...
> I am sure Tom Dorrance, and others, never sat and agonized whether some interaction with their horses was either +R or R-,


Sigh. I don't know how to say it, after trying a number of ways & you just not getting it, that I am in no way saying that it's 'your way or my way'. I am simply trying to convey the importance of +R, and what I see as common misconceptions, as I see it.

On the note of 'agonising' over the concepts, it's just something that, like learning/explaining about innate horse behaviours, ways of relating, that I found incredibly valuable to understand, and have found others felt the same way when I've explained it, and it has helped them learn to be more effective trainers. That's all. I don't recall it ever being an 'agony' to get across before this conversation.


----------



## Hondo

RE: For most horses, I don't think R+/R- for teaching cues matters a whole lot. What matters is what happens AFTER the horse learns the cues.

Comment: Providing R- remains below the pain and fear threshold. Otherwise the horse will remember the pain, fear, and their source forever.


----------



## Foxhunter

It can all get very complex because the animal's temperament can play a large part. 

I had two horses come to me. They were out of full sisters by the same stallion. I knew both their dams and they were very similar to each other. These two horses weremchalk and cheese.

One was so nervy you hardly dared cough when riding him the other was the opposite and was afraid of nothing. 

I went for lessons on these two horses from a top U.K. Dressage rider and the nervy horse was fine with his very demanding way but the other nearly had a nervous breakdown. 

I didn't like his demanding ways for training so stopped going to him. It took me weeks to get the bolder horse relaxed enough to attempt one tempi changes.


----------



## Smilie

Hondo said:


> RE: For most horses, I don't think R+/R- for teaching cues matters a whole lot. What matters is what happens AFTER the horse learns the cues.
> 
> Comment: Providing R- remains below the pain and fear threshold. Otherwise the horse will remember the pain, fear, and their source forever.



True, just like using food rewards incorrectly gives negative results, with that human becoming a treat vending machine. Both have to be used correctly, as all horse training principles

Loosie, I in no way said not to use R+, however, it seems you wish yo limit R+, by pure definition, to clicker training, while I consider those things I mentioned, as R+. The scratch on the withers at the right time, The 'good boy or good girl at the right time, even stopping along a trail ride, letting the horse rest and graze- those are R+ rewards to me.

My question to you, was directly to tell me how clicker training has created a better bond , for you, with your horses, esp as it transfers to riding?

Never did I say one way or another, but rather, just like when taking clinics, you take from each what works for you. If clicker training works for you, then no reason not to use it.
You are twisting my meaning again, insinuating I believe in using only R-. Not true, in my mind, but you wish to negate things like a verbal praise, a scratch at the right time, as not truly fitting R+ definition. My horses sure get that reward idea, and that is what counts, not some class room definition
Far as those founding fathers of NH, , like Tom Dorrance, Ray Hunt, Buck B, and a host of others, their use of R+ seems to be the same as what I use, and that was my point. I have yet to see Buck B, chris Irwin,ect, use clicker training
I already acknowledged situations where I do think clicker training and food rewards would be a good choice. You perhaps find it useful, trimming horses that have never had correct foot handling taught from an early age, which would be a great use

I am already transferring verbal cues from ground work, to leg and rein cues (pressure and release)), thus using a 'bridge, until the horse understands to transfer communication to leg,seat and reins alone. Thus, to me, using clicker training to achieve this, would be just adding something I am never going to be using , in riding my horses. Does not mean I don't believe In R+, just that you reject what I consider R+


----------



## Smilie

Foxhunter said:


> It can all get very complex because the animal's temperament can play a large part.
> 
> I had two horses come to me. They were out of full sisters by the same stallion. I knew both their dams and they were very similar to each other. These two horses weremchalk and cheese.
> 
> One was so nervy you hardly dared cough when riding him the other was the opposite and was afraid of nothing.
> 
> I went for lessons on these two horses from a top U.K. Dressage rider and the nervy horse was fine with his very demanding way but the other nearly had a nervous breakdown.
> 
> I didn't like his demanding ways for training so stopped going to him. It took me weeks to get the bolder horse relaxed enough to attempt one tempi changes.


Yes, of course, you take any horse's temperament into account, both in the rate you train that horse, and how you ask him, working towards that relaxation first
A timid horse, needs a confident rider, that is very fair, and has a lot of feel ect,e ct
I think the point that needs clarification, is not whether to use the right combo or R+ and R-, but whether most horsemen have a broader concept of R+, that works for them and their horses, that does not necessarily involve clicker training and food rewards, although, again, I conceded already where I do believe clicker training is useful, and to certainly use it , if it is a method that works for you-same as any other training concepts, given by various trainers
Do you need clicker training,to have a happy, useful , well adjusted horse, that likes to work for you, with a willing attitude? My reply is 'yes'
Again, excluding abused or scared horses.
I consider the right use of pressure and release, timing, always giving the horse a chance to respond to the lightest aid, making sure the horse understands the cue in the first place, is the correct use of R-, including using that pressure enough, on ahrose that understands that cue, but refuses to comply, to get that compliance. Next time, the horse is again asked with the lightest cue. Over time, used in a fair and consistent manner, it builds willing compliance, as that response becomes ingrained, and the horse is a creature of habit, content with fair and clear boundaries.
I use what I have always considered R+, along with understanding the very nature of horses, as aherd prey species 
For me, R+ has always been giving the horse a scratch on the withers, a pat, with a verbal'good boy or good girl, at the correct time
Ending on a good note,when a horse really tried, stepping off, loosing that cinch, taking him back to the barn, perhaps letting him pick some choice grass along the way, sponging him off on a hot day, has always been R+ in my mind
In the end, I think I have enjoyed bonds with horses, much s anyone, my horses are not stressed, or have a poor attitude, are never hard to catch, thus when it comes down tot he final point, I do not think clicker training is for everyone, nor are your horses not trained with R+ , as well as the correct amount and degree of R-, just because one chooses not to use Clicker training and direct food rewards


----------



## jaydee

An interesting article
Study: Food Rewards Can Improve Horse Training | TheHorse.com
I think its very wrong to say that if a horse is treated like a pet it will be spoiled and so difficult to deal with.
Our dogs are pets, even our working dogs that lived outside were pets and if giving them affection and treats = spoiling then they were spoilt in that sense of the word but they were and are well trained and know how to behave themselves. 
Same applies to our horses. They're not kept purely for competing and they aren't working animals, they're leisure horses that we own because we enjoy having them and spending time with them.
Treating a horse as a pet doesn't ruin it - bad training does that.
Most horse's that have come to me that were barn sour, buddy sour, balked/napped did so because they hadn't been correctly trained/prepared/had been rushed too much and thrown in at the deep end, ridden inconsiderately, ridden by green riders or nervous riders that couldn't instill a sense of 'you're safe with me' or ridden by people that insist on being too hard and make a horse tense and anxious


----------



## bsms

Trooper is an uncommonly sensitive, willing horse. His sire was the stallion I mentioned who was dangerous until he learned that humans made it possible for him to travel 50 miles/day and work very rough cattle. Total opposites. What worked with one would fail with the other!

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

I'm pretty sure we all agree that if "R-" does this, it is very bad (and also note what a bad fitting saddle did in just a couple of months):











There is a huge difference between popping Bandit in the gut with my heels when he's saying, "I don't feel like it" and spurring a horse bloody! And Trooper is proof that there are people willing to do the latter...

"_The scratch on the withers at the right time, The 'good boy or good girl at the right time, even stopping along a trail ride, letting the horse rest and graze- those are R+ rewards to me._" - @Smilie

The widely cited "3 second rule" applies to teaching a horse a new cue. It has nothing to do with long term - and horses often do things to gain a reward in the future, including traveling quite a distance to get to food and water. Scratches, praise, rests, grazing - those create a positive environment, which a horse needs far more than R+ training!

This is where science and reality sometimes part. I'm a huge fan of incorporating science into riding, but one needs to understand the limits imposed by the incorrect design of experiments - which is why we now have a wide proclaimed "20% of body weight" rule with no substance in reality!

When my wife rides Cowboy, she'll sometimes steer him off trail so he can grab a quick bite of something he likes. Then they continue on. A few minutes later, she may need him to follow Bandit up a spot that is easier for 15 hand Bandit than 13 hand Cowboy. When she does, he gives his best effort without hesitation.

The bites of food took place BEFORE the climb (and will take place sometime after the climb). Do they affect Cowboy's willingness and even eagerness? I'm convinced the answer is yes. It cements their relationship as a team, working together. It tells Cowboy she respects him and wants good things for him. By actively seeking ways to give Cowboy what he likes, it turns "work" into "fun". If the cavalry writer from the 1800s I quoted earlier was correct, it helps convince Cowboy to give his best when she calls upon him.

That may be why I don't care if I use R+ or R- to teach a cue. What matters to the horse, IMHO, is this: Do I create a positive environment, where he is respected, cared for, encouraged, supported, protected and enjoyed? Do I approach rides as a team where we work together on goals rather than say, "_Pleasing me is your JOB! You eat my food, now make me happy blast you!_"

I just fed our three horses. Bandit is #3 in the corral, so he waited at the far bucket for his alfalfa hay. As he started to eat, I lightly rubbed his shoulder and sympathized about how the smartest, bravest horse got stuck with eating last. He obviously did not understand my words. And horses don't spend a lot of time rubbing each others shoulders. But Bandit may have understood the message better than research scientists - I care for you. You are special. We are pals. You get the best looking flake because I think you are the best horse. We can face the world when we do it together.

R+ training event? Nope. Creating an R+ environment? I think so.

Yesterday, riding past a neighbor's yard, he jumped sideways unexpectedly. Turned out the neighbor's 3 year old had come around the corner of the house at full speed, and Bandit startled. OK. That can startle a horse. So we went another 100 yards down, then I asked him for a 180 to go back past the house.

He didn't want to. He really preferred to continue on another 100 yards to our arena and home than turn around and go uphill past the place with scary 3 year old kids. I turned him, but it took more than a few ounces of pressure on the bit! And getting him to go back up the hill took a pop in the belly with my heels. Then he went. We went a few hundred yards up, then back down, then back up - until he was able to walk relaxed past the spot that had become scary to him.

Oh no! I used R- to move him! Yep. And together, we kept working at things until his fear was gone. He'll be much more relaxed today when we go past there. But I don't think Bandit was the least bit offended or harmed by my actions. It would have harmed him far more if I had let him quit and spend the night thinking about scary 3 year old kids! Part of yesterday's lesson was "_I know what is best in this situation and once you obey, you will realize I know what is best_". Horses need to know they are being protected by obeying their rider. That is using R- to create an R+ environment - at least as I understand it. It certainly is using discomfort to teach the horse how to become comfortable.

Sometimes you have to push a horse so he will learn being pushed is OK. When he learns that, then being pushed doesn't create negative results, because the act of pushing becomes acceptable to him. In a positive environment, using negatives to teach is OK. To me, and to Mia and Bandit.


----------



## Smilie

No one said you can't consider a horse a'pet', as pet had different connotations
When it is used, by horsemen in the phrase, 'barnyard pet', it si equivalent to a horse that has become spoiled, through whatever means, be it feeding treats incorrectly, or just in no consistent handling,
So much of the arguments , ar due to different takes on what any particular word means
I mean, I give Charlie cookies at times, and she is not spoiled.
I also have no problem with anyone that wants to use clicker training and food rewards, JUST the idea it produces ahorse that is more willinging, happy, bonded, ect
Yes, I have read where that clicker training helps in horses associating ,learning a desired response faster, but you can't take away that , at least in part, you are also tapping into a horse;s strong food modivation-no different then using his herd ,/prey instincts, his desire for clear, fair leadership
Also, while clinical trails are useful, they have to be taken into light far as practical application, on how you ride/use a horse
For me, far a training a horse with no issues, esp under saddle, clicker training has no additional value, although that might be otherwise, for other people


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

There is a danger of looking at R+/- and P+/P- or even the herd dynamics only from the behavioral perspective. There is much more going on under the surface than meets the eye. 

This is a point I have attempted to make in other posts a la the blind men and the elephant story. If you don't know the story: Jain World 

“Repeated exposure to oxytocin causes long-lasting effects by influencing the activity of other transmitter systems, a pattern which makes oxytocin potentially clinically relevant. Oxytocin can be released by various types of non-noxious sensory stimulation, for example by touch and warmth. Ingestion of food triggers oxytocin release by activation of vagal afferents.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15834840 

Part of the success of Clicker training may be attributed to the long term affects of the repeated exposure to oxytocin. 

In 2003, the United States Department of Defense released a study that showed that when exposed to a pleasurable behavior, both animals (in the study dogs, though even rats have a similar release) and people experienced increased levels of Oxytocin.

Some of the effects of Oxytocin include:

-Aiding social bonding (additional supportive evidence is found in the successful use of Oxytocin in Autistic patients to increase socially positive behaviors)
-An increase in trust and openness
-An increase in forgiveness/generosity/empathy
-An increase in social memory
-An increase in intergroup bonding (two different groups accepting one another)
-Modulates fear and anxiety
-Increases the awareness of certain social stimuli such as the recognition of positive or negative facial expressions/body language, especially those as they relate to survival. 

So from a larger perspective, we see that while classic conditioning is an important part of training, there are many other factors that can also have an influence in a longer term sense. 

Not all demonstrable effects can be attributed directly to the application of classical conditioning techniques themselves but, also, through the effects the training has on the mind of the animal. By triggering the release (repeated exposure) of certain hormones in training we can either aid or deter an openness learning and in the long term affect a certain over all "attitude".


----------



## Smilie

See, that study, and other like it, mean not much to me, Jaydee, as Most good trainers have no probelm keeping ahrose;attention, and I have yet to see how would would truly use it to get ahrose that is a better horse under saddle, nor have I taken one clinic, where clicker training was used, to help train a horse under saddle.
It has also been shown, that horse, growing up mainly unhandled, kept in wide open spaces, develope more neurons that enable learning, that horses allowed turn out full time, have a better learning attitude, yet many people stall horses, keep them confined when young, because they are 'too valuable' to turn out
There is pile of info out there, and everyone of us,has to decide what works for them and their horses. If no abuse is used, then what does it matter?
You use what works for you.
As Dr Sid Gustavson said, ' Horses have a great ability to adapt, but we need to make sure that we never exceed their ability to do so'
I am sure, everyone here reading, that horses raised in the open, not stalled, learn better are not about to change their horse management
Ditto, for any clicker training that 'appears' to have a horse learn faster, when I am quite happy as to how fast my horses learn, and how they keep attention on me.
Anyone test clicker training, far as keeping a stud's attention on you, in the presence of mares in heat?


----------



## jaydee

You could use clicker training to reinforce any learning situation so no reason why it shouldn't be used with a stallion?
Problematic stallion behavior tends to be more about the individual horse and the person handling it regularly - CT isn't some sort of a magical formula that will guarantee a win every time, it's something that you use alongside your regular methods
It's clear that you still don't understand the concept and rather than speaking from experience you're wanting to discredit something that you've never tried so actually have no clue how it works in practice.
There are stallions competing at top level in all sorts of disciplines so I imagine that the people dealing with them are able to control and focus them around mares - though a lot of mare owners now use regulate when competing there are still some that don't. Clicker training isn't THE TRAINING - it's more like a bonus feature to use alongside it when you need it.


----------



## Foxhunter

Smilie said:


> .
> It has also been shown, that horse, growing up mainly unhandled, kept in wide open spaces, develope more neurons enable learning, that horses allowed turn out full time, have a better learning attitude, yet many people stall horses, keep them confined when young, because they are 'too valuable' to turn out


Well, I have dealt with a heck of a lot of horses that have been brought up where they are brought in for the night especially during the winter and can say that a lot of them have been far more willing to learn than some I have had that have lived out all Thor lives. 

When a breeder has spent five or six figures on breeding a racehorse they are going to do their best to keep it from injury which does not mean it is kept insode 24/7


----------



## Hondo

Yea! I've been vindicated. I am an unapologetic treat junkie! Occasionally I even use it as a reward. Particularly for standing while being mounted or taking a half step more forward along the rock or log I using for a mounting block. But I don't really even need it anymore.

Used it on Rimmey a lot when I was trying to get him relaxed with his feet.

I am a vending machine. I know it, the horses know it. I can't see that it's hurt them in anyway. 'Course if we were entered in some contest the judges might question when a horse was checking my pockets.

They like treats and I like them. That is the basis for most treats.

In fact, I haven't seen them for about 4 hours. Think I'll take a stroll and give them a treat.


----------



## Hondo

This causes me to remember when Regan was known for always having a large jar of Jelly Bellies on the table at the onset of what was to be a difficult meeting.

And the box of chocolates.

Sometimes it just seems to take science a while to catch up!


----------



## Smilie

jaydee said:


> You could use clicker training to reinforce any learning situation so no reason why it shouldn't be used with a stallion?
> Problematic stallion behavior tends to be more about the individual horse and the person handling it regularly - CT isn't some sort of a magical formula that will guarantee a win every time, it's something that you use alongside your regular methods
> It's clear that you still don't understand the concept and rather than speaking from experience you're wanting to discredit something that you've never tried so actually have no clue how it works in practice.
> There are stallions competing at top level in all sorts of disciplines so I imagine that the people dealing with them are able to control and focus them around mares - though a lot of mare owners now use regulate when competing there are still some that don't. Clicker training isn't THE TRAINING - it's more like a bonus feature to use alongside it when you need it.


Jaydee, I AM TRYING TO DISCREDIT NOTHING_OKAY!
I asked some questions, accept clicker training is just another thing someone can use, if they wish to, and am only saying that so far I have not seen where I would need to use it , on the horses I have. If it gives you some better connection with your horses, then for goodness sake, use it!!!
I just don't accept the idea, that somehow I don't have the connection with my horses, just because I chose not to use clicker training-is that so hard to understand?
The reason I mentioned stallions, is because horses, those that are in tact, are motivated by two main things- drive to reproduce and food. It is okay to use any intrinsic part of a horse,, whether it be their herd/prey body language and instincts, and even food rewards, if used correctly, and gives you ahrose that you enjoy, and a horse that is happy, relaxed, ect
I have shown stallion, Jaydee, so am well versed in teaching them to focus on you, and ignore mares, even those in heat

The only thing I have a problem with, is the idea that UNLESS you use clicker training, you never use R+, and if you chose not to use it, somehow you have less of a connection, empathy, with your horses

People can chose to use CA methods, that of any other trainer, clicker training or not, and have their own valid reasons , concerning whatever choice they decide to make


----------



## Smilie

Foxhunter said:


> Well, I have dealt with a heck of a lot of horses that have been brought up where they are brought in for the night especially during the winter and can say that a lot of them have been far more willing to learn than some I have had that have lived out all Thor lives.
> 
> When a breeder has spent five or six figures on breeding a racehorse they are going to do their best to keep it from injury which does not mean it is kept inside 24/7


 Individual horse personalities also come into play, and the conclusion above, is not my own, but that of Dr Sid Gustavson, a vet that specializes in equine behavior and welfare
The concept of horses having the ABILITY, to learn better, if they have been allowed to grow up as horses, is from this source,below, and not necessarily my own ideas or experiences, as I also handled my horses, and have not trained any mustangs
I realize horses are managed, including being stalled, for various reasons, including their perceived value, and am not suggesting that every horse should be turned out full time, but that does not change what research shows, any more then any facets of clicker training. 

We all use what is both practical, and right for us, and, again-horses have a great ability to adapt, so certainly can adapt to be stalled part time, while in training etc, but, in the words of Dr Sid Gustavson, 'we must never exceed their ability to do so
Research and practical application, do not always go hand in hand


Renowned Horseman, Martin Black and Neuroscientist, Dr. Stephen Peters co-author Evidence-Based Horsemanship which combines science, the understanding of brain function with an empirical understanding of the subtleties of a horse's behaviors, reactions, and chemical state


----------



## Smilie

There are many experts, far as equine behavior, and I have had the chance to listen to several of them. Here is the link to Dr Sid Gustafson, including his fields of expertise in equine behavior

Sid Gustafson Equine Behavior instructor - Expert with University of Guelph | ExpertFile


----------



## Smilie

Speaking of racehorses, Dr Gustafson is also involved in the welfare of racehorses, speaking out against the use of lasix , as a standard practice

http://therail.blogs.nytimes.com/author/sid-gustafson/?_r=0


----------



## Smilie

Here is a sample talk by Dr Gustavfson






I take in many, many seminars by various experts, including equine behaviorists, as it broadens your horizons, and clicker training is just one thing I took in, along with the body wrapping of horses by Tellington JOnes
I, use what works for me and my horses, everyone else is welcome to do the same


----------



## Smilie

As in everything, from CA to clicker training, to feeding hand treats, there are opposing opinions, with no one way being either for everyone, or correct
Use what works for you,
Yes, it is often not the method, but the wrong way it is applied, but that includes both R+ and R_

Charles Wilhelm - CW Training | Ride Magazine


----------



## loosie

Smilie said:


> Loosie, I in no way said not to use R+, however, it seems you wish yo limit R+, by pure definition, to clicker training,


Not at all. I didn't initially bring it up. 'C/t' is one method of training, _using _+R. I'm not even particularly discussing c/t, but just +R. Tho I do use a 'bridging signal'("Good!!" or "Yes!!") when I'm training, so it's effectively the same thing, except as explained, I don't use the same method(or +R) exclusively with all animals. The 'bridge' is vital, because otherwise it would be impossible in a lot of instances, to convey 'right' in a timely enough fashion.



> while I consider those things I mentioned, as R+. The scratch on the withers at the right time, The 'good boy or good girl at the right time, even stopping along a trail ride, letting the horse rest and graze- those are R+ rewards to me.


+R & -R are _behavioural science definitions,_ not subjective terms, like 'respect' or 'reward' for eg. All of the above could be called 'rewards' for eg, assuming they're (innate or conditioned) effective consequences. But if we're going to have a discussion using objective, scientific terminology, we need to stick to what it actually means. Otherwise it's like me trying to discuss... algebra with Harold & arguing with him on the basis that to me it just means definite numbers & doesn't include letters or symbols. Or saying something like 'to me, primary colours include purple & aqua & pink'...

So again... Positive(as in *adding*) Reinforcement(as in strengthening) is a behavioural science definition which means* adding* a *desirable* consequence, to make a behaviour *more likely to happen/stronger* in the future. So to many horses(not all), a scratch in a 'sweet spot' is a bit of a +R. Letting the horse graze on the trail is +R.

Negative(*subtracting*) Reinforcement(strengthening) means *removing* something *undesirable* in order to make that behaviour *more likely/stronger* in future. So quitting 'work', letting the horse rest, removing pressure are all egs of -R.

And 'Good boy', a pat(and in many instances, something like a scratch on the wither) is a _'bridge signal'_ - that is, an *innately meaningless* signal which has come to be *associated with a reinforcement*(or punishment, if we include 'Ah-ah!' or 'No!' or raising a whip or such).

And for balance, the flip side is Positive(*adding*) Punishment is the *application of something undesirable* to *weaken* a behaviour. Such as 'pressure' of some kind... rein/bit pressure, to make it less likely the horse will ignore seat aids, spurs to 'weaken' the behaviour of ignoring leg aids... Although 'punishment' is often perceived as only the more extreme, painful egs, such as hitting a horse with a whip to weaken the behaviour of ignoring a raised arm or such... whacking a horse with a big stick to 'weaken' the behaviour of being attacked or 'bullied'.

And Negative(as in *subtracting*) Punishment is the *removal of something desirable* in order to *weaken* a behaviour. Eg. witholding food when an animal is being 'rude'.



> My question to you, was directly to tell me how clicker training has created a better bond , for you, with your horses, esp as it transfers to riding?


So again... whether with 'c/t' or otherwise, I perceive that using actual +R improves my relationship with the animal(bond, if you like), and the enthusiasm they perform their 'work' with, because it is a different _motivation,_ creates a different attitude & emotions, compared to avoidance of 'undesirable'. For eg. instead of 'I _must_ do this Or Else'(whether or not they learn to enjoy it in future or not), the motivation is 'I _want_ to do this because it's Enjoyable!'



> You are twisting my meaning again, insinuating I believe in using only R-


Not in the least true. Never, ever said or 'insinuated' that! If you read what I've written, you will see that time & again I've acknowledged you have given egs of +R. It seems that you are doing the twisting yourself, by misusing the terminology. 

My horses sure get that reward idea, and that is what counts, not some class room definition

Again, I do believe 'the reward idea'(as in generally) is quite different in effect, not just in theory, to actual +R. **& that's NOT saying I believe it is wrong or right, just different. 



> like Tom Dorrance, Ray Hunt, Buck B, and a host of others, their use of R+ seems to be the same as what I use


I am not in the least 'negating' what is *done* by either those people(wouldn't be so presumptuous!!) or by you. But I'm not sure they use all that much +R. And do they actually call it 'positive reinforcement' when they release pressure, etc?? I don't think they do, but if so, that would also be wrong, based on it being scientific, objective terminology.



> Thus, to me, using clicker training to achieve this, would be just adding something I am never going to be using , in riding my horses.


I get the idea you also think I use 'clicker training', as in using an actual clicker & food treats all the time? I don't. Though I did use c/t for a time when I was learning to apply behavioural training, and I do think it's helpful for beginners to learn with it.


----------



## gottatrot

bsms said:


> Sometimes you have to push a horse so he will learn being pushed is OK. When he learns that, then being pushed doesn't create negative results, because the act of pushing becomes acceptable to him. In a positive environment, using negatives to teach is OK. To me, and to Mia and Bandit.


Agree very much. Also, a horseman will be open to the fact that what might be extremely aversive and unacceptable pressure to one horse might barely register with another.

I worked with one horse that tried to kick me, and when I corrected him with a loud, harsh verbal sound as I would have with even my very sensitive Arabs, he panicked and nearly fell down. He was so sensitive, my least threatening "serious" correction was too much for him. After that, I only corrected him very gently and quietly, which worked well for him. 

Other horses I've thought I was very strong with, and they didn't seem to notice. This is why you can't really specifically say what will be aversive to a horse. Some horses do better the quieter you get. Others seem to almost demand that you give them a smack in order to listen to you. My friend has a horse like this, she is very kind but jokingly says her horse needs his "daily beating." No one ever hurts the horse, but he literally does not pay attention to you on a ride until you either give him a smack on the neck or a strong pull on his bit. After that, he settles in and works quite happily. Before that, he will do all kinds of naughty things like grabbing the bit in his teeth, pulling the reins out of your hands, and tanking off with the rider. 

I've tried being kind and quiet with him. For some reason he wants to know for sure that you are willing to take hard measures with him, if necessary. Once he knows that, it seems to make him feel more secure. My mare Halla can be like this too. She asks, "Who is in charge here, you or me?" She wants it spelled out, and feels that she must be in charge if you are not willing to be. So you have to tell her, although she does not often require a smack, that you will be calling the shots today, with her input. She doesn't let you be vague or passive. She believes someone must take charge. To these horses, this is not a negative environment either. It is what makes them comfortable. 

@Hondo, I also give out treats liberally. Why not, my horses work hard, are very polite about getting their treats, and it creates a positive environment for them.


----------



## Smilie

As mentioned, I also give treats, randomly, -just because.
To be clear, I see no problem where those that use clicker training as a'bridge', feel they get better communication with their horses, feels it adds something to the total relationship/learning experience,if youa re in this group, then use it
I just feel it is another tool, and not the latest revelation in horse training, that must be used, or you are considered behind the times, to not have as good a relationship with your horses, or that you have some poor confused brutes, forced through physical discomfort, to try and grasp a training concept
Perhaps, once enough clicker trained horses are out there, that appear trained way better then those without clicker training, having less stress,have a stronger bond with their humans, it then can become mass accepted, by any trainer worth his salt, a 'the way to go'
Myself, I can re call the great flurry over Imprint Training, when first presented by Dr Robert Miller, and it became 'the enlightened way', to handle foals.
Well, time did not quite support that. That is the whole problem with ;'clinical trials.
Heck, I took HRT, because we have a high risk of heart disease in our family, and a low risk of breast cancer, and the current data supported the idea that HRT would lower the risk of heart disease.
Well, surprise for me and the pMU industry< once more data was available. Not only did HRT increase the risk of breast cancer, but of heart disease!
I got breast cancer, and the PMU industry died.
Not saying that clicker training might not stand up, given enough time and data, but it also does not mean that I am going to jump on that band wagon, of feel that I lack being an 'enlightened horse trainer. There is also the old truth, that is something is not broken, then don't fix it!
That does not mean I have any problem with those that find clicker training improves their connection with their horses, does not mean I have not read the data that supports it, nor understand the principles used-just that I chose not to use it, same as I would, when presented with any other horse keeping, training or management data. You use what works for you and your horses


----------



## bsms

loosie said:


> ...But I'm not sure they use all that much +R. And do they actually call it 'positive reinforcement' when they release pressure, etc?? I don't think they do, but if so, that would also be wrong, based on it being scientific, objective terminology...


Perhaps that is why most of us ought to drop scientific terminology. I'm pretty sure Tom Dorrance never cracked a professional behavioral journal. Same for Ray Hunt. But folks who met them say they got great results.

Ray Hunt quotes

"Your horse learns he can do anything you want him to do and he's glad to do it; he's ready to do it. You've set it up for him. You've never discouraged him, you've never belittled him, you've really bragged on him and his good qualities. When he did something wrong, you didn't make a big thing of it. You went along with him there, too, and showed him that wasn't too good a thing to do - yet you didn't criticize him or hammer on him. So, as time goes on from day to day, week to week, month to month, and year to year, I'll grant you that you can build a friendship and something that is unbelievable." - page 38

"But this other way, there's never a doubt; when you ask him to do something, it's not a kidding sort or joking sort of thing. You ask him to do something, he knows you mean it and that there is a reason why you ask him. So he does it because he is your friend and you're his friend and you have taught him this....You have let him learn it because you've gone with him when he was discouraged, disappointed, worried, and bothered. You've accepted it and you've shown him a softer way." - page 39

I got a dog in college. Had him for 14 years. I've never met his equal. I adored him. Chris was also a big, powerful dog. If you wanted to convince him he had done wrong, you might need to kick him in the ribs just to get his attention. He once jumped out of the pickup while I was doing over 40 mph. He hit the ground, picked himself up, shook himself, then trotted after me. By the time the truck had stopped, he was ready to jump in. No cuts. No broken bones. No signs of being sore, even!

My Border Collie, Jack the Slipper, is very sensitive. Look at him wrong and he'll darn near melt. He's actually pretty tough physically, but his desire to please is so strong that a harsh word destroys him. But because his desire to please is so strong, a pet is all it takes to reward him - and it is a strong reward. He'd do just about anything to hear, "Good dog!"

Pressure that would destroy Jack would have spoiled Chris. So you adjust.

Same with horses.

BTW - When we are on a trail, Bandit is all business. He is allowed to eat, but rarely does unless I dismount. Cowboy, OTOH, eats all along the way. He likes the beans from mesquite trees, and my wife will stop and collect some that are out of his reach, then feed him by hand. Then they catch up with us. Bandit likes them too, but he dislikes stopping on the trail even more. He gets very grumpy when we have to wait for my wife and Cowboy! They are just different. And so their riders treat them differently.


----------



## Smilie

This si not a link that is not in support of clicker training, but rather goes into possible pitfalls, when, like any other tool, used incorrectly.
The potencial dangers, are every bit as great, as using R- incorrectly
I know those here like Loosie, know how to correctly use clicker training, but the potential harm, even danger, when using it incorrectly, is every bit a huge as applying any technique by someone like CA incorrectly
I think that point needs to be made clear, esp when presenting clicker training to someone relatively new to horses

Clicker training with horses | Association of Pet Behaviour Counsellors

BSMS, my point exactly all along, when I stated people like T. Dorrance , Ray Hunt, Buck B, ect, never applied any terminology far as R+, R-, nor did they use clicker training, yet they had exceptional relationships with horses, both in communicating with them, and training them


----------



## Hondo

....but any adjustment should remain below the fear threshold.

My experience with Hondo and Rimmey is pretty much the same. I can swing my hands wildly all around Hondo's head and he just ignores me.

At first with Rimmey, I had to keep my hands extremely slow around his head. When the two were close and Rimmey was watching, I'd go do all kinds of crazy stuff around Hondo's head.

Rimmey is a lot better but he'll still get frightened before Hondo.

That is one reason I've decided not to do any sacking. I just have an "aversion" to being a fear causer. I know they eventually desensitise but I also believe they will remember the fear I caused. It might become a fading question mark in their mind, but a question mark never-the -less.


----------



## Smilie

Not my view, so don;t throw those rotten tomatoes, and yes, it also is about clicker training dogs, BUT it just gives another view, to think about, concerning clicker training conditioning
After all, we become more informed, subjective, reading both sides of any issue1
Again, not my view, just a viewpoint I came across, using good old google, like anyone else!

Why I Don't Believe In Clicker Training


----------



## Smilie

Hondo said:


> ....but any adjustment should remain below the fear threshold.
> 
> My experience with Hondo and Rimmey is pretty much the same. I can swing my hands wildly all around Hondo's head and he just ignores me.
> 
> At first with Rimmey, I had to keep my hands extremely slow around his head. When the two were close and Rimmey was watching, I'd go do all kinds of crazy stuff around Hondo's head.
> 
> Rimmey is a lot better but he'll still get frightened before Hondo.
> 
> That is one reason I've decided not to do any sacking. I just have an "aversion" to being a fear causer. I know they eventually desensitise but I also believe they will remember the fear I caused. It might become a fading question mark in their mind, but a question mark never-the -less.


We are going into \'well trodden territory again, Hondo, as I believe I said many times, that a fearful horse learns nothing, so you don't go there
A horse that refuses a cue he understands, is not necessarily a fearful horse, but one who has just learned that he can say 'no. You as the human, have to decide which one it is
I think we have been over this example, also, enough to leave awell worn path-that of a horse that spooks.
For a true fearful spook, you just ride on, like nothing happened. However, on a horse that has learned he can spook to intimidate arider, get out of work, you use the ;'demand' approach
If you watch Buck B, or anyone else using sacking out correctly, it does exactly the opposite of what you suppose, with that horse relaxing, becoming calmer, esp to random motion.
I don't know about you, but any horse i:m going to pack, is going to get sacked out, before I try and put that top tarp on him, and tie the diamond hitch!
Learned to also sack ahorse out with aslicker, long before I have to ride him with one on a trail, but hey, that';s just me!


----------



## Hondo

Smilie said:


> so you don't go there


...but any adjustment should remain below the fear threshold.

My experience with Hondo and Rimmey is pretty much the same. I can swing my hands wildly all around Hondo's head and he just ignores me.

At first with Rimmey, I had to keep my hands extremely slow around his head. When the two were close and Rimmey was watching, I'd go do all kinds of crazy stuff around Hondo's head.

Rimmey is a lot better but he'll still get frightened before Hondo.

That is one reason I've decided not to do any sacking. I just have an "aversion" to being a fear causer. I know they eventually desensitise but I also believe they will remember the fear I caused. It might become a fading question mark in their mind, but a question mark never-the -less.


----------



## loosie

Reiningcatsanddogs said:


> Not all demonstrable effects can be attributed directly to the application of classical conditioning techniques themselves but, also, through the effects the training has on the mind of the animal. By triggering the release (repeated exposure) of certain hormones in training we can either aid or deter an openness learning and in the long term affect a certain over all "attitude".


THANK YOU for sharing that!!! In my cruder way, that is what I was getting at. Although I think oxytocin may not have been understood when I was studying, I didn't know it was that specific hormone that played such a big part, and to explain further, I would have just said endorphins are produced and different neural pathways are developed, with lots of positive reinforcement training, without understanding the specifics much further.


----------



## loosie

Smilie said:


> Jaydee, I AM TRYING TO DISCREDIT NOTHING_OKAY!


Sure comes across as such. And in saying that you don't care to learn how things work, so far as studies on oxytocin, etc, it also comes across that you don't care to even understand the things you are arguing about, in which case I find myself wondering why on earth you're even asking what people perceive is 'better' about using (actual) +R.



> The only thing I have a problem with, is the idea that UNLESS you use clicker training, you never use R+, and if you chose not to use it, somehow you have less of a connection, empathy, with your horses


Not quite sure which bit of the elephant that is, but reckon I'm safe to assume not one person is, or ever was arguing with you on that one & anyone who understands the principles of c/t would agree with that.


----------



## loosie

gottatrot said:


> Agree very much. Also, a horseman will be open to the fact that what might be extremely aversive and unacceptable pressure to one horse might barely register with another.
> ...This is why you can't really specifically say what will be aversive to a horse.


Or, by the same token, what, to any given horse or at any particular time, is desirable(so can be used as positive reinforcement), and the strength of that reinforcement or aversion. A horse who is preoccupied with fear or some other strong emotion will not likely be motivated by a favourite food. A horse who's just finished a large meal may feel a bit of lucerne isn't worth going out of their way for. A horse who is moulting may do anything for a good scratch, but another horse may see that as a 'nothing', or even an aversive, a punishment...


----------



## loosie

Oh mate! I thought I'd look at that link, then found myself having to read to the end, in incredulity of the things he said! Smiley, I find it hard to understand how you can post something like that & yell about 'not trying to discredit anything'. Can you not see how blatantly derogatory(aside from irrational) that is??

From the 'why I don't believe in C/T' article...
_"Clicker training* fanatics* make the same mistakes as all dedicated reductionists: *always pretending to know more and more, and devoted to knowing about less and less*. They are more concerned about their method than the whole dog, and thus miss the entire point of why a dog does what it does, and what dog training is all about. ..."

_What an arrogant & ignorant, view! I bolded what I think are the most relevant words, which I think applies to this author.His example of the badly trained dog is no different than 'failure of ANY trainer'. As with any method under the sun, it's doesn't give magical results, or make the practitioner good or intelligent at their job. "Clicker Training is one dog training method based upon a theory called Operant Conditioning. Those who believe that all behavior is explained by Operant Conditioning also believe:
1. All animals, including humans, are fixed-program machines. "


Talk about taking generalising to the extreme! This is just a silly assumption, that because c/t is based upon O/C that it means those who practice C/T believe without question or condition, everything Skinner personally did. Of course, there are fanatics in any walk... To assume that all those who use c/t or operant conditioning do so in exclusion of everything else under the sun is just... incredibly naive.



"4. Animals are just specimens to be poked, experimented on, caged, and eventually dissected for examination. There is no morality to Operant Conditioning
5. The Clicker Folks contend, as a general rule, it is inhumane to ask a dog to inhibit a behavior, such as teaching a “leave it” "


Here he assumes C/T practitioners have no ethics... and then assumes they all have the ethic that animals shouldn't be taught certain commands or corrected??


" then you have to reject the primary basis for the theory of Operant Conditioning. … because there is no morality in Operant Conditioning. ... I DO understand and use the principles of Classical and Operant Conditioning in my work. ... Classical conditioning and operant conditioning are becoming obsolete theories of behavior."


So he alone is exempt and contradictory to his generalised assumptions about everyone else that uses it??


"Looking at the overall concept, could I make a woman want to have sex with anybody just because they said a trained command word?"


Nothing to say to that argument but... incredulous that he even made it!


"That’s why behaviorism is not valid. Behavior is more complex than the theory proposes. If the theories were correct, then they would work in all circumstances of behavior."

So it's all a load of hooey, there's no baby in the bathwater.


"Clicker training is based entirely on the theory of Operant Conditioning, yet is even more narrow than the theory upon which it is based. Clicker training is based upon the utopian viewpoint that teaching and training should only be conducted using “positive reinforcement”, meaning using structured delivery of treats for behavior. It also assumes that all behavior is generated and controlled by whatever the humans put in the environment of the animal. "


It's obvious he's extremely carried away by his narrow assumptions, and if you believe all of the above, then yes, I can understand why you'd discredit c/t. Just like if 'Natural Horsemanship' was all about fluffy rainbow farts, or if barefoot hoof care meant cutting high heels into the quick, making sure angles were at 45 degrees, forcing concavity & accepting 'transitional soreness' for a year. Yes, these things are believed, & some people actually preach them. But his assertions about c/t generally are no less ridiculous than generalising about all NH or barefoot as 'fanatics who believe xyz'.


----------



## Hondo

Kudos looosie for getting past the first two paragraphs. I didn't have the patience.

I have noticed a tactic that is sometimes used in debates, including talk shows back when I actually watched or listened to them.

What you do is to suggest something that your opponent said that you feel you can defend against even though the opponent did not say what you claim. This gives you a win and puts the opponent in the defensive stance of, "I did not say that".

Or even better sometimes if multiple people and sources are involved, don't even direct the misquote at any particular individual and no defense will even be presented for your misquoted claim and your win will stand without opposition.

I sometimes wonder if people can do this subconsciously without even realizing what they are doing.


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

Hondo said:


> What you do is to suggest something that your opponent said that you feel you can defend against even though the opponent did not say what you claim. This gives you a win and puts the opponent in the defensive stance of, "I did not say that".


If I recall correctly, that is called a bait and switch.


----------



## Foxhunter

I have never used CT for any purpose but have seen it used at Monkey World, a rescue place for chimps, orangutans and other monkeys. 

They teach the bigger apes to give a certain part of their body for examination. It might be an arm or leg, butt or mouth. It has certainly made life easier for the keepers and the animals.


----------



## jaydee

@Smilie
You need to take a deep breath and step back
I don't think anyone has accused you of failing your horses because you don't use clicker training
I don't think anyone has dismissed the idea of using '-R' when needed
I don't think anyone has said that if you don't use CT you'll somehow fail your horse


I'd never used CT until a couple of years ago and knew little to nothing about it but when nothing seemed to be really working with Lou as well as I needed it too I decided to give it a try and was amazed at how successful it was. She's at a 'place' now where I rarely need to use it but should a situation arise where I might it's there in my 'toolbox' to pull out.


You know I can recall a time not so far back on this forum when if anyone dared suggest they use treats as part of training or even used treats at all they were jumped on from a great height - I'm really pleased that the wheel has turned so to speak.


----------



## Smilie

Sorry, no intention to upset anyone, and perhaps I over reacted, when it seemed that if I did not embrace clicker training, I failed the'much better way/connection, bond with my horses, staying in the 'dark ages'
I do think it has application, esp for abused horses, and that blog was rather stupid to post, although the one by the person, who teaches clicker training, and some fall outs , if not used correctly, has merit
Dr Sid Gustafavson is also everyone who cares about the total welfare of horses, should take time to read. Not all ultimate /ideal things for horses, is always practical to apply, with what we wish to do with them, but that does not change the fact that they are basic truths
I listened to the first feed backs on foal imprinting, as per Dr Millar, and at the time, it was considered the next best thing to apple pie. Years later, , more data, research , swung opinions in the other direction
I do not think that there are enough clicker trained horses out there, at this time, to really make the judgement that it should be a tool for all horses, and not just for abused horses, or for liberty work
Time will tell, and I accept it works well for those that chose to use it correctly, reserving the right to not be in subliminal way, at least have it suggested if you don't use it, you have failed to 'embrace the better way'


----------



## Smilie

My apologies for posting that blog, 
Yes, I did get on a track, due to the implication that if you didn't use clicker training, 'you failed to use a better way'-ie were caught in the unenlightened dark ages of horse handling.
I see where it has application, esp on abused horses and for liberty work, used correctly
I do think, that just like Imprint training, we need more time and data to see if using clicker training creates better horses, in the long run.
When imprint Training was first introduced by Dr Miller, many jumped on that band wagon as being the most enlightened way to train foals. With more time, data, views swung in the other direction.
Not saying this is the case with clicker training horses, but still time for an open mind, before reaching a final conclusion that it would benefit all horses
I do think the link by the person that teaches clicker training, has some valuable information, or what can go wrong, same as when using join up or 'round penning incorrectly
I am quite fine with accepting many here find clicker training beneficial, long as not using it, means you apply no R+ to your horses


----------



## tinyliny

Hondo said:


> ....but any adjustment should remain below the fear threshold.
> 
> My experience with Hondo and Rimmey is pretty much the same. I can swing my hands wildly all around Hondo's head and he just ignores me.
> 
> At first with Rimmey, I had to keep my hands extremely slow around his head. When the two were close and Rimmey was watching, I'd go do all kinds of crazy stuff around Hondo's head.
> 
> Rimmey is a lot better but he'll still get frightened before Hondo.
> 
> *That is one reason I've decided not to do any sacking. I just have an "aversion" to being a fear causer. I know they eventually desensitise but I also believe they will remember the fear I caused. It might become a fading question mark in their mind, but a question mark never-the -less.*



I realize the discussion has moved on, and that I've not contributed much (too rancourous for me) . . . but, with regard to this comment, the whole point of sacking out a horse, or desensitizing them to anything that causes them fear is to bring them to a place where it no longer causes fear. Then, you leave them alone. they will have experienced fear at your hands, but since you stuck with it, and you brought them to the point where they could see that nothing bad happened, that should be what they come away with; that in/with you, scary things can happen, but nothing BAD, not the the bad thing they fear (being eaten, or trapped) happened. with you, they can go through fear and out the other side.

that is what one would hope to bring the horse by desensitizing.


----------



## jaydee

I sometimes find it easier to take a gentler approach to 'getting horses used to stuff' than going full tilt at it and forcing the issue
It's another of those things I suppose where if done correctly its great but if the timing is just that bit out then it turns into a traumatic experience
Some of our horses were cautious of the little rechargeable leaf blower I use to 'sweep' the barn with when I first got it and would stand at the back of their stables all bulging eyes and snorting but after a couple of weeks of them observing from a safe distance you could blow around their legs and they'd carry on eating - they just figured it out for themselves.


----------



## Foxhunter

When I designed the new barn I put a lot of thought into it. The best thing was that the babies were all in the loose area and with the design being very open, they could all see what was going on from me clipping in the aisle to the farrier working at the end of the barn. I used the ATV for mucking out so that went up the aisle and also the feed was taken out to the fields in it so they looked on that as meals on wheels. The tractors with big loaders would remove the muck heap and drive past their big door and they would soon be hanging out watching. 

It helped that the older horses ignored things going on and most of the babies had the clippers under their chins when they tried to help me clip. 

I had the horse blame me for spooky things, like going into the loose barn carrying a big umbrella, kicking a football around, kids riding their bikes through the barn. When a sheet of corrugated iron blew across the yards the youngsters rushed to see what it was. The dogs also helped, geese wandering around all helped greatly with making them more curious than afraid.


----------



## jaydee

I really do believe that constant exposure is the best way to train horses to deal with things. If you tip toe around them they're far more likely to be timid and nervy


----------



## Hondo

@tinyliny Yep, I do understand what you say and most would agree.

But there are those that do not. Horse people not agreeing? Now that's a surprise! 

Cherie for one on this board doesn't sack. There are published trainers who don't sack.

Many say the best thing to avoid a spooky horse is to create confidence and trust with the horse.

My worry is that any memory of me causing fear "could" "possibly" lower that trust and confidence in me or at least delay the formation.

I of course have no evidence that my worry is founded, haven't read any research, studies, etc.

Cause no fear, is just one of MY rules for ME.

And Hondo is a few hundred percent better at spooking than 2 years ago. I could be the inordinate amount of just time I spend with him, which I'm sure that helps, but the little bit of sacking I did try didn't appear to be leading to positive results..........for Hondo and I.

Others mileage may vary, as always.

........................................................................................................................................

There is something @bsms mentioned way way back that has been chewing on me that I want to comment on. I've forgotten the exact quote but it was on the order that R/+- and it's application didn't matter as much as what came after it with several agreeing.

I'm not in disagreement, but I do think HOW the R+, R- was applied may well determine what needs to come AFTER the R+-. Those two phases, if the first exist, go very much hand in hand.

my 2c


----------



## Smilie

t my age, it is making sure that the horses I have left are cared for correctly, should I suddenly go to those greener pastures myself.
Yes, horse people that arr passionate about horses, are going to disagree, and typing in anger, is not good for anyone, so I regret doing that, as it made me less then professional.
On the other hand, this is a public forum, and there needs to be a balance, esp for anyone new to horses, just dropping in
I completely agree that clicker training, used correctly, can be a great tool, HOWEVER, for someone like Hondo, to then extrapolate it is okay to randomly feed hand treats, be a human vending
machine, never demand a horse to do anything, is also not correct, and does a disservice, to anyone new to horses, taking that as a general good advise
Sure, all of us, including myself, do feed hand treats, but that does not mean it should be projected as a good thing to do, for everyone that handles horses, and enough data confirms this.
In the end, it is not people on forums, as Hondo, mentioned, that vindicate anything you do with horses, but rather the horse himself. If your horses are happy, you know how to use the correct balance of R+ and R-, that horse is a reliable partner, then you are on the right track, regardless of labels
Fa ras horses being pets, versus livestock, again really does not matter, as my horses, now that I am no longer raising them, selling horses, are most likely pets, as my special; horses have always been pets, if you come right down to it, but that does not mean in the derogatory sense, where that animal has blind love directed towards it, diluting any respect
It sure as heck matters to those raising horses, as to whether horses are classified as pets or livestock, far as any government assistance, when times get tough
When we had a very severe couple of years of drought, and our government assisted live stock producers, with money towards hay, the only horse people that were included in any funding, were PMU ranchers
Sure, you can say, that has no impact of you and your horses, but it does impact the overall welfare of horses
Anyway, I think a good balance, based on experience, and an end product of happy healthy horses, requires no labels. You use what creates those horses, as in the end, and in the words of Chris Irwin, 'horses don't lie'


----------



## Hondo

Smilie, I respectfully and formally request that you refrain from such comments as, "for someone like Hondo, to then extrapolate it is okay to randomly feed hand treats, be a human vending machine, never demand a horse to do anything", in connection with your negative comments. Please stick to your opinions about specifics only.

I view the context of your comment as a blatant personal attack on me which is not only against the spirit of this forum but I believe may be a violation of the rules, "comments said with the intent of hurting another user".

We had a long discussion about what demand meant to various people. Demand to me had meant an increase in pressure until a proper response was made including whipping and other means of pain. In that context I still refuse to demand.

I'm certain if everyone viewed all of my actions I would be considered a vending machine by many. So did the people at Ronald Reagan's meeting table. For a long time, every time I succeeded in getting one of Rimmey's feet 6 inches off the ground he got a LuvIt treat. Now he sometimes lifts and upturns his foot before I even bend over.

People on the ranch regard me as a human vending machine.

Well hey, what about people who give the horses hay? Human hay machines?

I'm working with two horses that no one here wants to ride. And they are doing ok with me. Better than ok.

So what happened to, "Well Hondo, it looks like whatever you're doing is working so keep doing it"?

I "extrapolated" from clicker training? Where do you come up with this stuff? I've never done clicker training. I understand how it works but that's it. So where did you get this? 

As far as randomly giving treats, YOU are the only person on this thread that has claimed to give random treats. YOU. Not I or anyone else. Go back and read your own posts.

There was a discussion on tapering off treats after a behavior has been established. That was in another thread. There was scientific evidence that if the reward was tapered off in a random fashion the behavior did not extinguish as it would if the treat were abruptly stopped. You must have not been clear on exactly how that worked because you have mentioned other times than just on this thread , "I give treats randomly".

I wish there was a way I could help you.


----------



## loosie

jaydee said:


> I really do believe that constant exposure is the best way to train horses to deal with things. If you tip toe around them they're far more likely to be timid and nervy


Yes, drives me to distraction when I get a client who says 'don't raise your arm, your voice, put your tools down softly, because my horse won't cope otherwise' or some such. or 'keep a hand on him at all times, he will get upset if you don't' or 'he won't let you pick up a foot unless you do xyz'... Of course I'm not in the habit of chucking things around, grabbing at horses, waving like a madwoman... well, when working with other's horses, anyway  but some people make it difficult to even do my job in a normal way, because of restrictions THEY believe their horses should have. I also find it very... interesting that while they're around, the horse may well be a bit edgy with anything remotely abrupt. But if I can con them into going & getting me a drink, funny, but the horse copes fine in absence with my 'normal' behaviour. ;-)


----------



## tinyliny

I think we should start a club for 'human vending machines'. I'd be a founding member, though I describe my treat dispensing more as the "human Pez dispenser"; the way I tuck the alfalfa rolls into a fanny pack, or (God Forbid) into my bra (I often have no pockets). Makes saddling a cinchy horse so much nicer for both of us.


----------



## loosie

tinyliny said:


> but, with regard to this comment, the whole point of sacking out a horse, or desensitizing them to anything that causes them fear is to bring them to a place where it no longer causes fear..


I think, as with most things, it depends *how* it's done & with how much/little empathy/consideration for the beastie. I'm no doubt preaching to the choir for the vast majority, in what I write below, but for the sake of anyone who may not have learned/experienced/thought about the differences...

For fear of upsetting people with more behavioural 'speak':hide: The still common methods of 'sacking out' & the likes would commonly come under the behavioural heading of 'flooding'. That is, you tie up, tie down, or otherwise restrict the horse, and then force him to put up with the 'scary' thing, for as long as it takes, until the horse stops reacting & is calm. It is also the way that many 'cowboys' broke in horses in the old days(& sometimes still do 'out back') - just tack 'em up, get on & ride the bucks out until the horse 'submits'. That sort of practice, IMO should be 'retired' as an antiquated idea. It is natural for an animal(particularly a prey animal, I think) to fight for it's life(as it may perceive the situation), until it reaches a point of hopelessness. At which case endorphins kick in & allow the animal to relax, to be far less aware/feeling of the situation. That's because if you've been attacked by lions & there's no hope of excape, Mother Nature is kind enough to provide some means of reducing the suffering of being eaten alive!

While 'flooding' can very well work for desensitising horses, it frequently only causes them to 'shut down' mentally, to be 'shell shocked', to become nearly 'catatonic' in some situations. It can also cause a horse to be 'good as gold' until 'suddenly, out of the blue, for no reason at all, he just went berserk!' I think that is where the belief that you can't leave a horse for months without being ridden, or they'll 'go feral' comes from. 

I think it's safe to anthropomorphise here, to better understand. And the term 'shell shocked' comes from that. Think about how you'd feel, as a claustrophobic if you were just forced into a cupboard & locked in. Or an arachnophobe locked into a room teaming with spiders... there are far better ways to help people over their fears, and those tactics very frequently only cause further neuroses in people too.

A more understanding way of 'sacking out' would be to use the behavioural tactic of 'approach & retreat'. That is, to introduce a 'scary' in such a way that it only mildly bothers the horse. At an intensity/distance that the horse is uncomfortable but not downright frightened of. And then the stimuli is taken away - or the horse is. This is done repeatedly until the horse is no longer uncomfortable with it at all, before the intensity is *gradually* ramped up, and the horse is desensitised to that level. Much better than being 'thrown in the deep end' and the emotions/associations with fear/terror, and their associations with people and restraint are also avoided. 

Back to using +R... if when an animal is frightened, you offer them treats or such, it's common that they won't even take it, may not even 'notice' you have treats. They're far too preoccupied with self preservation. Anthropomorphising, I'm sure you can relate to the comment "no amount of money would make me..." I've even known of dogs & horses to whom treats became an aversive because they'd been associated strongly with scary situations! 

But if the 'scary' can be kept low key enough, offering Something Good will really help speed the desensitisation process along & change the association to Good Feelings.


----------



## loosie

Hondo said:


> Cherie for one on this board doesn't sack. There are published trainers who don't sack.
> 
> Many say the best thing to avoid a spooky horse is to create confidence and trust with the horse.
> 
> My worry is that any memory of me causing fear "could" "possibly" lower that trust and confidence in me or at least delay the formation.
> 
> I of course have no evidence that my worry is founded, haven't read any research, studies, etc.


Cherie does use 'flooding' tactics though, such as tying up a horse alone & letting it just 'stew' until it 'submits'. I don't personally like that approach, avoid the 'sink or swim' approaches, but of course, in the human world, horses very often have to be gotten over stuff in a hurry & their underlying attitude/emotion about it is of secondary importance. So I don't at all condemn others using those sort of approaches in different situations.

I'm positive I've read of behavioural studies that show what you're saying(which is what I feel too) is indeed valid. That the best way to create confidence and trust from your horse in yourself, is to avoid forcing them into situations which cause fear. And regardless of any studies done, I believe experience bears this out. The more you can use 'approach & retreat' to take the horse to *the edge* of fear and prove you're in control and won't let it get too much for him, the more he starts to generalise & look to you in situations that are scary.


----------



## loosie

tinyliny said:


> I think we should start a club for 'human vending machines'. I'd be a founding member, though I describe my treat dispensing more as the "human Pez dispenser"; the way I tuck the alfalfa rolls into a fanny pack, or (God Forbid) into my bra (I often have no pockets). Makes saddling a cinchy horse so much nicer for both of us.


Haha! It's good to hear I'm not the only one that does that kind of thing! Gets tricky when you've got dogs in training at the same time... oops wrong pocket & the horse gets a chicken giblet!:falloff:

And while I think of myself more as a 'poker machine' in that way - not predictable - you do have to put money in the slot for either of them, and the way my horses have trained their 'treat machines' is to have 'good manners' & do other things they know 'pleases' me. Therefore they develop a very strong 'desire to please' ;-)


----------



## tinyliny

Well, I use the reward if a tiny treat with each time I raise the girth, buuuuut, horse cannot reach around for it. He must have his head facing forward 'waiting for me to make a click sound, then bring the treat to his mouth and immediately raise the girth tighter. 

If I give a treat T the end of out ride , I have trained X to back a step or two away from me before I reach forward to give hi his treat. The poor guy will often look at me earnestly, than sort of bow his head and start backing away from me randomly. I guess it works often enough for himtomkeep trying.


----------



## Foxhunter

I a man not a great one for treats but where we rode at this time of the year there were lots of apple trees hanging over the trail so I would often pick some, I would eat one and give the horse I was riding a bite. 

Bit more tricky where there were two plum trees, to get the best fruit involved shortening the stirrups to flat jockey length and standing in them! Pockets filled we would ride on. The horses all liked plums too and would eat then and spit out the stones. 

I trained the horses to go into the correct stable with a carrot or two in the manger, I would let them in one at a time, if they went into the wrong stable there was no carrot, I would put them in the right dorection and they found a carrot so, they sooon learned to go straight to their own stable. 

When their were children around they would take carrots and give them to the horses in the stables, every horse knew to take them gently feeling for little fingers making sure they were out the way before taking the carrot. 

Non of them were working for their treats any more than I worked for a gift of a bar of chocolate.


----------



## Bondre

loosie said:


> the way my horses have trained their 'treat machines' is to have 'good manners' & do other things they know 'pleases' me. Therefore they develop a very strong 'desire to please' ;-)


This is the big difference I've noticed with my horse since adding R+ methods to our groundwork and riding. I do clicker training with her, and now my horse Is hugely enthusiastic to please me, whereas before she was merely willing. I started this because she had a major balking issue which I was unable to make any headway with and in fact was probably making worse by attempting to resolve it using pressure and release. I would put the pressure on, she would refuse, and I would have to up the ante or back down. I tried increasing the pressure to my own comfortable limit once, and would have pushed her into rearing if I had continued, so I decided I needed a new tactic and started R+. Before the balking started she was willing and compliant; then she became unwilling and defiant; and thanks to using R+ she is now becoming enthusiastically compliant. 

But it's compliance with a difference - it's thinking compliance now. Instead of going along with my ideas because she doesn't see any reason not to, like before, I now get the feeling that she is weighing up my suggestions and making decisions. I have read this many times about clicker training - that your horse will start to think for himself (and best not start if you don't want a thinking horse!) and I'm pleased to say that it's true. 

Of course, clicker training is not the only way to stimulate your horse to think. Any type of training that offers choices to the horse will promote independent thought rather than just looking to the leader for guidance. Bsms has written frequently about this based on his experiences with Bandit. Some people might not like a thinking horse, and admittedly it can make things go slower, as on occasions she stops while she thinks something out. But this is ok by me, within reasonable limits, and thanks to the R+ training she is more likely to come round to my point of view as I well sometimes give her a treat for making the 'right' decision. 

To start off with I had to take the treat bag on every ride, and reward every tiny attempt to move forward. We had frequent halts for thought. I never increased the pressure on her when she stopped - merely gave her a nudge with the legs to remind her I wanted forward, and then wait for her to be ready. Over time the halts for thought have become less and less frequent and she has regained the desire for forward which she had lost so completely. 

I have also used clicker training for teaching her to stand still for mounting, which I know can be done by R- methods but is so much more fun for us both using R+. When I mount up and haven't brought the tret bag, she looks round for her treat and then says 'oh yeah, forgotten again have you, and now you want to palm me off with a scratch on the neck but it just isn't quite the same'. ;-)


----------



## Hondo

@loosie Woke up to some really good posts this morning! I particularly liked the idea you mentioned about taking the horse up to the edge, but not into, fear and then backing off.

That is pretty much what I did with Rimmey's feet and poll. Even before I touched his feet or poll I would watch for any sign of nervousness and back off when nervousness was detected accompanied by lots of TLC and perhaps a treat.

And over time I was just able to farther and farther without nervousness.

So in that sense, I guess I do some sacking short of fear. But certainly no flooding. Didn't know that term. Very descriptive.


----------



## jaydee

Horses have far more intuition and ability to figure things out than a lot of people give them credit for - or in some cases will allow them to do for themselves. If you micro-manage them all the time they become rather too robotic for my liking but I suppose for nervous or novice riders that's more desirable


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

I "sack" out my horses but I have noticed a huge difference in the ones that we trained up from the start and the ones we acquired pre-trained. We didn't ride them for the first six or so months we had them and only did ground work, which included exploring all sorts of things.









The horses that we trained up will see me holding something strange and new and approach me to smell, nudge maybe even lip at it. Once their curiosity is satisfied and they relax, they will let us do anything with it. 

The horses that came pre- trained tend to move away first and are loathe to explore the object even if I am holding them on a halter so they cannot move away.

Small sample so it could be just coincidental (perhaps I simply choose those kinds of horses) or it could be part of that overall "attitude" which has been developed with time that I spoke of earlier. 

Curiosity is something I highly value in a trail horse. 

Of course it can also get a horse in trouble like when a small, strange black and white creature goes waddling across the pasture and the horse must absolutely go up and check it out. Then the peoples come back and say "Oooooh! You stink!" and proceed to give you multiple baths!


----------



## Hondo

@Smilie In your support I will recognize you are here and arguing. Many from a past era would not even suffer to be here listening to some of what is being said.

So based on that, your mind may possibly be more open to considerations of learning based change than some of those that would not even be here.


----------



## Bondre

Hondo said:


> But certainly no flooding. Didn't know that term. Very descriptive.


Here's an nice article I just read on flooding. 
https://clickerhappyhorse.wordpress...-training-what-it-is-and-how-to-recognise-it/


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

Bondre said:


> Here's an nice article I just read on flooding.
> https://clickerhappyhorse.wordpress...-training-what-it-is-and-how-to-recognise-it/



Thanks for posting that, I think it serves to have us take a second look at what we are really doing when we ask for certain things from our horses.

I do have to bring this up in the vein of being intellectually honest though.


IMO, I think the context of the example that she used of learned helplessness could be easily misunderstood. 

"A feeling of permanent helplessness which typically arises after exposure to an unpleasant event or stimuli which the person observing or involved usually doesn't have any control over their participation."

The reason I underlined those two words is because it is usually stimuli specific. In other words, if a horse sees a sign he has learned to not even freeze up in the first place because there is no point to it. Therefore a horse who has learned helplessness will not display a visible reaction in the first place. So what she is exemplifying is the process of creating a horse who will learn helplessness rather than one that is already there when he freezes up. If I didn't explain that well enough, let me know. 

Again, with her use of the word “flooding” in the examples she selected; the introduction to the stimulus she used in her example is gradual, not traumatic and generally there is not already a learned, pre-existing true fear, simply a learned aversion. It is more akin to what is called aversion therapy whereby there are stimulus situations and associated behavior patterns that are attractive to the client (horse), but which the therapist (trainer) and the client (horse) both regard as undesirable. Think of an alcoholic that is made to sit inches from a bottle of beer and each time it appears he thinks about drinking it, he receives an electric shock. 

Typically flooding is more like what an idiot barn owner’s wife I know did with one of the lesson horses. The horse was scared of plastic bags so she locked the horse in a stall overnight where she had hung bags all over. The horse could not physically escape. 

Rather than learned helplessness though, the result of flooding was a horse who proceeded to run her over in absolute panic the second that she opened the stall door the next morning. Her husband found her unconscious in the stall hours later. 

Given the first chance to escape, the horse did precisely that and developed an even more heightened fear of bags as a result. Learned helplessness is not always the inevitable consequence of flooding, which is why flooding is a risky thing to use and is rarely used today to help with true phobias. 

Just my two cents.


----------



## Hondo

Oh Wow! Thank you Bondre for the article and thank you RCD for the comments. The video was similar to working with Rimmey's feet except it took me a lot longer. Of course Rimmey was having to unlearn stuff.

The fact that the food does more than just a reward but in fact produces a more receptive and relaxed mind is so important, thanks to another post by RCD.

I wanna tell ya, there have been lots of strong feelings and stressful back and forths but there is a ton of information scattered throughout these pages. I am so behind on all this having spent most of my waking hours on feet the last two years. BTW, I can now after two years finally see that definite upflip of the toe on Hondo's fronts just before foot fall. Just recently.

Oh, and I would be remiss without thanking loosie for mentioning flooding in the first place which gave some structure to what I opposed by instinct but didn't have a technical reason for my feelings.

Looking like NH needs to step back and re-examine at least a couple of their procedures.


----------



## jaydee

If someone shut me up in a room full of frogs and toads I would either have died of a heart attack by the time they opened the door or I'd be up on a murder charge once I caught the person responsible!!!


----------



## bsms

jaydee said:


> ...Some of our horses were cautious of the little rechargeable leaf blower I use to 'sweep' the barn with when I first got it and would stand at the back of their stables all bulging eyes and snorting but after a couple of weeks of them observing from a safe distance you could blow around their legs and they'd carry on eating - they just figured it out for themselves.


There is a double trailer - a smaller trailer inside a larger trailer - with a couple of leaky gas cans parked on the road about 1/2 mile from me. The first time Bandit saw it, he refused. I ended up dismounting and leading him, but he wasn't convinced. Not really. So the next 3-4 times, we rode near it but turned away before getting there.

Yesterday, we rode there with Trooper. Trooper ignored the double trailer. Bandit kept Trooper between himself and the trailer...then stopped to eat grass about 5 feet past the trailer.

Had I pushed him, it would have become traumatic. By letting him see it a few times, getting a little closer but never very close...and then having Trooper near by...I think Bandit has now decided it is OK. And that may help a few months from now, when we next see a strange looking trailer or there are leaky gas cans making things smell bad.

I've spent 17 months trying to lay a foundation of "Talk to me. We will do it together, or not at all. You are never alone." That hasn't completely overwritten his "Just do it - or else!" experiences...but yesterday's ride was bitless, and he went past on slack reins. He's 8. Even if it takes me another year or two to get a truly solid foundation laid, I'll still have 15+ years of riding ahead (Lord willing)!

I cannot make him confident. I can give him chances to succeed, and let HIM teach himself confidence - in himself, and in me. And if it takes 2-3 years, but I can get 15 back in a trustworthy horse, it is a geat investment.


----------



## Smilie

Hondo said:


> @Smilie In your support I will recognize you are here and arguing. Many from a past era would not even suffer to be here listening to some of what is being said.
> 
> So based on that, your mind may possibly be more open to considerations of learning based change than some of those that would not even be here.


Hondo, I am very open to new things, and do treat my horses. My comment was not an attack on you, as you, like many here, myself included, treat our horses, knowing them, aware of making sure the horse does not become food aggressive
However, this is a public forum, where many with entry level horse experience,read posts,and the fact remains, it becomes 'do as I say, not as I do', far as projecting basic safe horse handling, and that was my point.
If you read any basic horse safety handling principles, as taught a 4H, pony club, hand feeding treats, is recommended against
I mean, we all can go into a long list of things we do with our horses, because we trust and know them, that are not exactly things you publicly endorse, far as safe horse handling 
Far as sacking out, I believe I do way, way less then many here. I don't make walking over tarps, hanging tarps over horses, as any part of my training routine. I sure don't flood horses. I have learned to maybe lunge them with a slicker, before actually needing to ride them with one, on a trail ride for the first time
I am in the camp that you can never sack a horse out to everything he might ever encounter, and that body control, trust, will get you through, way better then trying to expose a horse to everything they might encounter.
You don't know me, so you might be surprised as to how enlightened I actually am.
I mean, I too can say, hey- I give Charlie some horse cookies, kiss her on the nose, ect, but that is not what should be projected as accepted safe horse handling. It is exceptions, horse people make, with their horses, just like riding without a helmet,in my case, on horses I trust
Fact also remains, as I read in statistics in H& R once, that more people are seriously hurt, by skipping basic safe horse handling, on horses they trust, then by people riding colts or green horses. The article then gave several examples, where people got seriously hurt with horses they trusted, because they skipped steps they would not have, on a green horse, just through a fluke accident
Sorry, that article is just logged in my memory, and not at my finger tips


----------



## Smilie

Who here recommended flooding?
There is a difference in teaching a horse to dampen his reaction to random motion and flooding, Stacy Westfall gave a good example of how to do that, with a reactive horse
All she did, was lead the horse on a loose lead shank, while flipping a lunge whip , back and forth, hitting the ground in front of her, each side, back and forth, in rhythmic manner. At first , the horse would react, each time that lunge whip hit the ground, but eventually, barely reacted, lulled by that rhymis motion.
Once that was accomplished, she would throw in a radome hard strike on one side, then go back to that rhythmic back and forth. At first, the horse would react strongly to that hard strike, then react less and less.
I'm sure you have watched Buck B, who seems to enjoy general endorsement here. You will see how he uses that desensitization, to a mild degree, to cause relaxation
When you first get on a colt, very common to just lightly bump those stirrups on either side- that is a form of sacking out. If you never got on colts, then you don't need to do even light sacking out.
Sacking out, is not as in the good ole west, where a horse was hobbled or snubbed up, and then 'flooded;
I don't believe in Imprint Training, which is a prime example of flooding, so why in the heck would any good trainer use it?
At the same time, I have seen people bucked off, because they hauled some plastic sandwich bag out of their saddle bag, for the first time on a green colt
One guy, got bucked off, simply because he never had saddle bags on his horse, and we left camp at a trot


----------



## Rains play

IMO any tool you use should be used as an extention of your hand/body not a weapon. So if you use a lariat or a stick it should be just the extention of your hand. 
When RPing a horse I always apply pressure with my body language. Where I stand, where I look determines where I want the horse to move. When round penning I am asking and he is answering. I have to set the horse up to give me proper answers so I make the wrong answer harder than the right one and that makes us both happy. A horse will normally want to give the right answer because it's easy and horses are lazy.
Sometimes the hard way is the extention of my hand applies more pressure so he can see and go where there is less pressure. 
If you look at how hard a horse plays with another in the wild, "popping" him with a lariat in the hip is nothing.


----------



## gottatrot

Mostly the only flooding I use anymore is flooding with treats. :grin:

John Lyons is a proponent of gradually increasing the difficulty of what you expose a horse to rather than using flooding. In a way, however, this technique can become a type of flooding because you expose the horse to many things in the course of a session. I couldn't keep a horse's attention long enough to do that, so don't use much of his methods. The one time I've found flooding helpful is in getting a horse used to clippers. I believe most horses think you are sending a giant insect at them, and they just have to figure out this insect doesn't have a stinger and won't fly in their ears. 

I've seen horses raised from a foal by owners who introduce them to everything and teach them that nothing will harm them. The first horse an owner did this with was a very mellow, low energy QH and she ended up bomb proof, great with kids, anyone could ride bareback. The second horse was the first horse's daughter, and she had a bit more energy and became very bold. She learned nothing could ever harm her and would break out of electric fences, rip apart blankets, was aggressive with other horses (and would try things with humans), and trusted her own judgment completely. Although rarely frightened, if she did react under saddle, she did not listen well to the rider. 

I'm not saying the owner was wrong to try to introduce a horse to everything and create a bomb proof horse. But I wonder with some personalities if leaving some doubt in their mind is helpful. Is the world completely safe? Perhaps if I wanted to, I _could_ harm you with this lunge whip. I'm not going to whip you with it, but it's kind of scary, right? Rather than showing the horse that it doesn't hurt, nothing hurts much, and you can bull your way through anything. If I have to choose, I will take a horse that is spooky and will move too much over a horse that fears nothing and will not move his feet.

So my point is that we must take into consideration the temperament of the horse, and some horses need to learn confidence and trust, and these horses don't ever need to feel pain or experience fear at our hand. 
Other horses are so confident they may be aggressive if we don't teach them that we are a predator, we might have sharp teeth that could hurt them, and they need to listen to us. 
I shouldn't really say "confident," because some horses like Halla are more bluffers and are only trying to be safe in an insecure world. So that's another thing we have to consider. Is the horse afraid inside and just trying to take charge to feel safe? Would they really prefer that someone else had the job? 

Those are actually easier than the horses (rare) who feel they are the best leader for the job, and you are not. Those horses DO NOT need their confidence built up. They may need treats as incentive to listen, and they do need to feel the environment is positive or they will write you off. But what incentive can we give the dictator/narcissist horse to work with us? It sometimes has to come down to "I'm a bigger horse than you are so you must listen to what I say." After all, in the natural world these horses would always end up in charge of everyone else. We have to prove to them that somehow even though they were born to be the big boss, we can be in charge of them. 

My point is, I'm with @Hondo and don't want to have to create fear in a horse. And most horses I choose to work with are naturally spooky and require confidence building. That's what I prefer. But I have met horses that have no fear, have learned that nothing can harm them, and they have a strong drive to be in charge of everyone. With these horses, you must sometimes use harsher methods. I draw the line at anything that could physically damage a horse, meaning bleeding, bruising, scraped off hair, etc. But sometimes I've had to actually smack with the rope or my hand or sting with the end of the lunge whip. I've had to get very loud and aggressive. This was necessary for the safety of the humans and also the well being of the horse. So I won't say I'll "never" cause pain. I won't cause damage, but I will cause pain. I'm saying this as a human who required actual spankings as a child to keep me in line, because I was strong willed and stubborn myself. I thank my parents for teaching me that I wasn't in charge of everything, and that the world can hurt sometimes. Some horses need these lessons too.


----------



## Hondo

Rains play said:


> If you look at how hard a horse plays with another in the wild, "popping" him with a lariat in the hip is nothing.


I question, and only question, whether that is a valid comparison. If two humans, say boys, are "horsing" around with each other, just playing, but kinda rough, and they are the same age, size, and so on, then play is play.

But if one is 13, 110 pounds and the other is 21, 215 pounds, it's not even stephen. And so the horse "may" look at a pop in the hinney as a lot more fearful and stressful than a forceful chomp from a pasture mate.

Just my hipshot thoughts when reading.........


----------



## Hondo

@Smilie Organizations like 4H have deep pockets and must take care lest they encounter a lawsuit.


----------



## Hondo

@gottatrot

Agreed. The five rules I made up for myself in a previous post included that aggression towards a human in order to establish dominance must be punished and that punishment should include pain. Quite a bit in fact.

FLOODING: Wouldn't you know it. I may be right in the midst of flooding as I type. Indications are that Rimmey will never be mine. So I brought Dragon into the field with Hondo and Rimmey. He was my second choice and is available. He is around five and a gelding. Very people friendly and but very high fear.

His mother is Molly, the lead mare and his dad is a registered quarter horse with blood lines to One Eyed Jack, or was it Two Eyed Jack.

Anyhow, he is out there now wanting to go back to the herd although he knows Rimmey and Hondo well who are in the pen right now munching down. I tried to coax Dragon in but he is not ready. I try again every day just by coaxing. With treats? Of course!

So anyhow, it just dawned on me that he is locked in this tiny 60 acre field that he can't get out of and back to the larger safety of the larger herd.

If this is a flooding event, I'm not sure how to avoid it.


----------



## Smilie

Confused. Where did flooding ever come in? Admit to not having read everything.

Far as feeding hand treats, lets separate using food rewards, with timing, a target, as in clicker training, with just random food rewards
Sure, many of us hand treat our horses, myself included, but I never bribe ahrose with food, and when I do hand treat, I realize that I am chosing to work outside of accepted safe horse handling practice, versus trying to justify it onto itself. This is due in part to my experience, and knowing my horses, but that does not mean I would feel justified in recommending it Carte Blanche , esp to people new to horses
I believe I stated upteen times that a fearful horse learns nothing, so why go there?
I let my granddaughter hand feed Smilie and Charlie, as I know both mares, and am there when they do so. Does not mean I would ever tell my granddaughter to hand feed a strange horse
How many posts have we had here, where someone bought a horse, that had been hand fed, and that either was nippy, or down right dangerous, running other horses over that food provider, or chasing them off with flying heels, not particular as to where those heels landed? It is fine to do it with your own horses, knowing them, and quite another to pass it on as accepted hrose handling in general. 
Tonight, I took Carmen for a quick ride, in the canola field next door, which is cut, but not combined, thus high wind rows. It was nippy, but tomorrow more snow-so as I try to keep three horses ridden, it was her turn
She has spent the day in the corral, as the grass is still very green, so I limit her to part time turnout. Never want to go the founder route again!
Anyway, she was eager to go, yet trotted and loped on aloose rein, with the dog running in and out those rows. She suddenly stopped, and tensed. Being a prey species, she had seen slight moment in the trees that boarder that field. She did not try to leave, and soon I saw the two deer, coming out of those trees. Soon as she saw they were just deer, she relaxed ,and continued home on aloose rein
When I got home, I tied her in the barn isle, where I have some feed buckets hung. She got some beetpulp, while I fed Smilie and Charlie.
I then unsaddled Carmen, turned her out for the night, with a pat. Next morning, she will be easy to halter in that pasture, no food treat needed.
That relationship works for me, so tell me what is missing, or in the words of Tom Jones, 'tell me what he 'you' got, that I don't have:

My granddaughter and Charlie


----------



## Smilie

Anyonelse have problems with pages jumping around?




Yup, and my horses can be playful, seek out people











My youngest son, and daughter in law, with a two year old filly some years ago, She is now owned by the daughter of a friend of mine, where she has lived for the last 8 years, and has a lifetime home

You know nothing of how I train or interact with my horses hondo, nor do you have some relationship with Hondo that transcends anything I have with my horses.
Yes, kuddos for getting through to Hondo, earning his trust, but I have already patted you on the back, for that before!


----------



## loosie

Smilie said:


> Who here recommended flooding?


Probably the same person who recommended using c/t exclusively & the person who said -R was cruel  ;-) But seriously, I brought up 'flooding' to explain the difference between this method of 'sacking out' & (dare I say it)'better', acceptable ways, such as the egs you have given, and as I explained in my post.



> prime example of flooding, so why in the heck would any good trainer use it?


Cherie's method of 'teaching' horses to 'cope' with being out alone for eg, is 'flooding' & why I disagree personally with doing this. So saying, I do reckon 'never say never' though. I think there is even a place for conditioning 'learned helplessness', such as, for eg if a horse must put up with an emergency medical procedure. But as is suggested in that good article, it should be a 'method of last resort', something which is done because it MUST be, not by choice, IMO, if there's a better way.


----------



## loosie

gottatrot said:


> John Lyons is a proponent of gradually increasing the difficulty of what you expose a horse to rather than using flooding. In a way, however, this technique can become a type of flooding


Perhaps that's where I got the idea, many years ago that JL did indeed use 'flooding'. CA does, which is one aspect of his teaching I strongly disagree. Made me grind my teeth when I heard him say something like 'you want to scare him as much as possible & keep it up, because the more you scare him, the quieter he will get'. Of course, the horse was trapped in a round pen with the bloke... Unfortunately, I've seen a lot of 'flooding' type 'training' in the name of 'round penning'.


----------



## loosie

Smilie said:


> Far as feeding hand treats, lets separate using food rewards, with timing, a target, as in clicker training, with just random food rewards


You've been over this ad nauseum & as you have said you do not consider the reasons important, I think we should just agree to disagree on specifics. 

But I do feel the need to comment on this assumption, as something a bit different to where we've 'been' before...



> I realize that I am chosing to work outside of accepted safe horse handling practice, ... does not mean I would feel justified in recommending it Carte Blanche , esp to people new to horses


And yet, more 'accepted' is people recommending using bits, whips, spurs, etc to newbies...



> Does not mean I would ever tell my granddaughter to hand feed a strange horse ...
> that had been hand fed, and that either was nippy, or down right dangerous,


As per above comment, how many times do we see people getting in trouble with so called 'accepted safe practices' - meaning, for eg, conventional compulsive methods?? I think these comments are just blaming a 'tool' for a 'user's' failure. Yep, people do stupid or thoughtless or ignorant things all the time, but it's not the food that makes it happen, any more than putting a bit in a horse's mouth makes it rear.


----------



## jaydee

Rains play said:


> IMO any tool you use should be used as an extention of your hand/body not a weapon. So if you use a lariat or a stick it should be just the extention of your hand.
> 
> 
> If you look at how hard a horse plays with another in the wild, "popping" him with a lariat in the hip is nothing.


Yes the whip or the rope should be just an extension of your arm/hand which makes it very useful especially in the early training stages if you lunge or 'free' work your horse because you can use it to give clear direction. That also makes it important that the horse isn't afraid of the whip because you don't want him to see it as a weapon and over react and run away from it because an over reactive horse is not an easily trainable horse
With regards to the brutal way horses can treat each other compared to how we might hit them as punishment or to sharpen them up - it is one way to look at it and can put things in perspective - however you do need to consider a couple of things. 
Understanding how horses behave around each other and using natural horse behavior as a sort of 'tool' for ourselves can be useful but -
We are not horses and they know that we aren't horses. I never want a horse to treat me the way it treats other horses so I think the reverse needs to be the same.
When you watch horses together quite often horse A will give horse B a hard kick or bite to move him/her but an hour later horse B will be doing the same to horse A
Sometimes horse A decides to move horse B with a swift kick and threatening stance and horse B decides 'not today mate' and puts horse A on the ground.


----------



## bsms

loosie said:


> ...As per above comment, how many times do we see people getting in trouble with so called 'accepted safe practices' - meaning, for eg, conventional compulsive methods??...


Many accepted safe practices are like many accepted practices with horses: They survive for ages, unchallenged and untested.

It is said that some people have 40 years of experience, and others have a year of experience repeated 40 times. Certainly before the Internet, when even a very good bookstore might only have 1-2 books about riding and training, it was possible for one of those with a year of experience repeated 40 times to become the Gold Standard as a trainer. After all, Old Joe had been getting results for 40 years. Who better to learn from?

And no, I am not talking about any of the participants on this thread! There are a number of very experience riders on this thread, and each one of them is discussing ideas, not pontificating! As something of a newbie, it is nice to see experienced riders asking if there is a better way.

I like some of what Baucher taught and reject a lot more. I read a comment by a guy who knew Baucher. He said a horse who didn't respond to Baucher's method quickly was quickly and quietly sold. It seems Baucher's business model didn't include admitting failure. Having "The Method" and wowing crowds is not a new phenomena!

I'm glad I didn't take formal lessons very long. I've often seen written on HF something like, "_My horse has the entire day to eat and be lazy. When I come to ride, it is MY time, and doing what I want is the horse's JOB!'_ And when taking lessons, it normally IS "the student's time". The student is paying, and the lesson horses pay the price. It IS their job! If there are 6 students, and the instructor says trot, EVERYONE is supposed to trot! And if a horse doesn't want to, the instructor isn't likely to point out the student is bouncing so much that the horse doesn't want to trot. Or that the horse has given 3 lessons earlier in the day and is sick of trotting in circles.

In a way, I'm giving my wife lessons in riding. After nearly 30 years of marriage, I'm not going to waste my time telling her to do X or Y or Z. But she rides Cowboy, and she and Cowboy and Bandit and I go riding. She's learning to balance and move in a trot because Cowboy trots to catch up to Bandit. As she gets better at it, Cowboy is willing to trot farther and faster, and they sometimes canter now. Briefly. It is R+ motivation for Cowboy. He wants to catch up to Bandit.

And my job is to make sure we don't get too far ahead, or to see the trotting is going well and ask Bandit for a trot, because two horses trotting near each other - even side by side sometimes now - is more enjoyable for the horses. It is even worth keeping a trot going across some short rocky spots - because the horses want to do it.

I mentioned going past the trailer. I wasn't sure if Bandit would do it. I mentioned it to my wife. Her reply? 

"_So what? If he doesn't do it today, we can turn around and go home the other way. Why does it matter if he does it today or next week?_"​ 
*"So what?"*​ 
She may be new to riding, but she is also teaching me. That isn't bad advice for teaching a horse. "_So what? Why does it matter if he does it today or next week?_" I'd have stopped digging a hole with Mia, and climbed out a lot faster, if I had only asked myself, "So what?" Mia needed a solid foundation of confidence, and my training schedule and training goals didn't include giving her the time she needed. If lesson A was learned one day, we immediately went to B. Or maybe even jumped to D. And if she couldn't do D, she failed! The goals became the focus instead of the horse!

We tend to learn training by watching professional trainers. But professional trainers don't have 1 or 2 or 3 years to shape a horse. A famous Old West horse breaker said he could do a lot better with more time, but "*No one wants to put a $40 finish on a $10 horse!*" The numbers have changed, but I probably spent $2500 on a trainer for $1200 Mia after several years of floundering, and that only got Mia ready to ride in an arena. The trainer wasn't certain she would ever be safe to ride in the desert.

I think our conventional training methods are largely shaped by what it takes to turn out an acceptable product in 30, 60 or 90 days. Or to compete in a show, where the standard of judging may have nothing to do with good movement, balance, and certainly not with how much the horse is enjoying himself!

After all, _"When I come to ride, it is MY time, and doing what I want is the horse's JOB!" _*And darn it, I've been there, done that and said that!*


----------



## Smilie

yes, we have gone over the same things over and over again.
I have agreed that both R+ and R- can be used incorrectly, so why use one extreme to support the use of the other extreme, when neither are correct ?
I;m kinda proud, that horses like that filly above, sought out human friendship, while never being fed hand treats
Cheri will have to defend her own methods
i have never used flooding, didn;t buy into that Imprinting of foals, even if it was presented by a vet, and believe I have a pretty darn sensible balance between both R- and R+
The example with Stacy Westfall, is hardly flooding.
I do believe , when a horse understands a cue, is not afraid, but tells you /no', and you are sure as to what you are asking him to do, you do use' the ask, ask louder and then demand-which does not include abuse'
I don't agree with everything CA does, but the fact remains, he works with many spoiled horses, in a set time frame, and spoiled horses, versus abused horses, do need some correct strong R-, to be made un successful in performing the vise, someone though incorrect training, has taught that horse
My horses ride on a loose rein, trust me, sure as heck are relaxed and happy, so why this endless debate ?
Willing compliance, which the post was all about, is a learned behavior, through using the correct balance or R+ and R-, and by building blocks in learning
Neither forcing a hrose into a trailer, nor luring him in with treats, is willing compliance, for example. Rather the horse is taught the skills to load willingly , by first being taught how to lead with full respect,understanding how to respond to pressure, by moving away from it, thus not questioning as to where he will or will not lead or ride eventually. Trust , of course, is part of that picture, as a horse that trusts you, will learn to dampen his inborn flight response.He learns to have confidence in you as a leader, which in turn builds trust.
These principles have always worked for me, so when I give my horses a loose rein, ride off, they comply willingly, versus balking, reluctant to leave home, or rushing back, as I like to think they have a suitable partner on their back, that gives them that herd security, when they are away from their actual herd members
I am done with this post, as it goes around in endless circles , that completely miss the original post's question
A horse is not born with willing compliance, nor si it gained by just using R+ , and never applying R- at the right time, and in the correct balance/. You create good work ethics, through good training, wahtever you use-period!!


----------



## Smilie

Yes, Loosie, just because I mentioned not randomly allowing people, esp those new to horses, not to feed hand treats, then that must mean I give them whips and spurs to use!
This post is going to the the end of being ridiculous. I have always stated that no one should ever wear spurs, until they have an independant seat, never apply spurs , unless they intend to, and then only as aback up to non compliance to leg aids
I never let my kids ride with spurs, nor would not dream of handing a pair to someone that came to ride my horses. I don't trail ride with spurs, never wear spurs until a horse completely understands leg aids, seldom need to use them on a horse, as they have learned to respond to light leg alone, and are always, always given a chance to do so.
I don't ride with either bats or whips, and if I use a lunge whip, it is only as a signal, as an extension of my arm, rarely needing to touch the horse, if ever
Why would you even put in such a ridiculous statement, that if you don't condone the general feeding of random hand treats, esp by those new to horses, that might not recognize when a horse is becoming food aggressive, it must them imply you condone handing people whips and spurs and to 'go for it!
I tried to explain in a reasonable way, of using both R+ and R- in the correct balance, but it is like hitting a brick wall


----------



## Unknown

Flooding, to me, is what happens after a heavy rain. I'm not sure what this topic is about? It says "willing compliance or aversive reflex", but most of what I'm reading is about fear and what to do about it. I'm not sure I understand? What I do know is that no animal, man or beast, likes, or wants, to be afraid. That alone helps you out with horses.


----------



## Hondo

Unknown said:


> Flooding, to me, is what happens after a heavy rain. I'm not sure what this topic is about? It says "willing compliance or aversive reflex", but most of what I'm reading is about fear and what to do about it. I'm not sure I understand? What I do know is that no animal, man or beast, likes, or wants, to be afraid. That alone helps you out with horses.


Flooding, in addition to heavy rainfall, is a term used in behavior modification. I will leave the rest to Google.


----------



## Hondo

Today I recieved my copy of Dressage by Henry Wynmalen. That is the book Tom Dorrance did recommend to his students years later, as pointed out to me by bsms.

I was surprised that an old time cowboy like TD would recommend a book written for Dressage. If nothing else, I think I found the answer on page 29. Here is a partial quote. And I do believe it is part and partial to the thread topic.

Quote:

"Confidence is absolutely essential because without it the horse just cannot make a sufficient surrender of himself, mentally and physically, to learn and to absorb our teaching. Mental and physical processes are so intimately connected, that they cannot be separated.

Everyone understands that it is an essential object of our training to obtain control of the horse's voluntary actions. But it is less well understood that it is impossible to succeed in doing so with any degree of complete success, unless we gain control of his involuntary actions also. And that is much the more difficult task of the two.

Involuntary actions, or rather reactions, are called forth by the working of the horse's nervous system independently of his own free will................................."


I had to stop reading at this point and think. I got chills. I'm still thinking. This passage is not about dressage or cutting, it's about a horse.


----------



## loosie

Smilie said:


> I have agreed that both R+ and R- can be used incorrectly, so why use one extreme to support the use of the other extreme, when neither are correct ?


YOU used one 'extreme', implying hand feeding was innately dangerous & shouldn't be used because it wasn't 'accepted safe practice', which also implied the generalisation that 'accepted' methods of bits, whips, etc, etc were safer. Regarding your below post calling my suggestions ridiculous, THAT is why I gave those 'ridiculous' extremes. IMO it is just as ridiculous to suggest that 'bits cause horses to rear' as to suggest 'food causes aggression'. Or for that matter, '-R is cruel'.



> i have never used flooding, ...
> The example with Stacy Westfall, is hardly flooding.


Yes, along with the other things you keep repeating, apparently thinking' that I'm debating them, I know you already said you don't use flooding. Never said you did. I also never said I perceived the SW eg you gave was flooding, if you read what I wrote. I honestly don't get where you're 'hearing' all these arguments against all this stuff, that you feel you need to keep being so defensive & repetative about. I agree that trying to discuss it with you...



> it is like hitting a brick wall


Obviously you're just not getting what I'm talking about(I appreciate i'm not a perfect communicator) & so you're repetatively arguing stuff that I don't/never disagreed with you on, or that is irrelevant or extreme. That is why I said I think we should just agree to disagree & drop it - far too many misunderstandings to have a rational discussion.


----------



## Smilie

loosie said:


> YOU used one 'extreme', implying hand feeding was innately dangerous & shouldn't be used because it wasn't 'accepted safe practice', which also implied the generalisation that 'accepted' methods of bits, whips, etc, etc were safer. Regarding your below post calling my suggestions ridiculous, THAT is why I gave those 'ridiculous' extremes. IMO it is just as ridiculous to suggest that 'bits cause horses to rear' as to suggest 'food causes aggression'. Or for that matter, '-R is cruel'.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, along with the other things you keep repeating, apparently thinking' that I'm debating them, I know you already said you don't use flooding. Never said you did. I also never said I perceived the SW eg you gave was flooding, if you read what I wrote. I honestly don't get where you're 'hearing' all these arguments against all this stuff, that you feel you need to keep being so defensive & repetative about. I agree that trying to discuss it with you...
> 
> 
> 
> Obviously you're just not getting what I'm talking about(I appreciate i'm not a perfect communicator) & so you're repetatively arguing stuff that I don't/never disagreed with you on, or that is irrelevant or extreme. That is why I said I think we should just agree to disagree & drop it - far too many misunderstandings to have a rational discussion.


Well, I do agree that we lack communicating with each other , as you have mis took many things I have said, same as the reverse, at least, that is how your wording came across to me also.
,I realize that treating a horse correctly, does not progress to food aggression, any more then any use of R- means you create fear in a horse, and are dominating him out of that factor
Many here that originally entered this discussion, have long since bailed. Think I will do the same, as I nothing worthwhile is coming out of it any longer, and I think we both have expressed as to what we feel.
In other words, this old pony has been flogged to death!!!!
In the end, Loosie, please tell me as to how we really differ that much , far as relating to our horses? Just because I don;t feel I have the need to use clicker training, I think, if I got anything right you said,is that you do believe in the correct balance of R+ and R- yourself.
Neither one of us seems to believe in the opposite extreme ends of R+ or R -, as two wrongs don't make aright. Shall we leave it at that?
Just as many posts here, headed down the road, that if you ever asked a horse to do anything, you were being abusive, (not saying it was you ), then the other direction, where I suppose anyone might have thought , I was implying using any food rewards, resulted in a spoiled horse. Nether is true, so I think that is agood end.


----------



## Hondo

Here is what I do not get.

If the average horse is even 1/10th as clever as Clever Hans was at reading human body language, then how can they perceive that a whip or a rope is an extension of the human body?

I'm inclined to think that the horse sees a human body with a rope or whip that is not being used hurt or harm them, but just in case, better be careful..........


----------



## Smilie

Hondo said:


> Today I recieved my copy of Dressage by Henry Wynmalen. That is the book Tom Dorrance did recommend to his students years later, as pointed out to me by bsms.
> 
> I was surprised that an old time cowboy like TD would recommend a book written for Dressage. If nothing else, I think I found the answer on page 29. Here is a partial quote. And I do believe it is part and partial to the thread topic.
> 
> Quote:
> 
> "Confidence is absolutely essential because without it the horse just cannot make a sufficient surrender of himself, mentally and physically, to learn and to absorb our teaching. Mental and physical processes are so intimately connected, that they cannot be separated.
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone understands that it is an essential object of our training to obtain control of the horse's voluntary actions. But it is less well understood that it is impossible to succeed in doing so with any degree of complete success, unless we gain control of his involuntary actions also. And that is much the more difficult task of the two.
> 
> Involuntary actions, or rather reactions, are called forth by the working of the horse's nervous system independently of his own free will................................."
> 
> 
> I had to stop reading at this point and think. I got chills. I'm still thinking. This passage is not about dressage or cutting, it's about a horse.




A confident horse, is created by having a confident leader that the horse trusts. 
The horse then knows that leader is 'looking out for the lions', so he does not have to Respect, trust, confidence, are all strongly inter related
If I feel confident, ride with confidence, Charlie, who can be a reactive horse, also becomes confident, riding along on a loose rein, not over reacting to anything she encounters.
Let me start thinking, 'if I come off, I might wreak my re placed knees, and surely Charlie is going to react big time. when that snow plow passes us, I can become a prophet of my own destiny.
Horses are very tuned in to our body language, as a prey species. If we tense, expecting the horse to react to something ahead, the horse will also tense, as he feels his leader tense,as he does not relate that to his leader feeling his own tension, only that his leader must also be concerned over that object ahead.
There was an experiment done, where riders were told, that when they passed a certain part of an arena, a fake cannon would be fired. The cannon was not fired, of course, but every horse (wearing monitors) tensed at that very spot, as their riders could not completely suppress any of their own body language


----------



## tinyliny

Got to close this thread for a bit. just getting too personal, all around. great subject matter, though. a pity.


----------



## Foxhunter

*Thread is opened after some editing. *


*It is an interesting subject and people need to keep an open mind that there are many training methods. There is absolutely no need to throw insults around.*


----------



## Foxhunter

Hondo said:


> Here is what I do not get.
> 
> If the average horse is even 1/10th as clever as Clever Hans was at reading human body language, then how can they perceive that a whip or a rope is an extension of the human body?
> 
> I'm inclined to think that the horse sees a human body with a rope or whip that is not being used hurt or harm them, but just in case, better be careful..........



It all boils down to trust. 

I have had many horses and ponies that were whip shy. Pick up the lunge whip when lunging them and they were gone. Flick a whip when riding them and they would jump or shy away. So I always used a lunge whip when lingering them - which I would try and do at least once a day until they accepted the whip and would rode with a whip in each hand and make sure they saw it frequently. 
With the way I handled them in the stable, firmly and fairly, correcting the little things, they soon adjusted and accepted that a whip swooshing past their eye was dispersing the flies, ditto around their ears. They soon took no notice.

Horses are capable of guilt. I know that when teaching rides in the arena I could crack the whip at one pony that was being naughty and the others would not flinch. The pony playing upmwould jumpmto attention even though I had not actually touched it. 

Feeding the young horses in the loose barn which involved walking the length spreading the feed into the trough, I had one of the youngsters slam into me deliberately. I immediately wrapped the feed bucket at him and chased him away. The other horses immediately went into a corner in a tight bunch and stood there watching as I chased and threw the bucket at the offender. I went very close to them and they were not bothered by me being mad. They would not let the offender into their bunch either, they knew I was not annoyed with them. 

I had to mix more feed for them and when I returned they all followed behind me eating from the trough. The offender stayed well back and when I approached him he was alert but never moved. I game him a scratch and he joined in the eating. He accepted his punishement as fair and never slammed me again.


----------



## Hondo

Hmmm. Do horses feel guilt? Yet a whole new controversial subject.

Your example of the youngster bumping you sounds very similar to when Molly feigned a kick at Hondo when I was nearby and I threw a halter at her several times while chasing her. The rest of about 17 horses just sort of stood around watching.

Molly absolutely avoided me for the longest time. Then one day she came right up to me and entered my space in a friendly way. I gave her a huge amount of TLC and we are now better friends than we ever were. Hmmm. Do horses apologize?

But I had not thought of her experiencing guilt. I thought she was just giving me a wide birth as the other horses do her as she is the cranky old lead mare by force and intimidation. I just thought of her avoidance of me as plain old fear of the new Harold she had not seen before. Avoidance response. Aversive.

But the example with Molly may be different than with the youngster. These animals are becoming more complex than I ever thought. Sometimes it's hard to keep from anthropomorphizing when some things they do seem so human. That said, I have not really examined human guilt but it would seem to be fear based. 

I was surprised to learn how possessive a horse can be with a human toward other horses. Hondo often appears very much that way with me if another horse tries to horn in on HIS tlc.

As a footnote, I'm still unconvinced that a horse ever sees a whip or rope as an extension of the human body. I remain somewhat puzzled on how that concept ever got created and popularized.

Or maybe that just means the human is to think of it as an extension of their body but not the horse? I just think of it as a tool that can be used in a non-aggressive or threatening way for communication.

With the small number of horses, now three, that I interact with directly, I just see no need for that tool.

Feeding a bunch of loose horses would I know be a whole different story. When I was feeding 23 horses they were all locked in their pen before the food was brought out. I made the mistake of trying to lead a horse in with a can of feed while other horses were still loose and very soon discovered that was a big big error on my part when I suddenly became swamped with horses! Dangerous too.


----------



## Foxhunter

I do not think they see it as an extension of the human arm, they know it is a tool. 

When longeing some horses they will try and cut in or be a bit lazy if a whip is not carried. They know when I have one or not although they all know it is not there to be used in a viscous way but they know that it will be used as a tool to keep them out. 

I spent hours practising with a longe whip and a hunting whip so that I could put the tip on an exact spot.


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

Hondo said:


> As a footnote, I'm still unconvinced that a horse ever sees a whip or rope as an extension of the human body. I remain somewhat puzzled on how that concept ever got created and popularized.
> 
> *Or maybe that just means the human is to think of it as an extension of their body but not the horse*? I just think of it as a tool that can be used in a non-aggressive or threatening way for communication.


I believe that is it. We humans just need a clearer way to think about it.


----------



## Smilie

Well, yes, it in an extension of our arm, far as cue length, but I am quite sure that a horse does not consider the whip as part of your arm
I do not think horses feel quilt, as first of all, they don't know what actions are correct towards us, until we teach them, and what is 'wrong' to us, does not mean it is, 'wrong' to a horse.
A long time ago, hubby was in the corral with two horses, and one was a very dominant mare (the one I had bought off the track )For some reason, when hubby's back was turned, she decided to lunge at that other horse, but got hubby in the shoulder instead.
She immediately knew her mistake, and if a horse ever could have a 'i messed up', look on her face, she did. I don't think she felt guilty, just knew the consequence of equine teeth on human flesh!
But then, that is just my reading the horse in hindsight


----------



## bsms

Hondo said:


> ...Quote:
> 
> "Confidence is absolutely essential because without it the horse just cannot make a sufficient surrender of himself, mentally and physically, to learn and to absorb our teaching. Mental and physical processes are so intimately connected, that they cannot be separated.
> 
> Everyone understands that it is an essential object of our training to obtain control of the horse's voluntary actions. But it is less well understood that it is impossible to succeed in doing so with any degree of complete success, unless we gain control of his involuntary actions also. And that is much the more difficult task of the two.
> 
> Involuntary actions, or rather reactions, are called forth by the working of the horse's nervous system independently of his own free will................................."


Maybe it is my engineering background - I was trained in Biology, but spent my life flying jets and working with engineers - but I looked at that statement and thought it was nonsense. Saw it late last night and it bugged me.

But here is some additional context:
.It is perfectly certain that animals of different species can understand each other quite well and can and do communicate amongst each other satisfactorily provided only that fear has no part in the proceedings; that there exists, in other words, a degree of confidence...They imply that we shall not be understood by the horse unless we possess ourselves, or acquire, the aptitude of talking to him by attitude and behavior; and even then we shall never succeed fully unless we do so in that calm and quietly determined manner whereby confidence is inspired." - page 29​.
This is what I think Foxhunter is describing. I suspect Smilie would agree as well, particularly with a green horse. There is a confidence horses gain around someone who is firm but fair, whose reactions are proportional and justified by the circumstances. When horses understand you are formidable - someone who cannot be ignored lightly - yet also that you care about them and are truly on their side - they become safe.

It is what I cited much earlier in the thread, about "Electric fences don't chase horses", creating boundaries that are enforced, but letting the horse decide if he is going to challenge that boundary. Horses don't fear an electric fence. They honor the boundary, but they may graze right next to it. Like Foxhunter, I've chased a horse around the corral while the other two just wanted to stay clear. The others knew WHY the one was in trouble, and it didn't concern them.

Heck, I once watched Mia finish the job! It was almost like she was saying, "_Want to see how to discipline a herd member? Watch and learn._.." She spent 20 minutes or so finishing what I had started. Then she strolled over to me, put her head beside me and looked at me as if to say, "_Got it?_" That mare was SOOO wrong for me, yet so right for me! :-?

Much of traditional horse training is based on this. Tom Roberts:
.I am going to ask you a question, and before you read on I would like you to answer it clearly – to yourself.

Question: “Why does a horse stop or go slower if you pull on the reins?” If you answer, “Because it hurts the mouth,” I am sorry to have to break the news to you – you have failed.

But no, I'll give you another chance: “Why do you jump up instantly if you sit on an upturned tack or drawing pin?”

If you answer again: “Because it hurts” - you really do need to read every word in this book!

The horse stops – and you jump up – not just because it hurts, but to stop it hurting. By no means the same thing.

And there isn't any doubt: if jumping up didn't stop the pain, you would try doing something else. So, too, eventually, does the horse. ​.
You don't teach a horse through pain, and you don't teach him by making him fear you. But traditional approaches DO say you create a boundary, and give the horse responsibility for not crossing the boundary. Then the horse can have freedom, safety and contentment - by honoring the boundary the human set.

That may be using R-, but it is NOT using punishment. The difference is critical to the horse. Horses don't fear electric fences, and they don't fear someone who sets firm boundaries.

Here's some more context on the involuntary part of the quote, which bothered me until I saw the context:
.
"It follows that, since the horse cannot himself control such reactions, the trainer cannot do so either, at any rate, not directly. But the trainer can realize these reactions arise, involuntarily, under the influence of outside stimulants, such as fear and nervous excitement; it is an important, perhaps the most important element in the trainer's art not to create any such disturbing influences himself.

 No one can avoid occasional upsets in a highly strung, high-couraged horse, under the impact of extraneous influences...But the talented rider shall be able to insure that no upsets or excitement are caused by his own conduct on the horse....the merit of the horse's calmness is in the confident and willing acceptance of his rider's requirements; there is no merit in calmness due to virtual "extinction" of the horse's liveliness and brilliance." - pages 29-30, underlining mine​ .
I think Tom Roberts made it easier for a newbie like myself to understand with "_This will profit you. This will profit you not._" But I'll admit I really wish I had read the above passage early on with Mia. As much reading as I do, it wasn't until a few years down the road, when I read James Fillis on how to handle a nervous horse that I found someone writing what I was learning - *if you try to punish a nervous horse for being nervous, you get a more nervous horse!

**Been there, done that, got the bruises!*​
This is where I'm sure Wynmalen, Roberts, Fillis, Hunt and others would part way with Clinton Anderson's approach to spooking - that you make spooking "hard" by...well, by punishing the horse via making it spin hard back and forth for 3-5 minutes until the horse gives up.

Again, this does not imply rejecting R-. The act of the spook itself is punishment enough. The horse has already punished himself by spooking. All I need to do is restore confidence.

In my limited experience, horses don't enjoy getting scared. They do not enjoy spooking. It might be different with a bored horse in an arena, doing lap 567 under a student...but in trail riding, horse's don't enjoy the jolt to their nervous system caused by sudden panic. They WANT to calm down fast, and not do it again, unless the rider gets in the way. And while some people - not Smilie, BTW - find it presumptuous for a rider of 8 years to talk about having learned anything, one lesson that has been driven home to me is that as a trail rider, good riding normally consists of getting out of the horse's way.

Maybe an advanced rider can improve a horse. I'm not advanced, never will be, and feel no need to bite off more than I can chew. For many recreational riders, an attainable goal is to let the horse be under saddle as he would without a rider, except perhaps calmer and more confident. The horse is able to improve himself unless I interfere. In so many cases, it is my weight, my balance, my attitude, my desire that limits the horse. I wonder why the horse doesn't improve, and he wonders why I won't let him do better...

Morning rant off!


----------



## Hondo

Well, since you posted this on your blog, I'll post my response to your blog here. Hope I'm not breaking any forum rules.



Originally Posted by bsms
"Since I said unkind things about this writer earlier, I'll include this quote from another thread about where I think he is correct. It is in response to a post Hondo made, discussing Dressage by Henry Wynmalen:
It only seems fair that on my journal, having said unkind things about the book, I balance it out."


Originally Posted by bsms
"I think Tom Roberts made it easier for a newbie like myself to understand with "This will profit you. This will profit you not."


I finished reading Chapter 2, Horse and Man this morning. I was moved. Particularly by the passage you quoted above.

Working with the horse's involuntary actions seems to be very close or at least associated to the idea of "riding the horse's mind".

I think all newbies may be different also as I prefer Wynmalen over Roberts, but to be fair, I've only read quotes from Roberts that you quoted. Hello Amazon...........


----------



## bsms

The two Roberts books I liked were Horse Control - The Young Horse and Horse Control - Reminiscences. Both are short books and more how-to than Ray Hunt, for example. At my level, I found them very helpful.


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

RE: Electric fences

Actually, I do have a horse that fears electric fences. He won’t come within 15 feet of one willingly, even when there is good grass there. Like with so many things it seems to depend on the horse what the response is.

We have some electric fence tape that we got from a neighbor, it isn’t electrified but I use it to give the horses a visual boundary outside the pasture on small temporary grazing areas when I want to spend some time just sitting and reading without having to make sure no one wanders off. 

There isn’t always a gate in those areas and so instead of taking it down every day, I lead the horses in and out by lifting the tape up so they can walk beneath. The rest of the horses have figured out that it is not electrified and poses no threat and walk calmly through. Cowboy backs up in a panic response (head thrown up, whites of the eyes showing, nostrils flaring, increased heart rate) if you lead him towards the tape. 

Seeing three or four other horses pass through without an issue and finding himself separated from the herd wasn't enough to overcome that fear to make him any more willing to pass through under that tape. 

Can you “make” him walk through? Yes. But, he has a demonstrated a fear of it and making him do it repeatedly did nothing to assuage that fear with time. Going to the "make" actually only heightened his fear response making "demand" necessary and further exacerbating the situation. 

Someone once told me “he learned to ‘respect’ the fence somewhere along the way”. No. He learned to fear it and therein lies a significant difference. 

Given that this person has had 30 years working with trained and untrained horses (she grew up on a QH farm breeding Futurity quality horses), it speaks I think to a broader inability to distinguish one from the other amongst a great number in the population, even those with experience. 

***I only bring this up because as much as experience with horses counts for something, everything should be exposed to your own critical thinking, regardless of the source. 

Maybe the first time Cowboy ever encountered it up close and personal was at the slaughter auction he came from and linked the tape to the general fear he had then? Maybe he had never seen electric tape before and just fears it because it is novel? Can't say for sure but then logic would dictate if novelty is to blame, that his fear should technically quickly disappear as he is exposed to it and sees that it is harmless. 

Somewhere along the way he encountered its sting and developed a fear of it, even though I doubt the fence ever got angry with him or chased him. :grin: Imagine where he would be if it had?


----------



## Foxhunter

Yes, confidence is one of the greatest aids to training. 

William the spookiest TB I have ever known, he could spin so fast he would disappear up hos own butt drove most people crazy and they hated riding him but I loved it. I never got frightened by his antics because he always looked after himself and if I stayed on top I was safe! 

When a horse leaps sideways up a very steep bank and is way above the other horses, cantering along, it is hard not to let your heart rate change but he was safe and came down the bank further along with no problem. He also went sideways over another small bank and ditch. One stride of canter and leapt a five strand barb wire fence. He put in a couple of bucks on landing thinking he was so clever. I had to jump back over the wore to get out the field. 

The thing was that I had confidence in him, he knew it and after a few weeks work he would settle and not bother to spook. Well occasionally he would put one in to see if I was awake.


----------



## Hondo

Well, I think I'll do another Wynmalen quote:

"The horse is by nature very gentle. Gentleness is indeed his most endearing and his most valuable trait. Then let us do nothing to despoil it. For the horse is also, by nature, easily subject to fear, to fright and to confusion; in fact confusion is perhaps the trainer's greatest difficulty since he can so very easily bring it about himself. Whenever the horse is asked a question which he does not fully understand, and its execution is insisted upon nevertheless, confusion is the inevitable result."

I'm seeing a little William J. Powell in his writing. Tom Dorrance was not formally educated beyond high school from what I gather and is not a polished and accomplished author. Wynmalen is an accomplished author and from what little I know about Tom Dorrance, I more and more understand why he chose this book to recommend.

That said, I'm only on chapter two. which is only 5 cram packed pages long.


----------



## Foxhunter

It has been many years since I have read Wynmalen books. They were part of my exam reading.


----------



## Hondo

Exam for what?


----------



## gottatrot

Reiningcatsanddogs said:


> Somewhere along the way he encountered its sting and developed a fear of it, even though I doubt the fence ever got angry with him or chased him. :grin: Imagine where he would be if it had?


It's possible a fence did chase him...I've seen a horse break through an electric fence, have it get caught on his body and run with it flapping behind. I've also seen an electric tape fence break off in the wind and blow around after the horses. 

Amore is similar, I don't think she's physically afraid of an electric fence but she will do everything on earth not to touch a fence. She might graze close to one, but she won't step over or go under one that is being held. At one barn a horse colicked and ran through all the fences, so they kept my Arabs in a pen made of baling twine for a couple days since they wouldn't touch the twine to see if it was electrified.
I've had my horses loose in a dressage ring with knee high fencing because they wouldn't step over it - very convenient.
**************************************************************** @bsms, thank you for adding context to the quote about controlling a horse's involuntary actions. I was not agreeing that I could control what the horse could not. When I think of involuntary actions, I think of a horse's breathing, their nerve contractions, and reactionary spooking. If the horse reacts without thinking, how can I as a rider expect to control that?



> "*It follows that, since the horse cannot himself control such reactions, the trainer cannot do so either, at any rate, not directly. But the trainer can realize these reactions arise, involuntarily, under the influence of outside stimulants, such as fear and nervous excitement; it is an important, perhaps the most important element in the trainer's art not to create any such disturbing influences himself.*
> 
> No one can avoid occasional upsets in a highly strung, high-couraged horse, under the impact of extraneous influences...But the talented rider shall be able to insure that no upsets or excitement are caused by his own conduct on the horse....the merit of the horse's calmness is in the confident and willing acceptance of his rider's requirements; there is no merit in calmness due to virtual "extinction" of the horse's liveliness and brilliance." - pages 29-30, underlining mine


This makes sense to me. 

I have yet to meet a horse that spooked "for fun" or to cause trouble. I have seen how the horse in a heightened state of anxiety or alertness can spook more than when that same horse is calm. I have not found that a calm rider prevents all spooking, but I have seen anxious riders contribute to the heightened state of alertness the horse has, causing more spooking. So in that instance, switching the rider for a calmer one will help the horse spook less.

But so many of the involuntary state of the horse can rely on factors outside of my control as a rider. I can go out on a windy day where things are blowing around and the atmospheric pressure is changing, and I will have a spookier horse than on a calm day regardless of my mental state. As the quote says, I don't want to add to things by being anxious myself. But I can't change the horse's state of being unless I have a very unusual horse that is highly dependent on others' emotions for cues. 
Even Amore who my friends named "Sponge Bob" because she mimics closely the emotional state of whatever horse she is going out with is not _that_ susceptible to others for every state of emotion.

My bias is that although you can add to a horse's heightened state or nerves by being anxious yourself, it does not then follow that you can calm a horse or fix a situation by being calm yourself. I've been extremely nervous and had the horse calm her own self, and I've been extremely bold and calm while a horse spun up emotionally and went out of control. It is best to be calm and confident around horses. But we don't control horses with our emotional state, and I would submit that it plays a small role in how most horses feel on a certain day rather than a large one.

Why I care about this topic is because I've had people tell me I had hidden fears if horses I rode were high strung, and I've also seen people attempting to force a state of calm on horses with their "energy." It seems to be a fairly popular belief that we basically control horses by being calm or nervous. Which is a somewhat extreme take on the fact that horses are highly sensitive to the state of others, can feel our slightest muscle tension and listen for changes in our breathing and heart rate. 
But there are many horses that also think, "What a dummy, why is she nervous when there's no danger around?" Just as they ignore the neurotic mare that flits around the field being chased by blowing leaves. And some horses are thinking, "Oh good, we're excited because we're going to run!!"

Once horses have a take on us, I believe they will respond based on how they read the trustworthiness of our cues. If each time we are nervous a bear appears, our nervousness is going to really work them up. If every time we are nervous nothing happens, a horse will ignore that cue. They also ignore horses that run off and spook every 5 seconds in the field, but follow the trustworthy horse that only runs when something serious happens.


----------



## bsms

gottatrot said:


> ...My bias is that although you can add to a horse's heightened state or nerves by being anxious yourself, it does not then follow that you can calm a horse or fix a situation by being calm yourself. I've been extremely nervous and had the horse calm her own self, and I've been extremely bold and calm while a horse spun up emotionally and went out of control....


Same here. I got very tired of hearing how I made Mia spook. Last I heard, in open country, with very confident riders...she still jumps sideways at times. It's who she was, and who she is. 

I've had a horse act cool as a cucumber when I was in knots, and explode when I was super calm. I think Wynmalen's point was that we should not add to the horse's tension by deliberately creating more, such a spinning a spooked horse in circles for minutes. Instead, we should be as imperturbable as possible. "_Yes, you got scared. It happens sometimes, but you are with me. You are not alone. I'll help you._"

And while it is nice that my horse will sometimes stay calm when I am not, I shouldn't put that demand on them. 

Wynmalen goes on:
."This truly, is the fundamental difficulty to be overcome by every successful trainer with every horse, and there is only one way wherein that can be done, by gaining the animal's complete confidence and trust. If we ask little, the achievement is comparatively simple. But if we ask much, and in advanced dressage we are bound to go on asking more and more as time goes on, it requires great tact to maintain this trust and confidence by never asking more than a very little progress at a time." - page 30, underling mine​.
I have borrowed from a comment from Hondo, and rephrased this as "_Take small bites and chew thoroughly_". If it makes YOU tense, or tightens the guts of the horse, then as Hondo put it, "do a little less". Or as my wife put it, "_So what if he doesn't get past X today? If it takes him a week or a month, and you hope to own and ride him for the next 20 years, so what?_"

If willing compliance and even enthusiasm is the goal, perhaps one needs to set the horse up for success by making each step small. Then let the horse succeed, and then praise him for being successful. Rinse and repeat.
."...There is another thing to be considered with regard to the horse's character - it loves to exercise its powers, and it possesses a great spirit of emulation; it likes variety of scene and amusement; and under a rider that understands how to indulge it in all this without overtaxing its powers, will work willingly to the last gasp, which is what entitles it to the name of a noble and generous animal..."​.
If one thinks of it as "Ask, tell, demand", then the way to prevent making big demands is to take small steps. And this is where I have so often screwed up, by assuming X was a small step when my horse thought it a huge one.

And of course, some of it comes down to accepting the horse for who he is. Bandit will always be more aware, more alert and more self-protective than either Trooper or Cowboy. He's that way on a lead line, or when the three are hand-grazing in our little arena. The others bury their heads and eat. Bandit grabs a mouthful, raises his head and keeps watch. As our farrier put it, if I want a super obedient horse, I need to sell Bandit and buy one. Or learn to appreciate Bandit for who he is, and not for who he will never be.

I'm starting to ENJOY that aspect of his personality. My wife says he reminds her of Mia. I consider that a compliment...in horses, Mia was my "first love"...:wink:


----------



## Smilie

I am enjoying the more reasonable discussions now coming out of this thread.
One can never take away the basic innate instincts of the horse, completely, as a herd/prey species , but one can, through trust, modify them, and thus create confidence in a horse
Horses are very good at associating any object, with a negative experience, as that is just naturally 'smart', far as their survival as a herd/prey species
I use portable electric fencing, to limit pasture amount, and often don't bother pugging that tape into the main fence line, connected to our fencer. My horses just respect that tape, knowing form experience, that it can cause an unpleasant sensation
This association, kinda worked against me, at the first trail class I took Charlie to
At one time trail classes used standing metal gates, but because they proved to be unsafe at times, if a horse got hung up in them, breed associations, switched to using rope gates
Unfortunately, at that first trail course, the rope was white, same as my electric fence tape. CHarlie's, reaction was, you got to be kidding, wanting me to side pass towards a 'hot barrier!'
Far as confidence and trust, yes, we work at having that horse accept our leadership/judgment, to the point that he learns to dampen his inborn flight reaction, BUT, we must then be careful in not destroying that trust, asking the horse to do something that undermines it.
Again, example with Charlie, as she is my 'project horse', that I love a lot, is half sister to Einstein, is a very willing horse, but not one to turn her trust over lightly. She has all the try and willingness in the World, but remains at the bottom of the pecking order, inspite of being 16.2hh, with tons of muscle!
I had her trusting me, that horses passing her close in the show ring, were not going to hurt her, as I was keeping her safe, in that 'traffic'
Then, as I posted before, she got run into badly, by a horse in a crowded warm up, balking, then running backwards, as I was just loping along, jamming into Charlie's left flank, with the rider hooking her hard enough with spurs, to draw blood
That was an unfortunate betrayal of trust, that has taken me well over two years to regain, so that Charlie again trusts me, does not tense, when horses come up on her
Therefore, I try never to ask a horse to go somewhere, that I myself am not sure of. I will ask a horse to go through a muddy water hole, where the hrose can't see bottom, but where I know theer is one, but take the horse's instincts into account, when he indicates some area of the trail is not safe, and where I am not positive that it is
Far as never meeting a horse that has learned to use spooking to his advantage-all I can say, you have not ridden enough horses! In this type of horse, the first spook or so, was a genuine fear spook, but the rider was intimidated enough to get off, versus just confidently riding the horse on. A smart horse, then soon can learn to use that spook to intimidate a rider, so that he does not have to go where he does not want to, and gets out of work
Remember, you train a horse for the good or the bad, each and every time you handle or ride him
I am not going to post that video again, by Larry Trocha, where he goes into the different types of spooks, as those videos can be easily googled
True fearful spook, where something suddenly pops out-no way to prevent that spook, nor should you do anything but ride as if nothing happened, PROVIDING the horse does not follow it up by whirling, trying to bolt or buck

Habitual spooker-where a horse just spooks at the same place in an arena over and over again, and actually looks for things to spook at-you get that horse to focus on you, getting that mind you also ride, back on you

The spooker that has learned he can use it to get out of work, by having inadvertently being rewarded. Anyone that thinks this type of horse does not exist, has been created through wrong conditioning, just has not ridden enough horses, JMO


----------



## bsms

Smilie said:


> ...Far as never meeting a horse that has learned to use spooking to his advantage-all I can say, you have not ridden enough horses!...A smart horse, then soon can learn to use that spook to intimidate a rider, so that he does not have to go where he does not want to, and gets out of work...


Part of the discussion on this thread is how to teach a horse to enjoy being ridden, and to view "work" as "teamwork" - which is a positive to the few horses I've met. If my horse views my dismounting as a good thing, and desirable, then I'm failing to ride the way I want to ride.

Cowboy came here a bitter ex-lesson horse. Time and going out on the trails with the other horses has turned him around. He was a horse who wanted his rider off his back. He is now the level-headed, experienced horse I trust with my wife. He's gone from a free horse who no one wanted because he DID try to intimidate his rider to a horse who gives riders confidence.

Perhaps those horses who want their rider to get off their backs have had too much adversarial training and too little "equine tact"?

I'm not saying they don't exist, but their existence says something sad about humans. IMHO.


----------



## Hondo

I am enjoying the more reasonable discussions now coming out of this thread.

To the idea of a persons state of confidence affecting the horse, I'll refer back to when I posted my spook, spin, bolt, stop, look post.

Some may recall the video I posted of a rider's horse spooking when a white donkey ran up to the fence. And I also made a slow motion of the video and posted that.

In addition to paying a lot more attention to Hondo and looking for things that might cause him to spook, I think playing the slow motion video over in my head at times while riding is what made the biggest difference because it calmed me. I had ridden out as bad of a spook as on the video before the bareback fall during a similar spook. As it turned out, that really shook my confidence. Playing that video over in my head gave me the confidence that I had and could ride out similar.

And gaining that confidence in myself resulted in me not (so far) having to ride out anymore big spooks.

In my case it was, as gottatrot pointed out, not that I was calming Hondo by being calm, I just wasn't amping him up by being nervous myself.

And everything has just gotten better and better since then. And I fully expect it to keep improving.


----------



## loosie

Hondo said:


> Hmmm. Do horses feel guilt? Yet a whole new controversial subject.


Yeah, my feeling is that as with 'lying', 'guilt' & the likes are entirely human, abstract concepts. But, as with 'lying', they can learn to associate behaviours with consequences, and it is interpreted/appears as lies or guilt.

As a footnote, I'm still unconvinced that a horse ever sees a whip or rope as an extension of the human body. I remain somewhat puzzled on how that concept ever got created and popularized.

I think this is a silly concept really, because a) agree fully, horses don't see it that way, although I don't believe it was meant to be taken literally anyway, and b) I can smack, even wallop a horse with my hand, so I don't get why it's meant as an illustration of not using a whip as a punishment tool - it is, IMO, if the horse doesn't 'listen' to prior cues. Otherwise what's the point of having an extension, if it's not to reach/connect with the horse if/when needed??


----------



## gottatrot

Smilie said:


> Far as never meeting a horse that has learned to use spooking to his advantage-all I can say, you have not ridden enough horses! In this type of horse, the first spook or so, was a genuine fear spook, but the rider was intimidated enough to get off, versus just confidently riding the horse on. A smart horse, then soon can learn to use that spook to intimidate a rider, so that he does not have to go where he does not want to, and gets out of work


No, honestly, I think it's that I've not been around enough riders that get off and put the horse away when the horse spooks.

I've seen a horse that reared to get out of being lunged because the owners rewarded it, and I've seen a horse that limped at riding lesson time, which took us some time to figure out that the horse was always sound ALL the rest of the time, even on the trail. And I've met horses that learned to put people off with threatening, kicking and biting. So I do believe horses can learn to use things to their advantage. But I've not yet met a horse that did it by spooking. 

I have, on the other hand met a lot of riders that blamed their horses for playing games and doing many other supposedly devious things. I've been with people who thought their horses were spooking when they were tripping, and punished them. I've been with people who thought their horses were bucking when they weren't, and blamed good and willing horses for all kinds of things. I've seen people practically throw themselves off horses when turning a corner due to poor balance, and then getting mad and punishing the horse. I've seen people place their feet in front of where a horse is stepping, and then punishing the horse for stepping on them. My friend thought that her horse was spooking and upset when he was calmly tripping over lumps in the grass due to old age and arthritis. 

A friend had a horse she thought was playing games by spooking at a certain corner of an arena. Something had banged and fallen over in that corner twice and the horse had spooked naturally both times. So the horse began keeping an eye on that corner, but it was the rider that was extremely tense and also watching the corner each time while blaming the horse about it. So any sound from anywhere was making the horse spook, thinking the corner was about to attack again. The rider was also reinforcing these thoughts by behaving as if the corner was going to attack. But the rider was very upset with the horse "playing games" by reacting so often to the corner and kept punishing the horse. The horse did not understand why the punishment was happening, but connected the corner to both horse and rider being tense and upset. It became a long term issue.

What helped was removing the rider from the equation and letting the horse hang out in the corner while eating and relaxing. Then the horse saw the corner was not a dangerous place. I rode the horse past the corner, she spooked and I ignored it, and then we rode on. The next time past, the horse tensed but I ignored it, and then we just rode normally with no spooking. Both times after the apparently involuntary muscle reaction, the horse also paused to cringe and wait for me to punish her. 
Then the owner got back on and started watching the corner, so the horse started watching it and spooking there again. They just stopped riding in the arena because the owner couldn't get over it. 

So I agree that horses can get habitual about spooking in a certain spot. But I think horses would appreciate it if we didn't assign their motivation for it so readily. This sentence: "A smart horse, then soon can learn to use that spook to intimidate a rider, so that he does not have to go where he does not want to, and gets out of work." You could have ten smart horses, and ten owners might assume they are all spooking to "intimidate" or "get out of work." I'm guessing while one of the ten might have part of that apply to him, but the other nine might have completely different reasons for their actions.

The horse I mentioned was working as a team with her rider, carefully keeping both of them safe from the dangerous corner. As far as the horse was concerned, the rider was also just as worried as she was, and they together were doing their best to stay safe. All of these qualities are good ones. If I had ridden the mare regularly, the mare as a team player might decide that I knew something she didn't, and I was seeing that the corner was safe. My unconcern would have quickly been reinforced by nothing bad happening at the corner, and the horse would have begun to feel safe. The horse was a good mare, and a team player. She loved to work, went on long trail rides and was very forward. She also was not a dominant type and not trying to intimidate the rider.

I am sure someone out there has known a horse and rider combination where the horse would spook, the rider would get off and put the horse away, and so the horse used this as a tool. But I cannot believe this is a common issue, and I suspect people believe many horses are "devious spookers" while in reality it must be extremely rare.


----------



## gottatrot

loosie said:


> As a footnote, I'm still unconvinced that a horse ever sees a whip or rope as an extension of the human body.


I agree. Otherwise, why does it make such a big difference to a reactive horse if I set the whip or rope down? It's often too much pressure for a worried horse if I am holding anything in my hand, so I believe horses don't see things in our hand as part of our body.


----------



## Smilie

gottatrot said:


> I agree. Otherwise, why does it make such a big difference to a reactive horse if I set the whip or rope down? It's often too much pressure for a worried horse if I am holding anything in my hand, so I believe horses don't see things in our hand as part of our body.


I agree, and don't even know where anyone said that a horse viewed those artificial aid as extension of the human body
They are an extension, for the human, to apply an aid, beyond what is allowed by the length of their arm alone, and in the case of a horse, that might go into defensive or offensive mode, for whatever reason, stay out of kicking range.
Like you, I usually just have that lunge whip lying on the ground, esp on a green horse, that needs no extra impulsion. On ahorse, way past being worried, that gets lazy, and starts to four beat at the lope, for example, I only have to pick up that lunge whip, and that horse will start to drive up from behind
I just got back from taking Charlie for a quick ride over one of the local crop fields, that are harvested.She now goes out very willingly, never spooks at things that in the past, would have caused her to do so. I like to believe, that is because she has learned to trust me, and through correct use of R+ and R-, has learned great work ethics, accepts me as her source of confidence, versus Smilie, who is back in that corral
I have another example, of the learning/association principle, that is involved when ahorse learns to use spooking to his advantage. The initial reaction, is purely what has been programed into the horse, but, when that horse gets an unexpected reward, that horse can then use that inborn trait/reaction, off label
Of course, good riders,putting a solid foundation on a horse don't get off when that horse spooks, but certainly many people that buy a horse , and are then over horsed do. Trainers all the time get horses like this to fix, along with horses that have learned to balk, rear, bolt, but that is getting side lined from the example I wanted to give
I am sure most here, know the snort a horse gives, when he perceives some danger. Well, my old reining mare, learned to use that snort, at feeding time, to cause the rest of the herd to leave, while she enjoyed first pickings
At first, it most likely was a co incidence, where she truly spotted something, just when feeding time was happening, gave that snort, with the rest of her herd leaving.
She then used that warning snort at feeding, for the rest of her life, although her buddies caught on, and either only left a little ways, or ignored that snort


----------



## Smilie

So I agree that horses can get habitual about spooking in a certain spot. But I think horses would appreciate it if we didn't assign their motivation for it so readily. This sentence: "A smart horse, then soon can learn to use that spook to intimidate a rider, so that he does not have to go where he does not want to, and gets out of work." You could have ten smart horses, and ten owners might assume they are all spooking to "intimidate" or "get out of work." I'm guessing while one of the ten might have part of that apply to him, but the other nine might have completely different reasons for their actions.


True, and why you have to know your horse. Also, the horse that uses spooking to intimidate the rider, is usually one who lacks a good foundation , not one who was trained correctly all along
There is the principle that you train a horse each and every time you ride him, either for the good or the bad. Horses don't loose forward and balk, either, if they have that solid foundation. Horses learn by a perceived reward for an action, without applying a moral judgement..
Why do some horses learn to halter pull? (not talking of horses that are tied before they ever learn how to give to pressure)
Well, the first time, they usually have a serious true fear reaction, for whatever reason-something suddenly running up to them, like an animal they have never seen (take your pick,( pig, lama , donkey , ect ) The horse succeeds in breaking free, and pretty soon, it takes less and less for this horse to set back, with many of these confirmed halter pullers only standing tied, as long as they feel like it.
It is for the good trainer,to make sure, to never go where horses are accidently rewarded for the wrong thing, accidently or not


----------



## bsms

Smilie said:


> ...Of course, good riders,putting a solid foundation on a horse don't get off when that horse spooks, but certainly many people that buy a horse , and are then over horsed do. Trainers all the time get horses like this to fix, along with horses that have learned to balk, rear, bolt...


Actually, when Bandit gets too nervous about what is ahead, I turn him around, get a safe distance, and dismount. Then we go look at it together. Then I mount up and we ride on.

And he has become much calmer, much saner, and much less reactive. I rarely need to do that any more. Several times a ride at the start, and now about once a month. I believe he is learning to trust me like a human learns trust - because I've been right so many times before.

Seems to me that IS putting a solid foundation on a horse who used to go calmly until too afraid, and then would buck, bolt or race sideways, sometimes for hundreds of yards. And personally, I feel much safer on a horse who tells me he needs my help than on a horse who spins, bucks or bolts. Those are defensive reactions. If my horse feels the need to defend himself from me, I've failed. If he tells me he needs my help, and I help him, we are a team. We are riding together. He is not alone. And that promise to Bandit has been the basis of all we have done for the last 17 months.


----------



## Hondo

@gottatrotRE: "I've seen people place their feet in front of where a horse is stepping, and then punishing the horse for stepping on them."

My body produced an involuntary snort when read the above line.

@bsms Willis J. Powell also recommends dismounting and checking out things on foot. Remount, try again. It has worked wonders for me in a similar way as you report.


----------



## Hondo

Here it is.

Willis J. Powell, Page 63

A SKITTISH HORSE

The best method of correcting a horse of this description, when one is on the road, is to stop him suddenly, whenever he appears to be frightened at any thing he sees before him or at his side. Let him stand perfectly still: getdown, if he does not become quiet in three or four minutes, and handle him in the forehead. Lead him by the bridle to the object that frightened him: then lead him back to where he was, and get on him. Ride him up to the object.


----------



## Smilie

bsms said:


> Actually, when Bandit gets too nervous about what is ahead, I turn him around, get a safe distance, and dismount. Then we go look at it together. Then I mount up and we ride on.
> 
> And he has become much calmer, much saner, and much less reactive. I rarely need to do that any more. Several times a ride at the start, and now about once a month. I believe he is learning to trust me like a human learns trust - because I've been right so many times before.
> 
> Seems to me that IS putting a solid foundation on a horse who used to go calmly until too afraid, and then would buck, bolt or race sideways, sometimes for hundreds of yards. And personally, I feel much safer on a horse who tells me he needs my help than on a horse who spins, bucks or bolts. Those are defensive reactions. If my horse feels the need to defend himself from me, I've failed. If he tells me he needs my help, and I help him, we are a team. We are riding together. He is not alone. And that promise to Bandit has been the basis of all we have done for the last 17 months.


0

There is more then one way to train a horse, and I;m fine with what ever works, with that rider and horse combo
That does not change the fact, that the odd horse will learn to use that initial fear response, applying it in a situation where he truly is not that frightened, as he got n un intended reward.
If horse is still so fearful, lacks trust, that he offers to bolt or buck, then I would not ride him out, until I had some more trust and basics on him.
In the word of John Lyons, not that I am one of his disciplines either, 'ride where you can, until you can ride where you now cannot'
I am not above getting off, now, at my age, where I used to ride through something, as before, when younger, but I try to avoid needing to do so, by putting much more basics on my horses now, esp trust and body control, before I over challenge them. If I feel a horse will blow, I;m not above getting off, but in those cases, that object is moving, like a herd of feral horses, with a very bold and aggressive stallion, that decides to come at you, esp if riding a mare.
Kinda like to have both feet on the ground holding those reins, as hubby shoots over that studs, head!
Can't lead a horse up to an elk or a moose , to have a smell or look!
Outside of abuse or spoiling a horse, there are no absolutes or only one way of doing things. If it has helped Bandit, with you getting off, then do so
Also, I;m trying to avoid quoting overly much, far as any one training technique, as for every horseman that recommends you get off a horse, just as many will tell you to put the tools on that horse, so you can successfully ride him through stuff.
Like in all training methods, use what works for you and your horses


----------



## Smilie

Who in the heck is Powell?
Far as a horse offering to bolt, buck or spin, I think the rider has then failed to earn that horse's trust enough. The horse still feels he has to 'leave Dodge', even though you, his leader, tells him that is not true. The whole idea in training a horse, for me, is to earn his trust and respect, to the point that he will dampen his instinctive flight reaction, when you assure him that he is in no danger of being eaten!
Anyway, we are getting off topic again, so if getting off, works for you and Bandit, by all means use it
I feel I have failed a horse, if he continues to offer to buck, spin or bolt, run sideways, out of fear, as that horse truly has not learned increased trust, as our riding progressed. Just my take on it, feel free to differ


----------



## loosie

bsms said:


> You don't teach a horse through pain, and you don't teach him by making him fear you. ...
> That may be using R-, but it is NOT using punishment. The difference is critical to the horse. Horses don't fear electric fences, and they don't fear someone who sets firm boundaries.


Before I say any more, I will yet again point out that I don't believe appropriate & fair(yes, know that's subjective) -R & punishment is wrong/bad. Just in case people 'jump'... I also appreciate that most of what I say is 'preaching to the choir' for most, but perhaps some different perspectives will give more food for thought.

'Punishment', unlike 'positive & negative reinforcement' is a generally used & slightly ambiguous term, not just an objective behavioural term. Unlike the latter terms, there are differences of meaning of it. For eg. some may understand punishment as something that happens *after* a certain Wrong behaviour. Some may understand it as meaning only a strong physical or painful consequence, not mental. 

Behaviourally speaking, positive punishment is any undesirable stimuli that is applied/happens *at the time of* a behaviour, which will cause that behaviour to be less likely in future. Therefore an electric fence is indeed punishment. And _*behaviourally speaking, *you can't have -R without a preceding punisher_, like 'pressure'. Which makes the light 'cues' less likely to be ignored/resisted in future.

Unfortunately though, because horses don't rationalise, punishment - & for that matter, positive reinforcement too - often becomes associated with other specifics - place, happening, thing, that the horse, being 'punished' for, then is more reluctant to repeat in future. Or, in the eg of a horse taking food 'rudely', they're more likely to become 'nippy' in future. Whatever is happening at the time. Whatever works, or doesn't for him.

Which brings me to... Not that all punishment is painful, but just because, if you sit on a tack & move to *stop* the pain, doesn't mean that you don't learn that lesson *through* or because of pain. Likewise, just because any punishment used may be *clear & consistent*, that is, well understood & learned by the horse, doesn't mean the horse doesn't 'fear' those consequences - just perhaps not the handler, because they're consistent, predictable & great at timing, so the horse knows how to avoid, or 'turn off' any punishment too.

IOW, I don't think it's so much the 'punishment' or 'firm boundaries', or lack of, that leads to fear/confidence IMO, but the *clarity, the consistency* of the lessons. And I HAVE indeed met horses who were mortally afraid of electric fences, because they didn't understand they couldn't move, or they got zapped & didn't understand what happened, 'blamed' other events for it. Again, animals, with their disability to rationalise, means they often associate anything that's happening at the time with a stimuli. I was unfortunately responsible for causing my first horse to be mortally afraid of cows, because I let him sniff one over an electric fence, which zapped him. I bet that cow thought horses bite hard too!

Unfortunately, I'm having to gradually get my new puppies over a fear of horses,because of an electric fence. One of them came to work with me one day & went to sniff a horse through the fence... He thinks horses can zap you from a distance now! And the other one came down to my new paddock, that has sheep in an adjoining one, with a low wire. Unfortunately the horses were coming towards us when she backed into the fence, and there were sheep behind. She is now also terrified of the sheep as well as the horses, although when I've taken the dogs down since, when no animals are around, they're relaxed & totally unaware of the fence danger - both of them have nearly bumped into it since. 



> I think Tom Roberts made it easier for a newbie like myself to understand with "_This will profit you. This will profit you not._"


Yeah, such a simple statement, that conveys so much! I tend to say 'horses learn to do what works for them & quit doing what doesn't', meaning the same thing, and have found that simple statement tends to be easiest for people to understand, give them that 'aha!' moment.



> *if you try to punish a nervous horse for being nervous, you get a more nervous horse! ....
> *This is where I'm sure Wynmalen, Roberts, Fillis, Hunt and others would part way with Clinton Anderson's approach to spooking - that you make spooking "hard" by...well, by punishing the horse


Absolutely!!! This, IMO is VITAL to understand! And it comes back to associations, and that horses are *emotional* learners, not rational thinkers. Especially when they're in a fit of panic(though you could say the same of humans when they're panicking too). While I have understood this for a long time, I think Temple Grandin's book 'Thinking in Pictures' I read a couple of years ago, helped me better understand the specifics behind it.

They're not thinking, just reacting emotionally, and if you punish their fear - that is, add another unpleasant happening to it, it will only cause the *emotional motivation* for the behaviour to be that much stronger. That is, fear/reactivity is even more strongly associated. It will also be likely that YOU become mixed up with that fear 'picture' too. Similar/same as 'flooding' in my understanding. I think the 'best' you can expect with that sort of approach is 'learned helplessness' or mental 'shut down'.

But even if we do consider that approach 'rationally', if you were reacting to something in fear, whether or not it was to the point of panic/not being able to 'think' or not, how well would you learn not to be afraid of something when the 'treatment' was to punish you for it?? Kind of the same as locking that arachnophobe in a room of spiders... or whoever it was here who's afraid of cute little froggies.:neutral:


----------



## Smilie

now, this I can completely agree with Loosie:'
'IOW, I don't think it's so much the 'punishment' or 'firm boundaries', or lack of, that leads to fear/confidence IMO, but the *clarity, the consistency* of the lessons. And I HAVE indeed met horses who were mortally afraid of electric fences, because they didn't understand they couldn't move, or they got zapped & didn't understand what happened, 'blamed' other events for it. Again, animals, with their disability to rationalise, means they often associate anything that's happening at the time with a stimuli. I was unfortunately responsible for causing my first horse to be mortally afraid of cows, because I let him sniff one over an electric fence, which zapped him. I bet that cow thought horses bite hard too!'


That is also why, the statement that we train a horse, each and every time we ride that horse, either for the good, or accidently for the wrong'

As I said somewhere above, horses don't make moral judgements, far as their actions, but through an associated result, and why timing is so important
No, you don't punish a horse that is spooking out of a true fear response, and thus must be absolutely sure that a horse is spooking just because of some other reason-as simple as feeling good, having been confined, fed hot calories, in which case to change management and diet OR, and there are these horses, resulting from some human error, that have been rewarded for spooking, getting out of work, and in that case, you do get after them for spooking,
Horses don't spook just because of fear. Watch them playing , esp on a cold morning, and it takes very little to have then spook
I never punish a horse for spooking, where a true fear spook is involved. That is just a horse being a horse-when something suddenly appears. What matters though, is what that horse does after that spook. Trying to bolt, buck, spin, is not allowed, and if you did your bascs, earned that trust, the horse will come back to you, soon as you assure him it is okay. I sure don't wish to trail ride any horse that does not have this !


----------



## Smilie

here is a good article, read it or not, but it goes into the different types of spooks, including the 'good spook, bad spook, and fake spooks
Some interesting data on the fake spook, using heart monitors on the horses.

In a true spook, the heart rate of the horse goes up,but not in a fake spook
Thus, to conclude, you have to know as to why your horse is spooking, and certainly never, never punish a true fear spook. However, what the horse does after that spook, matters.
As many horsemen have known, whether you ever encountered such ahorse before, that someone enabled that horse, to use spooking to his advantage, those horses do exist, and then you do get after them for spooking
Of course, pain, low magnesium, lack of turn out, high NSC have all been ruled out, or addressed first
Yes,I posted a link, but I think it is a good one, coming from a trail riding source

Training a Spooky Horse | The Trail Rider


----------



## Smilie

Getting back to consistency and clear boundaries, to me they are sorta one and the same
For instance, you don't correct a horse for walking into you when leading, one time, and then not the other time.Clarity, of course, involves timing,and also consistency 
Trust , mediates fear. In order for a horse to trust you, you have to be trustworthy as a fair and clear leader, and to try to never lie to a horse


----------



## Foxhunter

For me, a horse that spooks is one that sees something, spins, leaps sideways moves its body away from the spook. The horse that refuses to go forward past the object is just being barn sour. 

Confidence and trust are the thing that gets them forward. 

To me it comes from the rider. 

I was asked to ride a very green horse out on the roads. These were narrow roads, twisty and always had a lot of buses driving along them. I had seen the mare grazing alongside the road and not even lifting her head when a bus went past yet the owner had had her spook and whip around on meeting a bus. 

I rode her straight out on the road. I didn't know the horse, never been near it before other than diving past her field. The owner was riding her pony. I took the lead and when, a few moments later we met a bus, I felt her tighten up. I put a strong leg on, told her, in a firm voice, to keep going. She gave the slightest hesitation and went on. 
For me the fact that she grazed so close to all vehicles meant she had no reason to fear of traffic. My confidence in believing this, experience in this belief together driving her forward, worked and she didn't look at another vehicle. Her owner admitted that when she had met a bus she had tightened up and expected her to look/be worried about it. 

The horse complied.


----------



## tinyliny

I read in Charles de Kunfy's book on dressage that he would advise the rider to 'go with " the horse that is spooking, . . . at first. his reasoning is that if you don't, you end up being scarier to the horse than the thing that he is trying to escape, and if you do something that really threatens his balance, he will think of YOU and your threatening his balance as connected to the spook and will become even more afraid of spooking becaause he knows the consequence that will come right after, and thus he is MORE likely to spook, more afraid.

if you go with him for a bit, he will see you as not part of the scary experience, AND, you start to use his sudden expulsion of energy, to "tap into it".


----------



## Foxhunter

Ok can see the point Kunfy is trying to make however I do not 100% agree with it. 

If a horse spooks violently you _have_ to go with them or be on the floor. 

A horse that spooks needs confident riding a horse that spooks as a prelude to balking needs firm riding. Knowing the difference is the key factor. 

A horse that continually spooks at the same thing does need firm riding and correction for doing so.


----------



## Foxhunter

One spooky horse I had and worked with for dressage, qualified for a championship class. I broke my leg just before the event and so my instructor agreed to rode him. As this horse was so nervy Neil had the horse at his place for the days before the event. 

On the first day the pair were going really well. Up the centre line medium trot, a perfect halt. Then Neil took hos hat off to bow to the judge and the horse freaked because that had never happened to him before. 
As he refused to settle Neil retired him. He spent a couple of hours riding the horse taking his hat off. 
The next day, in the championship class they again went up the centre line to a perfect halt. Neil didn't remove his hat as he should but just tilted it on his head. 

The horse was placed and when we got the dressage sheet back for the first movement the judge (same as the day before) had written in the comment 'COWARD,'


----------



## loosie

gottatrot said:


> Amore is similar, I don't think she's physically afraid of an electric fence but she will do everything on earth not to touch a fence.


... just reminded me, I also had a pony who would stand there virtually touching her nose on it... while 'Clever Hans' was debunked, it wouldn't surprise me if this horse could count - she'd stand there working out the 'gap between zaps', I'm sure she worked out she had 2-3 seconds, and would duck under it in between zaps!

And while I've known horses who were kept in electric tape yards that were never turned on, mine have always seemed to know when the battery has gone flat or a kangaroo has shorted it or such & walked right through.



> My bias is that although you can add to a horse's heightened state or nerves by being anxious yourself, it does not then follow that you can calm a horse or fix a situation by being calm yourself....
> seen people attempting to force a state of calm on horses with their "energy."


Yes, I basically agree, that is what I commonly see. But I also think it depends. If the person is already a trusted, respected leader for that horse, then the horse does indeed look to them for support/confidence. Takes their emotional, not just behavioural cues from the person. 

Also I believe (maybe even if they're not well known & trusted first, such as with someone as great as Tom or Bill Dorrance were) that being *honest*, fully congruent about your emotions & actions with the horse is perhaps even more important. Because horses can sure as hell perceive what's 'real', even if you're trying to hide it under an act of bravado, or 'calm' or 'happy' when you're not, and I have come to believe that when we do this, it's WORSE than admitting you're nervous, upset, because they see that as you being dishonest, trying to trick them I reckon, so lose trust in you.


----------



## Foxhunter

One of the funniest things I have seen with electric fences was with a cool I had bred. He was turned out with an old pony on weaning. They had the bottom end of a field, the top was fenced off with an electric rope. This was on a big dairy farm.

One day they escaped to the top because the cowman had taken the battery for the dairy herd. 
I put a battery back on and turned the pair out the next day. The pony walked up to where the fencer was and on hearing it ticking he walked away. The colt was standing close to the fence looking at all the long grass the other side. 
I swear the pony said, that the fencer was on. The colt put his head lower and licked the tape! 

He took off around that field shaking his head and striking out with his front feet whilst the pony watched, laughing.


----------



## loosie

Hondo said:


> @*bsms* Willis J. Powell also recommends dismounting and checking out things on foot. Remount, try again. It has worked wonders for me in a similar way as you report.


Yup, I've found it works wonders with worried, balky green horses, if they have me go first, or stick between them & the 'scary' the first time.


----------



## loosie

Foxhunter said:


> I swear the pony said, that the fencer was on. The colt put his head lower and licked the tape!
> 
> He took off around that field shaking his head and striking out with his front feet whilst the pony watched, laughing.


Reminds me, at one paddock we had no end of trouble with the fence shorting out. One day I heard my about 6yo daughter say 'Mum, the fence isn't working'. Turned to see her holding it in both hands. I looked down & said 'you've got Crocs(rubber sandals) on, so you won't feel it'. She kept hold of the fence, while she took them off. Then got zapped. Wasn't very happy with her mother's lack of sympathy or that I found it so funny!


----------



## Hondo

Smilie said:


> Who in the heck is Powell?


Quote from Wiki:

"_Daniel Sullivan (died 1810) from Mallow, Co. Cork, Ireland, was an Irish horse trainer who specialised in rehabilitation of horses that were unresponsive to traditional methods. A large portion of his work took place in England.

Not very much is known about him, since he was secretive about his actual methods. To the people who were able to watch him at work, he appeared to frequently stand so close to the horse that they assumed he was whispering to it. For that reason he became known as the "horse whisperer."

Hope of rediscovering Daniel Sullivan's secret method inspired the American, Willis J. Powell, who wrote about his own actual practices_." end quote

Powell, in his little book first printed in 1872, believes he had found Sullivan's "secret" of taming wild horses.

Here is Wiki's rendition of the basis of his "method".

The method

"_Powell says that the way became clear before him when he first realized that horses only offer resistance to humans because of fear. In order to tame a horse one must first quell their fears. To communicate calm and safety to the horse, nothing is more powerful than soothing touch. Once the horse is feeling safe it can become accustomed to things that might otherwise cause it alarm. (p. 33f)

Powell outlines steps by which an untamed horse may be approached without arousing alarm, how it may next be touched on larger and larger portions of its body. The same procedure of desensitization is to be followed in regard to all things in the horse-human environment that might cause unneeded fear. Finally, any fear of a saddle is handled in the same way._ (p. 33-46)" end quote


Thanks for asking. This was the very first "horse" book I ever read and helped form the basis of what I believe.


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

Foxhunter said:


> One of the funniest things I have seen with electric fences was with a cool I had bred. He was turned out with an old pony on weaning. They had the bottom end of a field, the top was fenced off with an electric rope. This was on a big dairy farm.
> 
> One day they escaped to the top because the cowman had taken the battery for the dairy herd.
> I put a battery back on and turned the pair out the next day. The pony walked up to where the fencer was and on hearing it ticking he walked away. The colt was standing close to the fence looking at all the long grass the other side.
> I swear the pony said, that the fencer was on. The colt put his head lower and licked the tape!
> 
> He took off around that field shaking his head and striking out with his front feet whilst the pony watched, laughing.



My first encounter with an electric fence was when I was about 6 or 7. My father had a rather dry sense of humor and I would try anything once.....

Anyway, we were at my Great Uncle Dell's TB farm in Wisconsin and I'm not sure why we were there but, we were out in the pastures and he and my dad were talking. All around I was seeing signs that said "Electric fencing. Don't touch". 

So when the conversation between the adults paused, I asked my father why it should not be touched. He said "Why don't you touch it and find out".

Of course I not only touched it but wrapped my entire hand around it! (I was barefoot) My father simply said "Now you know". I never touched another one after that and I learned to ask more questions before going against the advice of a sign or doing what people suggested!

When we got back home, I told my mother all about the horses and touching the fence. She was not pleased with my father!


----------



## Hondo

Foxhunter said:


> The horse was placed and when we got the dressage sheet back for the first movement the judge (same as the day before) had written in the comment 'COWARD,'


TeeHee. Thanks for the morning chuckle


----------



## Hondo

tinyliny said:


> I read in Charles de Kunfy's book on dressage that he would advise the rider to 'go with " the horse that is spooking, . . . at first. his reasoning is that if you don't, you end up being scarier to the horse than the thing that he is trying to escape, and if you do something that really threatens his balance, he will think of YOU and your threatening his balance as connected to the spook and will become even more afraid of spooking becaause he knows the consequence that will come right after, and thus he is MORE likely to spook, more afraid.
> 
> if you go with him for a bit, he will see you as not part of the scary experience, AND, you start to use his sudden expulsion of energy, to "tap into it".


Yes! Going with the horse. Here again is the slow motion version of the lady on a spooked horse that I've played over and over in my mind when riding (not so much anymore). I think it is such a fine example of "going with the horse".


----------



## Hondo

Where did I read it? Who knows? But somewhere I read that dogs, horses, or both could learn to come very close to the electric fence with the nose or whiskers and feel the static charge without being shocked and learn when it was in fact activated. The way static electricity can make the hair on your arm or head stand up would seem to verify this possibility.


----------



## Hondo

Ok. Now I have to tell my electric fence story. We raised our own pork and some for the market. The draft horses had learned to reach over the hogs fence and eat the ears of corn given to the hogs.

Dad put up an electrified wire around the top to discourage the horses. I was seven and always went with him to feed the hogs. I slipped under the wire and leaned back against it to watch him feed the hogs.

He thought the whole thing was hilarious. I was mad. After he turned off the charger for feeding, I went to turn it back on. No! You can't do that! But you did it to me! If you can trick me, it'll be ok. LIGHT BULB TIME

Mom did my chores secretly one day so I would have time to set up my trap. I had strings tied together from feed sacks leading over to the switch on the charger and a loop several feet away. I put my foot in the loop and tested my ability to turn the charger on several times. Perfect.

I had always turned the charger off since the "incident" as I did that evening.

Dad seemed to sense something was up as he kept glancing my way. I kept hesitating until the last minute fearing he would see me doing something.

Finally he had both bare arms pressed against the wire and was scraping the last of the feed from the bucket. Dad always had a curved pipe in his mouth. This was my last chance.

PERFECT! The pipe went straight out, the bucket to the right, the scraper to the left. Dad whirled around and called me a very bad name suggesting that he and mom were not married at my birth.

I was afraid I was in trouble. Then he rared back and just roared with laughter.

He never tired of telling that story.


----------



## Foxhunter

When you are a child and can pull on over on your parent (fathers are a better select than mothers because mothers never forget!) it makes it such a victory!


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

How much of the horse’s perception of pressure as R or P is linked to the specific way a neutral stimulus becomes conditioned?

Neutral stimulus: a stimulus which initially produces no specific response other than provoking attention. When used together with an unconditioned stimulus, the neutral stimulus becomes a conditioned stimulus.

This is where we started when we first backed Oliver and started teaching him cues. (I know this differs from English riding cues as the leg is not constantly touching the horse and the reins are not always in contact)

I watched my trainer sit on Oliver’s back and lift, rather than put pressure against the bosal either laterally or back. He placed his foot on the barrel but, only touched, not pressing and waited…and waited…and waited….and waited, not increasing pressure until the horse figured out what was being asked (wrong answers were ignored) and moved ever so slightly in the right direction (try) upon which there was an immediate and complete release of both and a nice little scratch. Subsequent responses were quicker and more confidently completed. 

This is a case, where it was such a light amount of pressure as to be less of a pressure and more of a change that told the horse something different than the status quo was being asked of it….Almost a Neutral Stimulus, designed less to make the horse move away and more to get the horse’s attention and communicate a desire from the rider for which the horse had a choice to either figure out what was being asked or to ignore it (some might say this is nagging). The horse chose to figure out the request of the rider. It could be interpreted as a willingness to cooperate.

The neutral stimulus became a conditioned stimulus so lightly, that it was almost still neutral in that it remained a signal to get the horse’s attention more than moving the horse away from discomfort as there really was none.

This is a very different approach to what I have often seen employed whereby if a response is not received within a moment or two, pressure is upped and then re-upped if there is no response (even on a completely green horse) until a response is received.

My theory based on my own observations of this process (Modern Californio Vaquero Methods) as well as the writings of a variety of trainers both older and modern, is that the closer you can stay throughout the training process to keeping cues on the edge of being a Neutral Stimulus, the more you cultivate willingness and less of an aversion response in the horse. 

Rather than softness and lightness being an end product goal, it is cultivated from the very beginning, incorporating it into the very foundation of the horse.


----------



## Smilie

Yes, that ofcourse is the basics of getting a light horse, starting with the lightest cue possible, as a horse will never respond to a lighter cue, then which was used initially
Of course, on a horse just learning a cue, you wait and reward the lightest cue
To keep a horse light, once he knows a cue, you might at times, need to go to the 'ask louder', to remind him to respond to that very light cue-it is a maintenance thing, not a training method!
My horses will back, on a loose rein, jut by me lifting my rein rein a bit, and applying light leg pressure, then stop the minute I lower by rein hand and take legs off.. I can direct the direction of that back, using either slight rein on the neck, or taking one leg off. All this is needed , to ride a trail course.
Same idea creates a horse that does a sliding stop, on a loose rein
THE LIGHTEST CUE, your horse will ever respond to, is the one you use first
Far as riding a spook, that is accepted practice, that a good rider just rides that spook, then carries on as nothing happened, and the horse does the same, versus trying to bolt, buck or spin. This is in a true fear spook, that is honest, where that horse comes back to you, versus trying to spin,buck or bolt.
AgaIn, spooking is a lot like colic, in the fact that you do not just address the symptom, but also the cause and type, in order to treat it effectively


----------



## Smilie

Whoever uses that upping of R- on a green horse, is no trainer I would ever use, and is the wrong application of pressure and release, and that person will never train a horse that I would ever wish to ride.
I think, most of the confusion in this thread, is someone applying the concept of something incorrectly, whether it be R+ or R-
An extreme example, would be someone using spurs , on a green horse, teaching that horse leg aids. That horse will then become dull sided, and will always require spurs to move away from that pressure.THAT IS wrong application of pressure and release. Remember-the amount of pressure a horse will learn to respond to, is the least amount used, to teach him that concept in the first place
Instead, you don't even ride with spurs, until that horse understands leg aids completely. When first going from ground verbal cues to leg aids, you combine the two, using the very lightest leg aid possible, rewarding each and every slight try.
IT is only once the horse understands those cues 100%, then gets a bit dull, do you use, ask, ask louder, to remind him to respond to that lightest cue, and then go right back next time to giving him a chance to do so
If there is any misunderstanding in using R+ here, correctly, using food rewards, it is certainly magnified by posts that show wrong use of pressure and release, either having seen it used incorrectly, or not fully understanding as to how it is used correctly!


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

The difference I see is what is considered a response? After five minutes? Two? Maybe ten? That is the method part. Manana. Tomorrow. Sometimes a try in the right direction is all you accomplish that day and not a "response" per se. "It takes as long as it takes". 

Some people wait thirty seconds or less and then up the cue, up it again, up it again until the response is no longer a matter of the horse coming to the answer themselves but, trying to find a way to escape the pressure.


----------



## Smilie

Foxhunter said:


> Ok can see the point Kunfy is trying to make however I do not 100% agree with it.
> 
> If a horse spooks violently you _have_ to go with them or be on the floor.
> 
> A horse that spooks needs confident riding a horse that spooks as a prelude to balking needs firm riding. Knowing the difference is the key factor.
> 
> A horse that continually spooks at the same thing does need firm riding and correction for doing so.



As I have also said.You have to know the type of spook you are dealing with, far as any action, beyond of course, staying with the horse!


----------



## bsms

Foxhunter said:


> For me, a horse that spooks is one that sees something, spins, leaps sideways moves its body away from the spook. The horse that refuses to go forward past the object is just being barn sour.
> 
> Confidence and trust are the thing that gets them forward...


My experience has been very different. For example, a few months ago, Bandit and I were returning from a ride with my wife & Cowboy. After 90 minutes, we were almost home. About 4-500 yards from home, someone was having their yard sprayed with herbicide - that's an Arizona thing, but true.

So we were almost at the end of ride, home and food and water and Trooper were literally within sight...and Bandit balked. Nostrils flared, breathing deep, smelling the herbicide - and he did NOT want to go forward.

His previous owner would have whipped him forward, and his parting advice to me was to just do what was necessary to push him past things. I dismounted, slowly led him near the place, acted unconcerned, and talked to my wife (who was still mounted on Cowboy, who was NOT concerned). When Bandit's head dipped, and his back relaxed, I mounted up and we rode the last couple of minutes home to the corral, grass, water, feed and companions.

About a month ago, someone else had sprayed their yard. It was spot spraying, so the smell wasn't as strong. Bandit moved about 5 feet over to increase his clearance, but that was the only sign he noticed.

Mia was worse, in the sense that you could NOT make her go forward. If you whipped her, very hard, with a 4' double leather strap (I write about what I tried, on advice from HF), she would fly backwards. Not paying attention to anything behind her, but I'd swear she could run backwards.

And even our Steady Eddie Trooper: He got the scars on his sides when loaned to a ranch in Colorado. They tried to spur him forward to force him to cut cattle (having previously agreed with Trooper's owner that they would NOT use him for cutting cattle) - and Trooper resisted. To the point of having holes spurred through his sides. 8 years later, his right side still has some patches of lumpy, bare flesh when he was spurred.

Will confidence and trust get them to go forward? I think it depends on how much the horse values his/her own judgment. We've ridden Trooper and Cowboy straight towards shooters throwing bullets our way. When Trooper and Cowboy are at a loss, they do what their rider wants. Nothing personal, because Trooper dislikes me and Cowboy is a 13 hand horse I rarely ride. That is who they are.

Mia and Bandit are both more independent thinkers. Both are pretty willing horses by nature, and both liked/like to go forward. But I think Tom Dorrance would describe them as having stronger than average instincts for self-preservation. Both are also smart enough to know full well who has feet on the ground and who does not, and what that implies for which direction we go! Bandit's previous owner did whatever needed to push him past things, regardless of fear. I try to convince Bandit he has nothing to be afraid of as long as I am with him.

This picture was taken about 6 weeks after Bandit arrived. It wasn't just the way he moved at a trot. His head was ALWAYS like that, and the tension in his body was ALWAYS there, no matter where we rode or how long:








​ 

I assumed it was how he was built. He spent much of his time in the corral like that. When he actually got nervous, I could literally scratch him between the ears while sitting in the saddle!

This picture was taken in June. The yard we are passing has a 100 lb barking dog in it:








​ 
I don't have any current pictures, but I've noticed his head and neck are now mostly level with his withers when we ride. He strolls fast...but it is often a stroll! His back is more relaxed at a canter or trot than it used to be at a walk. And I've ordered a bitless bridle for him because I think his spin and bolt days are over. (Note: he also has an odd shaped mouth that makes a comfortable fitting bit a challenge. I'm not anti-bit, but his mouth is hard to fit.)

If I'm misinterpreting what others have said, I apologize in advance. I'm certain there ARE horses who can learn trust and calmness from a confident rider. But Bandit's rider was a very confident rider. Heck, a guy in his 20s, maybe 220+ lbs in his socks, riding an 800 lb horse...that would make confidence easy. And I gather he won his fights with Bandit, when Bandit got feisty. But my goal is a horse who doesn't get feisty because we are both trying to accomplish the same goal. I want a team mate, not an obedient horse, with the goal of getting obedience via being a team!

And it could be that a horse who was started right would just be that way. I own Craigslist horses, so to speak, so I guess I buy bad habits in a way...


----------



## Smilie

I thought you traded Bandit for Mia, and he was just a green horse, when you got him. Did I miss something, or get confused?


----------



## Unknown

Hondo said:


> Here it is.
> 
> Willis J. Powell, Page 63
> 
> A SKITTISH HORSE
> 
> The best method of correcting a horse of this description, when one is on the road, is to stop him suddenly, whenever he appears to be frightened at any thing he sees before him or at his side. Let him stand perfectly still: getdown, if he does not become quiet in three or four minutes, and handle him in the forehead. Lead him by the bridle to the object that frightened him: then lead him back to where he was, and get on him. Ride him up to the object.


I would not do this. I do not get off. I want to get through *whatever* WITH that horse, not separate from him or tethered to him. When I'm on a horse, I can feel him and he can feel me. I have better and faster control mounted than I do on the ground and what happens on the ground does not always transfer to the saddle. If I'm mounted, I'm mounted. 

A "skittish horse" is not afraid. He's concerned. He doesn't know what is going to happen and once you take that big question mark out of his mind, he'll be fine. Skittish is the point when you know you need to handle the situation carefully because he is about to become afraid and a horse who is truly afraid is a horse you've pushed too far.


----------



## jaydee

There are times when for safety/self preservation I will most definitely get off a horse that's spooking - most often riding on roads where the traffic is constant and fast enough for drivers not to be able to avoid a horse that's threatening to leap sideways because its lost self control for some reason. It's just not worth the risk of trying to ride it out IMO
The spooking that occasionally goes on in our riding arena's is nothing to do with fear at all and all about trying it on the avoid work. They select one spot where the imaginary monster is and hope you'll be intimidated into giving up - no clue why because it never works. If you left them in there loose and stuck the hay in that same place they have no worries at all about standing there eating it.


----------



## jaydee

There are times when for safety/self preservation I will most definitely get off a horse that's spooking - most often riding on roads where the traffic is constant and fast enough for drivers not to be able to avoid a horse that's threatening to leap sideways because its lost self control for some reason. It's just not worth the risk of trying to ride it out IMO
The spooking that occasionally goes on in our riding arena's is nothing to do with fear at all and all about trying it on the avoid work. They select one spot where the imaginary monster is and hope you'll be intimidated into giving up - no clue why because it never works. If you left them in there loose and stuck the hay in that same place they have no worries at all about standing there eating it.


----------



## bsms

I traded Mia for Bandit. He had a LOT of miles on him, but in very open country where the tallest plant is about 6 inches high. He had zero experience with neighborhoods, paved roads, bicyclists, etc. He also had been ridden in a bosal for steering and with a bit being used as emergency brakes. And some of his tension was undoubtedly due to being an 800 lb horse ridden at over 30% of his body weight. I don't believe in the 20% rule, but a rider going over 30% is probably pushing things!

I was very surprised to find a horse with that many miles on him could and would race sideways 100-200 yards to avoid...a car parked on the side of the street! That was a lesson in how a horse could be used to one type of area, yet be totally unprepared for another.

And MY skittish horses have been known to squirt diarrhea. If they are just acting, they deserve Oscars for taking realism to new heights! I would also defy anyone to have control of Mia mounted when she decided otherwise...

Haven't done all that much arena riding, so I have no experience with a horse disliking one spot in an arena.


----------



## Hondo

As far as upping the anti in ask tell demand, I have no problem as long as it is clearly understood the upper limit of demand falls short of causing and fear or diminished trust in the trainer.

Unless that is clearly spelled out in a discussion of ask tell demand, I shall always state a refusal to demand in hopes that the large percentage that seems to think there is no limit until compliance is begins to understand the limit.

Anytime I read or hear ask tell demand without the limit stated, I read it as no limit.

I have now ventured into the first three pages of Chapter III of Wynmalen's Dressage where he discusses the finer points and proper use of a whip or 4 foot stick. He also indicates the origin of the term "third hand" which he attributes to Rarey. I noticed this as a portion of Rarey's work was included in the back of the book about Powell. Rarey made some comments about Powell.

Here is a portion of Chapter III, page 35 from Wynmalen:

_The second aid to help create impulsion is the whip. 

The whip, used as an aid, is an prolongation of the arm and hand, which enables us to touch, and so to control, the horse in places which the hand cannot reach; it is, in effect, the rider's "third hand", according to the expression used originally, I believe, by Rarey.

It provides the trainer with a very long arm; standing quietly by the horse's head or shoulder, he is able to touch the animal's quarter's without difficulty; the good trainer will work by himself' in accordance with the principle "one mand to one horse", and he will certainly not allow any assistant or other person to occupy any position behind the animal, than which nothing is more certain to distract the horses's attention; consequently if the horse be touched he knows at once that the action emanates from the very same man who stands so quietly by his thead.

It makes a deep impression on him; he feels himself controlled at both ends by one human being; he will never forget that basic element of equitation._

Touched, not struck.


----------



## gottatrot

Unknown said:


> I would not do this. I do not get off. I want to get through *whatever* WITH that horse, not separate from him or tethered to him. When I'm on a horse, I can feel him and he can feel me. I have better and faster control mounted than I do on the ground and what happens on the ground does not always transfer to the saddle. If I'm mounted, I'm mounted.
> 
> A "skittish horse" is not afraid. He's concerned. He doesn't know what is going to happen and once you take that big question mark out of his mind, he'll be fine. Skittish is the point when you know you need to handle the situation carefully because he is about to become afraid and a horse who is truly afraid is a horse you've pushed too far.


My trick is that I'd like if it both the horse and I can make it on with the ride together. If my horse starts doing a gait I don't regularly train at such as sproinging, skittering, galloping in place or bucking, and the horse is also panicking, I know based on past experience that my odds of staying on and not losing my horse altogether are starting to diminish rapidly. So I get off. Since I don't normally train these gaits, I don't worry too much about relating my intention of staying in the vicinity of my horse and holding onto some part of a rein to the saddle work. Not to worry, my horse isn't concentrating on memorizing an important lesson either. 

I guess the truly afraid horses I've been on were pushed too far? I would lay claim to that if I thought I could, but I wasn't a giant kite sail that suddenly appeared, a rattling and banging log truck that came around the corner, a herd of elk galloping through the bushes or a blast of dynamite. So I can't claim that I pushed a horse, but rather the environment that was outside the realm of the horse's understanding did.

As well, I've been on horses that did not have an appreciable period of time where they were mildly concerned, where you could tell them things were OK. Rather, they can go from calmly eating grass to sheer panic in a single second, usually before I've even registered there is something wrong. If you've ever been calmly looking at the trees on a horse that is completely and utterly relaxed, and then something falls from the sky you realize something can pass your vision at the moment your horse starts to hump into the worst panicked bucking you've ridden. And there are no lessons, no pushing and no calming anyone down. It's just adrenaline and trying to stay alive. But that's exactly how the horse feels too.


----------



## Smilie

jaydee said:


> There are times when for safety/self preservation I will most definitely get off a horse that's spooking - most often riding on roads where the traffic is constant and fast enough for drivers not to be able to avoid a horse that's threatening to leap sideways because its lost self control for some reason. It's just not worth the risk of trying to ride it out IMO
> The spooking that occasionally goes on in our riding arena's is nothing to do with fear at all and all about trying it on the avoid work. They select one spot where the imaginary monster is and hope you'll be intimidated into giving up - no clue why because it never works. If you left them in there loose and stuck the hay in that same place they have no worries at all about standing there eating it.


 There are times to get off, i agree, BUT, by putting more basics on a horse, before riding him out, you can avoid needing to get off, most times
A horse can't leap out into traffic, if you have body control on him, where you can both ask for his face, and counter flex him, so that his shoulder and ribs are away from the traffic, nose tipped towards. Only way he can then spook, is away from that traffic
Often, major 'bad spooks, as per link I posted, can be prevented, by putting more basics on a horse, before riding them out


----------



## Smilie

Hondo :
As far as upping the anti in ask tell demand, I have no problem as long as it is clearly understood the upper limit of demand falls short of causing and fear or diminished trust in the trainer.

Unless that is clearly spelled out in a discussion of ask tell demand, I shall always state a refusal to demand in hopes that the large percentage that seems to think there is no limit until compliance is begins to understand the limit.

Anytime I read or hear ask tell demand without the limit stated, I read it as no limit.

Well, it gets kinda redundant, needing to put in that disclaimer all the time, and should be taken as a given, by good horsemen
I mean, I now feel compelled, whenever there is an issue with a horse, to put in the disclaimer, of 'all pain being ruled out'. It is kinda like movies now, needing to put in , 'no animals weer hurt in the filming of this movie, each and every time, when current laws , far as animal rights, exclude that in the first place, or good horsemen , take it as an understood given

I have already mentioned over and over again, as to how that ask, ask louder, then demand, is used, and on what horse, and how, that I feel either people are not reading, or just don't get it!


----------



## Smilie

gottatrot said:


> My trick is that I'd like if it both the horse and I can make it on with the ride together. If my horse starts doing a gait I don't regularly train at such as sproinging, skittering, galloping in place or bucking, and the horse is also panicking, I know based on past experience that my odds of staying on and not losing my horse altogether are starting to diminish rapidly. So I get off. Since I don't normally train these gaits, I don't worry too much about relating my intention of staying in the vicinity of my horse and holding onto some part of a rein to the saddle work. Not to worry, my horse isn't concentrating on memorizing an important lesson either.
> 
> I guess the truly afraid horses I've been on were pushed too far? I would lay claim to that if I thought I could, but I wasn't a giant kite sail that suddenly appeared, a rattling and banging log truck that came around the corner, a herd of elk galloping through the bushes or a blast of dynamite. So I can't claim that I pushed a horse, but rather the environment that was outside the realm of the horse's understanding did.
> 
> As well, I've been on horses that did not have an appreciable period of time where they were mildly concerned, where you could tell them things were OK. Rather, they can go from calmly eating grass to sheer panic in a single second, usually before I've even registered there is something wrong. If you've ever been calmly looking at the trees on a horse that is completely and utterly relaxed, and then something falls from the sky you realize something can pass your vision at the moment your horse starts to hump into the worst panicked bucking you've ridden. And there are no lessons, no pushing and no calming anyone down. It's just adrenaline and trying to stay alive. But that's exactly how the horse feels too.


 I agree with some of this, BUT, on a horse, where you truly have that trust, you might have that initial, 'oh my God', BUT, if you truly have that trust and leadership,Plus, yes, body control, that horse will dampen his flight reaction, and come back to you,many incidents have proven that to be true, on many different horses, over too many years that I like to admit to!
For instance, when Smilie was just a long two year old, we accidently got into a nest of ground hornets. It could have been a wreak, as she was ready to bolt , buck, whatever, as those hornets stung her.
I had enough body control, ingrained response, trust,, to be able to say 'whoa', check her head around, and step off
Two New years ago, I rode Charlie down our road, thinking it was the holidays, so no way would a B train or a snow plow come down that road. She was still rather green in traffic. We had a lot of snow that winter, so that the ditches were filled, higher then the road at places,so no where to get off.
Well, along comes a B train not even supposed to use side roads.
I had Charlie face that B train, asked for her face, had her slightly in that counter flex position. She held it together, until that B train passed almost close enough to touch. She then jumped into the ditch, sunk, ,then made her way back onto the road, where we just continued down that road like nothing happened
Yes, when it comes to a possible wreak, and getting off, get off, but, in most cases, that should not be necessary, if you put those basics on a hrose
I know Cheri is not here to defend herself, but we do have her pinned post on creating a safe trail horse
One last example, of not reacting to a true fear response, but having basics on a horse, that will then prevent thaT 'I gotta get the hell out of Dodge, rider or not">
I rode Smile, when she was about three, in an empty crop field, next to us, that had a tarped hay stack. As we rode by, several bales came rolling out, with a Coyote right behind them. He must have been mousing.
Now, if there ever was a situation, where a hrose might think that a predator was surely attacking them, that was it!
Of course, Smilie took several bounding leaps foreward, but , when I yelled Whoa, she stopped, coming back to me, and thaT is the difference of a horse, that continues in flight mode, bucking or bolting after a true fear spook, and a horse that through trust, conditioning, whatever, comes back to you ,versus blindly continuing in flight mode


----------



## Smilie

Hondo said:


> As far as upping the anti in ask tell demand, I have no problem as long as it is clearly understood the upper limit of demand falls short of causing and fear or diminished trust in the trainer.
> 
> Unless that is clearly spelled out in a discussion of ask tell demand, I shall always state a refusal to demand in hopes that the large percentage that seems to think there is no limit until compliance is begins to understand the limit.
> 
> Anytime I read or hear ask tell demand without the limit stated, I read it as no limit.
> 
> I have now ventured into the first three pages of Chapter III of Wynmalen's Dressage where he discusses the finer points and proper use of a whip or 4 foot stick. He also indicates the origin of the term "third hand" which he attributes to Rarey. I noticed this as a portion of Rarey's work was included in the back of the book about Powell. Rarey made some comments about Powell.
> 
> Here is a portion of Chapter III, page 35 from Wynmalen:
> 
> _The second aid to help create impulsion is the whip.
> 
> The whip, used as an aid, is an prolongation of the arm and hand, which enables us to touch, and so to control, the horse in places which the hand cannot reach; it is, in effect, the rider's "third hand", according to the expression used originally, I believe, by Rarey.
> 
> It provides the trainer with a very long arm; standing quietly by the horse's head or shoulder, he is able to touch the animal's quarter's without difficulty; the good trainer will work by himself' in accordance with the principle "one mand to one horse", and he will certainly not allow any assistant or other person to occupy any position behind the animal, than which nothing is more certain to distract the horses's attention; consequently if the horse be touched he knows at once that the action emanates from the very same man who stands so quietly by his thead.
> 
> It makes a deep impression on him; he feels himself controlled at both ends by one human being; he will never forget that basic element of equitation._
> 
> Touched, not struck.


We seem to go over the same ground over and over, thus can only assume that all posts are not read.
I already posted, that a whip, is not viewed as an extension of the person;s hand, by the horse, but is an extension , for the human, that allows him to apply a cue beyond arm;s length, for things like impulsion, or simply staying out of reach, on a horse that might kick, for whatever reason. Yes, yes, you never strike that horse, unless of course, he offers to swing his butt in and kick. Whenever you discussion training principles, YOU have to take into account the horse, the level of training, the correct application, ect, and not just state isolated absolutes
My horses are respectful, so I only need to pick up the lunge whip from the ground, to get more impulsion, ect.
IF i was working with a horse, that was aggressive, learned he could swing that butt in and kick , when he felt like not working (pain and lack of understanding, being ruled out),darn right that lunge whip would make contact!


----------



## bsms

Smilie said:


> There are times to get off, i agree, BUT, by putting more basics on a horse, before riding him out, you can avoid needing to get off, most times
> A horse can't leap out into traffic, if you have body control on him...


A horse who isn't afraid in an arena cannot learn confidence about the real world in an arena. A horse can stop with a feather in the arena yet be very strong in the real world - because the horse WANTS something, and it is the horse's mind that controls the horse's body. Not a bit. Not a whip. Not stopping beautifully 783 times in a arena when the horse doesn't feel like doing anything other than stopping anyways.

Body control, for some horses, does not and will not exist. If the horse understand that he (or she) has feet on the ground, and you do not, then the horse knows full well that she is the final arbiter of where you go. The horse's mind controls the horse's body. We can influence the horse's mind, which then controls the body. We can create a habit of obedience, which MAY bypass the horse's conscious thoughts briefly. But the horse controls his own body.

"_so that his shoulder and ribs are away from the traffic, nose tipped towards. Only way he can then spook, is away from that traffic_"

You haven't met my horses. And you may not want to, since they all retain control of their bodies and can go pretty much any direction they wish to go, if they wish to hard enough. I've done spooks forwards, backwards, sideways, spinning, jumping sideways. I've never had a horse buck while spooking, but a friend experienced it on Bandit. I've had the poleys of my Australian saddle bruise my thighs from the spins. Backwards is the worst, IMHO. I hated those!

That is why I concluded I needed to ride the mind, not the body. If the mind is with me, I'm in good shape. When we are a team, he will use his body to help us. When we are not a team...then maybe he will loan me his body anyways, or maybe he'll take it back. But only the horse controls his body. People say, "Ask, Tell, Demand" - but if the horse decides to give the Middle Hoof Salute, he may shove your "demand" up your backside. Just depends on how bad he wants to do so...

That is why my farrier prefers mules to horses. He says a mule won't put up with how a lot of experienced horse riders treat a horse - and that makes my farrier happy. I've never ridden a mule, so I don't know. But he says the "mutually acceptable compromise" I talk about with Bandit is the only way to ride a mule.


----------



## Smilie

Of course, you ride both the mind and the body, neither one onto itself
That is where trust comes in, so a horse is able to over ride his inborn flight reaction, or at least dampen it
Neither body control, or riding the mind, works onto itself at all times, but they create a great combo!
Many times, riding the mind, alone works, which is built upon respect, which in turn generates trust, esp with repetition, exposure
However, you will always meet something, where riding that mind alone, is not enough, and the horse reverts to some basic survival,instinct. It is at that point, where body control, gives enough additional control, for a short period , that allows that mind to come back to you, engage the thinking part of that horse;s mind, versus his inborn flight response


----------



## Smilie

Since you like to use examples, I will give you one of riding the mind combo, plus body control
First of all, all free style demos, are based first on that horse being trained, using traditional equipment, so that one can drop any one, or all of that equipment, and ride that horse with nothing, ect the human body.
I rode Tonka, into Calgary, a major city, and then rode him in the Calgary parade. He had only been ditch rode before. I did this, because I had, by that time, gotten his complete trust.
Riding Carmen, on one of her first mountain hunts, we came to an area, where that re claimed road, was a corridor, used by mountain sheep, to come off the ridge on one side, cross that re claimed road, and go down to a natural salt lick
As we rode down that road, suddening a herd of mountain sheep came out of the trees on the one side, crossing the road right in front of us. Carmen looked,gave a slight start, but because I had , her mind, did not much more. 
Suddenly, she tensed again. A straggler had come out on a rock face, directly above us. It was at that point, I needed some body control, long enough to have her realize it was not a predator, ready to bounce.
I really think, you need both. You can drive a car, most times, carefully, and never need to touch the brakes, however, sure helps when they are there. Same with body control, as it sure does not mean you ride a horse with it alone, throwing trust and riding the mind out the window!


----------



## Smilie

You know the old saying, BSMS, 'love and marriage, go together like a horse and carriage, can't have one without the other "(yes, I know, not always true, today, but you get the idea!
Riding the mind of a horse, plus body control, go together for me, like a horse and carriage!


----------



## bsms

From what I've been seeing with Bandit, and we're not there yet, is that his reactive response was actually a trained response to a rider who would not honor his genuine fear. That doesn't mean his previous owner was a bad guy. He's a good guy who loves horses, and who started following Clinton Anderson because CA was so much gentler in his approach.

But the cavalry man from the 1800s who I quoted earlier also wrote, "The French say, when speaking of a horse that shows restiveness, "il se defend" - *he defends himself*...There is much truth in this expression, and it is one that riders should constantly bear in mind..." When Bandit felt overwhelmed, although he genuinely liked his rider, he also must have felt the need to defend himself, in any way he could. I suspect a well taught horse would never learn that, because a good trainer would not provoke it.

What I did might well be the wrong approach for some horses, and maybe for many horses. But as Bandit learns I won't attack and therefor he doesn't need to defend, as he learns that I will keep him safe and I know a lot about doing so, and as he becomes desensitized to wind chimes, weedwackers, insecticide, herbicide, gasoline, garbage cans and other things...he usually skips the defense and wants me to suggest. My suggestions are important to him because they work. If he'll work with me and listen to me, he doesn't have to be afraid of things. He likes that. He startles. Then he asks me what to do. And I like that.

I do agree about body control to the extent that habit - and I define training as creating a habit of obedience to a cue - that habit can briefly bypass the horse's thought and give us a few seconds of control. Those few seconds can defuse a very tense situation that the horse can make worse. Having those few seconds to make inputs can be life-saving, and I think we agree on that. Turn left NOW, turn right NOW, stop NOW, back NOW - those immediate inputs not only can sometimes bypass the horse's response, they often can get the horse's mind back to his rider. Ready to listen!

I probably overreact to terms like body control, but I confess to having become tired of hearing how all I needed was 'body control' to "make" Mia go forward, slow down when excited, etc. 

I hadn't used a curb bit with Bandit in months, so I recently did a couple of arena rides with him in a curb bit. I'd rather refresh his mind on curb bits in the arena rather than jumping immediately to the desert. There is certainly a place for creating a habit of obedience to our cues while in a safe place before venturing out. But to earn my horse's trust, particularly with a horse who became defensive when afraid, I also had to go out and have his trust challenged. I cannot expect a horse to learn good judgment without letting him make some mistakes along the way. If I'm not ready to ride out those small mistakes, I need a different horse.

Our progress has been slow, which reflects on my limits as a rider. But I've been watching him become a trustworthy horse. He may end up like Cowboy, a horse with spunk who can also be trusted with a new rider. That wouldn't allow him to win a competition of any kind. But if anything happens to me, a trustworthy trail horse will quickly find a good home around here. For an Arab-Mustang mix, that might be a good thing.
And when he startles, and then pauses and asks me what to do - I love it!:cheers:


----------



## Hondo

Smilie said:


> Hondo :
> As far as upping the anti in ask tell demand, I have no problem as long as it is clearly understood the upper limit of demand falls short of causing and fear or diminished trust in the trainer.
> 
> Unless that is clearly spelled out in a discussion of ask tell demand, I shall always state a refusal to demand in hopes that the large percentage that seems to think there is no limit until compliance is begins to understand the limit.
> 
> Anytime I read or hear ask tell demand without the limit stated, I read it as no limit.
> 
> Well, it gets kinda redundant, needing to put in that disclaimer all the time, and should be taken as a given, by good horsemen
> I mean, I now feel compelled, whenever there is an issue with a horse, to put in the disclaimer, of 'all pain being ruled out'. It is kinda like movies now, needing to put in , 'no animals weer hurt in the filming of this movie, each and every time, when current laws , far as animal rights, exclude that in the first place, or good horsemen , take it as an understood given
> 
> I have already mentioned over and over again, as to how that ask, ask louder, then demand, is used, and on what horse, and how, that I feel either people are not reading, or just don't get it!


Specifically: By Hondo: "Anytime I read or hear ask tell demand without the limit stated, I read it as no limit.

By Smilie: Well, it gets kinda redundant, needing to put in that disclaimer all the time, and should be taken as a given, by good horsemen."

Comment: Well Smilie, if only good horsemen are present, there really is no need to even be talking about ask-tell-demand, now is there?!

I have had exactly two riding lessons. About 6 months before getting Hondo. I requested lessons only on tacking out a western horse. She started at scratch. I was shown two brushes, on to raise the dirt and another to whisk it away prior to saddling. I had requested a light saddle to learn the moves and work up to a heavy roping saddle of 50-60 pounds.

We are talking an absolute greener than green beginner.

Well, she thought I ought to ride at least a little. I did and she had me do a few things. During one of the two lessons was when I first heard ask-tell-demand. When she said that the tone of her voice was very demanding even when speaking the word "ask".

I was not even in the same continent as a horseman and do not claim to be now.

But my gut told me something was wrong with the picture and associated words I was hearing. But I kept quiet about it.

Now you may think it's redundant to keep qualifying the ask-tell-demand. But is it anymore redundant that saying ask-tell-demand?

If fact, if there is any reason at all to mention the concept of ask-tell-demand, there is just as much reason to explain what it means and doesn't mean. If the audience already knows, then no use to mention ask-tell-demand at all.

I would lay small odds for a small amount of change, as that's all I have, that the primary reason for failure among new horse owners is an effort to enforce ask-tell-demand without knowing anymore about it.

This is what I firmly believe. I might be wrong but I doubt it.


----------



## loosie

Dogs & horses(& maybe everyone else besides us 'desensitised' humans...) feel electricity a lot more than us. Some say it's because their blood is more saline. Don't know about that one.

The Western Australian Police Force actually changed their practice of shoeing with metal rims because of electricity. At some big show or some such a few years back, a police officer went to ride his(metal shod) horse along a particular path, and the horse balked, refused to go forward. People had been walking along the path, no worries. But this was a well trained police horse, so after some surprising arguments on the part of the horse, he finally submitted and walked where he was told. A number of steps further on, he received an electric shock that killed him. The police officer survived. Turns out there was a broken live cable buried under the path...

And I've had a tree come down on an electric fence, pushing it onto the ground, and my dogs & horses refused to go within about a 10m circumference of it. I'd been walking past that spot barefoot & never felt a thing. One dog followed me past about 5m from the fence. Once. Yelped & bolted.


----------



## loosie

bsms said:


> who started following Clinton Anderson because CA was so much gentler in his approach.


I'm wondering what sort of circles he was in, to see CA as 'so much gentler'!!:-|


....And who said 'sproinging'?? I'm going to have to add that one to my vocabulary! :tongue:


----------



## gottatrot

loosie said:


> Dogs & horses(& maybe everyone else besides us 'desensitised' humans...) feel electricity a lot more than us. Some say it's because their blood is more saline. Don't know about that one.


I didn't know this. I have a theory that horses are like elephants (no one has studied it yet). Elephants have a very similar digital cushion to horses, and they have learned from studies that elephants transfer shock vibrations from the ground up the long bones of their body to their ears. There are cells in the digital cushion of elephants (which horses also have the same type in their digital cushions) that have the ability to transmit the shock waves. This means that elephants can hear vibrations. They seem to use stamping to communicate, and horses do too. So possibly electricity that is felt through the ground is also heard by horses, which would make it more painful or potent. 
Anyone who has put a tuning fork to the back of their ear has learned about sound vibration through the bones to the ear, and this is the principle in play.

I know some horses can hear electric fences when they are on by some subtle clicking or buzzing. A draft horse at one barn I was at would head straight for the fence the moment you unplugged it. He would go straight through if it was off, all 1500 lbs of him. It was "hurry, hurry, plug it back in!" as he charged for the fence line. He could not be outside if the power went out.


----------



## loosie

gottatrot said:


> I didn't know this. I have a theory that horses are like elephants (no one has studied it yet). Elephants have a very similar digital cushion to horses, and they have learned from studies that elephants transfer shock vibrations from the ground up the long bones of their body to their ears.


Yep, ellies can hear through their feet, and I'm not sure what studies have been done either, but from discussions on this subject with Dr Bowker(a few years back now, going only on(faulty) memory...), I think he had cause to agree with you that horses do too.

And getting even further off topic, one of the (number of) reasons why Dr Bowker believes heavy chemicals should be avoided on frogs, is because of scent glands, of which are also relevant to horses(wild at least), and studies done on hyenas, which show you can destroy the entire pack hierarchy by disinfecting their feet! ...Again, there was more to it as to why this was relevant to horses, but I can't remember specifics.

Curiouser & curiouser!


----------



## gottatrot

Smilie said:


> Of course, you ride both the mind and the body, neither one onto itself
> That is where trust comes in, so a horse is able to over ride his inborn flight reaction, or at least dampen it
> Neither body control, or riding the mind, works onto itself at all times, but they create a great combo!
> 
> However, you will always meet something, where riding that mind alone, is not enough, and the horse reverts to some basic survival,instinct. It is at that point, where body control, gives enough additional control, for a short period , that allows that mind to come back to you, engage the thinking part of that horse;s mind, versus his inborn flight response





> @Bsms:
> Body control, for some horses, does not and will not exist. If the horse understand that he (or she) has feet on the ground, and you do not, then the horse knows full well that she is the final arbiter of where you go. The horse's mind controls the horse's body. We can influence the horse's mind, which then controls the body. We can create a habit of obedience, which MAY bypass the horse's conscious thoughts briefly. But the horse controls his own body.


I agree with both of these, actually. It's sort of like the discussion on helmets and perceived risk. Horses always have the ability to take control in a situation. We never know for sure, but like someone who has played the stock market for a very long time, I can take a guess about how much risk is being taken. 

If I were to ride out all the trained horses from the last several barns I've boarded at, I know that with the majority of them my confidence, their personality and training for body control means that regardless of what we face, I will quickly gain command of the situation. I will be able to calm them quickly, and the chances I will come off in any situation is probably around 2%. I could ride all those horses for twenty years and probably never fall off once. That's even true of even most of the young horses, and green horses, due to their personalities.

But the minority of horses, which are the ones I ride regularly, with the same combo of my confidence, their training for body control and their personality (the X factor), have a different risk analysis. This risk analysis goes up sharply as I take into consideration their athleticism, reactive nature, sharpness, and quick reaction times. Every day I go out I face the fact that in the right circumstances my chances of coming off is around 4%, but if we face the wrong set of circumstances by chance, my risk of coming off is around 90%.

If the completely wrong set of circumstances comes up, I think the chances of my staying on are down to a hope and a prayer. 

I want the horse's trust, and I want them to believe I am trust worthy. I want our movements to stem from my thoughts, and to control their instincts at times by applying a cue at the right moment, with perfect timing. I want us to move together as a team, and for the horse to move his body off my weight and to go where I am looking. I want the horse to speed up and slow down with just a shift in my weight and reins as we decide together that's what we're going to do. And sometimes I drag a horse past something that might kill us both with just the power of my will.

But I know that it is risky, that things might go another direction, and I might have a wild horse stampeding over someone's expensive parasail on her way over the dunes to safety. One false move, one check back where I should have let out the energy, and it is all over. It's a dangerous game sometimes.

So I don't trust in trained body control or a horse's trust. I think judgement is more important. You have to assess the horse, see what state they are in and what they are thinking, and then decide if you must push, back off, get off, or what. There are no rules that apply in every situation. A horse might see a bear and be mildly concerned, or a horse might see a leaf and be certain that he is going to die. We want to assess things by how dangerous we think they are, but the horse is the one who will tell us how much danger there is by his response.


----------



## updownrider

bsms said:


> A horse who isn't afraid in an arena cannot learn confidence about the real world in an arena.


Your real world may not be an arena, but to many experienced horseman and horses, their real world is an arena.


----------



## Smilie

Agree, Gotta trot, in the entire combos you posted, variations, and applying judgement, to using the what is correct in any situation, and with a particular horse
The more tools you have, the more you are ready to ride through stuff, and while we all like to reach the point, where we only need the mind of the horse, fact remains, a horse is a herd/prey species, that never gets over that flight preservation instinctual behavior completely, in all situations.
When that happens, having that body control, gives you that instant where the mind of the horse might leave you,allow you to keep control, long enough to get the mind of the horse back to you. The more trust, experience, exposure, conditioned response, the less you will need to to use those body control buttons, but still nice to have them, 'just in case'


----------



## loosie

updownrider said:


> Your real world may not be an arena, but to many experienced horseman and horses, their real world is an arena.


Of course, but I believe this was in reference to preparing a horse for everything 'at home', in order that they will be fine out on a trail. I don't think bsms's comments are disputable in that frame.


----------



## Smilie

Far as preparing a horse for 'everything' at home, and they will then be fine out on the trail, was not what I meant, if I am being quoted
Of course, the horse still needs the experience of being ridden out, but you sure can make that more positive, if you have some good basics on a horse first
Before I ride a horse out, I like to have a good whoa, have basics like going well at all three gaits, turn on haunches, turn on forehand, a horse that will give you his face, be soft in your hands,when asked, instead of just sticking head up and nose out, when asked to give.
You can ride a pretty green horse out, until something goes wrong, and if you don't have basics, you will run into those bad spooks. Can't use body control, on a horse that has none, taught to the horse before you need to use them. 
Sure, i ride on a loose rein, on trail rides, but, if I do wish to ask for that head and poll,or dis engage a hip, or counter flex a horse,or just keep him going straight through a water hole, staying between my reins and legs, versus trying to walk along the bank, scrapping me along trees, I can do so,
still needs to deepen that trust, gained by experience, time riding out together, seeing stuff, but you lay the foundation to making that progression more successful, favorable, or whatever term you wish to use, doing that homework first


----------



## Smilie

bsms said:


> From what I've been seeing with Bandit, and we're not there yet, is that his reactive response was actually a trained response to a rider who would not honor his genuine fear. That doesn't mean his previous owner was a bad guy. He's a good guy who loves horses, and who started following Clinton Anderson because CA was so much gentler in his approach.
> 
> But the cavalry man from the 1800s who I quoted earlier also wrote, "The French say, when speaking of a horse that shows restiveness, "il se defend" - *he defends himself*...There is much truth in this expression, and it is one that riders should constantly bear in mind..." When Bandit felt overwhelmed, although he genuinely liked his rider, he also must have felt the need to defend himself, in any way he could. I suspect a well taught horse would never learn that, because a good trainer would not provoke it.
> 
> What I did might well be the wrong approach for some horses, and maybe for many horses. But as Bandit learns I won't attack and therefor he doesn't need to defend, as he learns that I will keep him safe and I know a lot about doing so, and as he becomes desensitized to wind chimes, weedwackers, insecticide, herbicide, gasoline, garbage cans and other things...he usually skips the defense and wants me to suggest. My suggestions are important to him because they work. If he'll work with me and listen to me, he doesn't have to be afraid of things. He likes that. He startles. Then he asks me what to do. And I like that.
> 
> I do agree about body control to the extent that habit - and I define training as creating a habit of obedience to a cue - that habit can briefly bypass the horse's thought and give us a few seconds of control. Those few seconds can defuse a very tense situation that the horse can make worse. Having those few seconds to make inputs can be life-saving, and I think we agree on that. Turn left NOW, turn right NOW, stop NOW, back NOW - those immediate inputs not only can sometimes bypass the horse's response, they often can get the horse's mind back to his rider. Ready to listen!
> 
> I probably overreact to terms like body control, but I confess to having become tired of hearing how all I needed was 'body control' to "make" Mia go forward, slow down when excited, etc.
> 
> I hadn't used a curb bit with Bandit in months, so I recently did a couple of arena rides with him in a curb bit. I'd rather refresh his mind on curb bits in the arena rather than jumping immediately to the desert. There is certainly a place for creating a habit of obedience to our cues while in a safe place before venturing out. But to earn my horse's trust, particularly with a horse who became defensive when afraid, I also had to go out and have his trust challenged. I cannot expect a horse to learn good judgment without letting him make some mistakes along the way. If I'm not ready to ride out those small mistakes, I need a different horse.
> 
> Our progress has been slow, which reflects on my limits as a rider. But I've been watching him become a trustworthy horse. He may end up like Cowboy, a horse with spunk who can also be trusted with a new rider. That wouldn't allow him to win a competition of any kind. But if anything happens to me, a trustworthy trail horse will quickly find a good home around here. For an Arab-Mustang mix, that might be a good thing.
> And when he startles, and then pauses and asks me what to do - I love it!:cheers:


Well, there you go, you are on track with Bandit, and pretty much understand as to what I have been trying to say, far as body control only being there, to give you that moment, to get the horse's mind back on you, from whatever was putting him into flight mode, and then you continue on, with the partnership and communication that you have established
Bandit looking to you for guidance, is not much different, then Einstein looking back at me, asking what to do about that bull moose
I had the relationship with Einstein, that sure was much more then body control, but rather dep trust, that when I asked him to mock charge that moose, he did so, purely because he trusted my judgement, as I used nothing more then a light leg aid.


----------



## Smilie

Hondo:
\Comment: Well Smilie, if only good horsemen are present, there really is no need to even be talking about ask-tell-demand, now is there?!

Sure there is, with it understood that good horsemen know ask, ask louder , then demand,not equating to abuse, same as it is expected they assume using food rewards is also done correctly,is not used in a manner to spoil a horse
Those that use R- correctly, feel they should not always need to put in that it is never used to create fear, same as those that use food rewards, feel they should not always need to state, if done correctly, does not result in spoiling


----------



## loosie

Smilie said:


> Far as preparing a horse for 'everything' at home, and they will then be fine out on the trail, was not what I meant, if I am being quoted


You were not being quoted. That wasn't a quote. If I'm not mistaken, you didn't even make the comment I was replying to. ;-)


----------



## Smilie

Gottatrot
'So I don't trust in trained body control or a horse's trust. I think judgement is more important. You have to assess the horse, see what state they are in and what they are thinking, and then decide if you must push, back off, get off, or what. There are no rules that apply in every situation. A horse might see a bear and be mildly concerned, or a horse might see a leaf and be certain that he is going to die. We want to assess things by how dangerous we think they are, but the horse is the one who will tell us how much danger there is by his response.'


Of course, there is a judgement call, BUT that still does not mean you will not more likely avoid that total meltdown, when a horse decides something is going to kill him, if you also have body control and trust on him, versus just going by your judgement of the situation and the individual horse
You are more likely to get that moment, with body control, that gives you that chance to get the thinking part of the horse, back to you, so the horse 's mind can accept that the leaf is not going to kill him!
Far as a bear, that might be aggressive, I sure want to stay on my horse, if we need to leave! There is the saying that you don't need to out run a bear, but rather just whoever you are with!
Let's face it, when a horse is about ready to blow, you have already lost his mind
He is back to being that prey species that he is, programed to flee, assess later, from a safe distance.
If you can't get his mind back on you, which means you have to bring his focus back to you, and not the object of his fear, -time to bail!


----------



## Smilie

loosie said:


> You were not being quoted. That wasn't a quote. If I'm not mistaken, you didn't even make the comment I was replying to. ;-)


Thanks, Loosie-just sensitive, I guess!


----------



## gottatrot

Smilie said:


> Before I ride a horse out, I like to have a good whoa, have basics like going well at all three gaits, turn on haunches, turn on forehand, a horse that will give you his face, be soft in your hands,when asked, instead of just sticking head up and nose out, when asked to give.


Sounds nice. 

Before I ride a horse out, I like to have a saddle on.  

Sometimes the horse and I are just meeting for the first time. That's where trust comes in. I trust that the person who says the horse has been ridden before is telling the truth. I'm still a bit younger than you, so I'm sure eventually I'll require a bit more than a saddle and a prayer.


----------



## updownrider

loosie said:


> Of course, but I believe this was in reference to preparing a horse for everything 'at home', in order that they will be fine out on a trail. I don't think bsms's comments are disputable in that frame.


I quoted a poster that has a history of using quotes and text literally. I merely clarified the phrase 'real world' for future reference.


----------



## Hondo

@Smilie If some newbie hears or reads ask-tell-demand and does not understand the upper limit is the generation of fear or distrust, the newbie's horse may and often does suffer.

For that reason I feel the redundancy, as you call it, is important to protect the newbie's horse. You feel differently. So be it.

That was a quote from bsms in your other post, not you.


----------



## Foxhunter

The thing about any form of training is understanding and empathy. 

Each and every horse/dog/child is different and although the basic rules of training are the same the application can vary greatly.

I would ride out with my old GSD and a little mongrel dog. The GSD I would bark commands at, the other I had to keep my voice light and sort of 'request' if I was stern with her she would do the opposite to the request from fear. 

A lot of the problems with horses today stems from people not understanding the rules, not having the knowledge/ability to implement them and, in many cases, have the idea that discipline/correction/consequences will lead to the animal/child not 'loving' them when the opposite is the truth, they all want to have someone they can trust and respect, having it all their way is not fun. 

It also takes effort and consistency is vital, the follow through which again many do not understand or unprepared to make the effort.


----------



## jaydee

Smilie said:


> There are times to get off, i agree, BUT, by putting more basics on a horse, before riding him out, you can avoid needing to get off, most times
> A horse can't leap out into traffic, if you have body control on him, where you can both ask for his face, and counter flex him, so that his shoulder and ribs are away from the traffic, nose tipped towards. Only way he can then spook, is away from that traffic
> Often, major 'bad spooks, as per link I posted, can be prevented, by putting more basics on a horse, before riding them out


 From reading this post I get the feeling that your experience of horses is limited to a very small 'type' of horse and not in the sort of locations that we have to deal with in the UK if we're ever going to leave the yard.
Firstly I would NEVER take a horse out on to the roads before it had all of the basics firmly in place and a lot of times the horses that have been the most difficult when they wanted to be were very well trained competition horses that fully understood all of the cues - you only have to look at the behavior of Carl Hester's horse at the Rio Olympics when in Carl's own words 'he saw a Pokémon at P' - that is a horse that knows all of the cues for body controls plus some - to understand that not all horses will listen to a rider when they suddenly (and I mean suddenly, no 5 second warning) decide to spook.
If a horse is spooking at something in the hedge that might cause him to jump into traffic then no way is he going to move into that scary monster - I have had a few horses that have spooked at traffic (the only way to get a horse used to riding in traffic is to take him out in it) that have jumped hedges and fences to remove themselves from the thing that frightened them.
We had to ride out on roads like this - there is no room for risk when the speed limit is 60mph and often nowhere to get out of the way.


----------



## Smilie

gottatrot said:


> Sounds nice.
> 
> Before I ride a horse out, I like to have a saddle on.
> 
> Sometimes the horse and I are just meeting for the first time. That's where trust comes in. I trust that the person who says the horse has been ridden before is telling the truth. I'm still a bit younger than you, so I'm sure eventually I'll require a bit more than a saddle and a prayer.



Well, while I did buy a few horses, when first starting out, thus had that un known factor, I then got to the point I liked to ride the horses I both bred, raised and trained. Since we rode any mare first, taht went into the broodmare band, plus I trained and rode our stallions, I had a pretty good idea of the minds/dispositions those babies had, esp having ridden many full siblings, over a span of many years
In the years I did buy a few horses, some started, most not, trust in the seller came more with learning reputations those sellers had, in the hrose industry, with all breed type hrose sales, really being 'buyer beware!
When I sold horses, I always just got them out of the pasture, so the buyer could see how they were to get haltered, and ride,without needing to be lunged first, or having been ridden down. I also always rode them first, and if you ever go to buy/ride a horse, that the seller won't get on first, a little warning sign should go up
When I soild our last stallion, after he was gelded, and I gave him a refresher under saddle, as I had not ridden him, since he was a junior horse, I had six broken ribs, not completely mended , and was not supposed to ride yet. (another horse, far as those ribs, freak accident, I posted about before )
My son was not around, hubby had never been on COdy, so I rode him, as he as very smooth, and put him through his paces, including flying lead changes, before I gave him to the buyer to ride. It was a policy of mine. 
Some 10 years later, she still has cody, is a good friend, and we have had our laugh over the fact, that I rode Cody with those six broken ribs , not healed
Sure, there was a time when I first started horses, where I did way less, beofre riding them out. In fact, the horses I started years ago, never even learned how to lunge, as I never used lunging, even when starting them under saddle. 

Surely, if starting a colt, even now, you require more then a saddle and prayer, putting some basics on that colt before riding him out??????
I/m not talking of ;catch riding a horse;, as I used to do that for some friends', where you trust that the horse does not do anything 'really bad', but just needs an experienced rider to ride him a time or two! Yup, too the word of those friends, and sometimes it was true, but another time, I did not realize I was on a confirmed bolter!


----------



## Smilie

gottatrot said:


> Sounds nice.
> 
> Before I ride a horse out, I like to have a saddle on.
> I assume that the horse is declared to have been ridden, ie broke, and is not a colt just brought in to be started! You are talking of a completely different scenerio!
> 
> Sometimes the horse and I are just meeting for the first time. That's where trust comes in. I trust that the person who says the horse has been ridden before is telling the truth. I'm still a bit younger than you, so I'm sure eventually I'll require a bit more than a saddle and a prayer.


Not talking of 'catch riding', but starting a young horse, putting basics on him, before riding him out


While I did buy a few horses, when first starting out, thus had that un known factor, I then got to the point I liked to ride the horses I both bred, raised and trained. Since we rode any mare first, that went into the broodmare band, plus I trained and rode our stallions, I had a pretty good idea of the minds/dispositions those babies had, esp having ridden many full siblings, over a span of many years
In the years I did buy a few horses, some started, most not, trust in the seller came more with learning reputations those sellers had, in the hrose industry, with all breed type hrose sales, really being 'buyer beware!
Bought one such horse, when first starting out, claimed to have been broke to ride and drive, and was only three. She was calm enough in that ring, but as the week progressed, it was obvious that she had been drugged. We were new in the area, and found out that the seller was known for drugging his sale horses. Learned never to trust a seller esp if he 'told you the hrose was broke, but did not get on himself!
When I sold horses, I always just got them out of the pasture, so the buyer could see how they were to get haltered, and ride,without needing to be lunged first, or having been ridden down. I also always rode them first, and if you ever go to buy/ride a horse, that the seller won't get on first, a little warning sign should go up
When I soild our last stallion, after he was gelded, and I gave him a refresher under saddle, as I had not ridden him, since he was a junior horse, I had six broken ribs, not completely mended , and was not supposed to ride yet. (another horse, far as those ribs, freak accident, I posted about before )
My son was not around, hubby had never been on COdy, so I rode him, as he as very smooth, and put him through his paces, including flying lead changes, before I gave him to the buyer to ride. It was a policy of mine. Sure did not want to make it seem I was using an excuse , not to get on the hrose, so never mentioned those ribs!
Some 10 years later, she still has cody, is a good friend, and we have had our laugh over the fact, that I rode Cody with those six broken ribs , not healed
Sure, there was a time when I first started horses, where I did way less, beofre riding them out. In fact, the horses I started years ago, never even learned how to lunge, as I never used lunging, even when starting them under saddle. 

Surely, if starting a colt, even now, you require more then a saddle and prayer, putting some basics on that colt before riding him out??????
I/m not talking of ;catch riding a horse;, as I used to do that for some friends', where you trust that the horse does not do anything 'really bad', but just needs an experienced rider to ride him a time or two! Yup, too the word of those friends, and sometimes it was true, but another time, I did not realize I was on a confirmed bolter!


----------



## Smilie

jaydee said:


> From reading this post I get the feeling that your experience of horses is limited to a very small 'type' of horse and not in the sort of locations that we have to deal with in the UK if we're ever going to leave the yard.
> Firstly I would NEVER take a horse out on to the roads before it had all of the basics firmly in place and a lot of times the horses that have been the most difficult when they wanted to be were very well trained competition horses that fully understood all of the cues - you only have to look at the behavior of Carl Hester's horse at the Rio Olympics when in Carl's own words 'he saw a Pokémon at P' - that is a horse that knows all of the cues for body controls plus some - to understand that not all horses will listen to a rider when they suddenly (and I mean suddenly, no 5 second warning) decide to spook.
> If a horse is spooking at something in the hedge that might cause him to jump into traffic then no way is he going to move into that scary monster - I have had a few horses that have spooked at traffic (the only way to get a horse used to riding in traffic is to take him out in it) that have jumped hedges and fences to remove themselves from the thing that frightened them.
> We had to ride out on roads like this - there is no room for risk when the speed limit is 60mph and often nowhere to get out of the way.


Well, that is using judgement for your situation, at that time, back in the uK, when I take it you were riding profesionally, "needing to ride competition horses, to get them from stabling , to working/exercise area, I take it. I a;lso assume you don't now ride those types of city streets in Ontario?
Most people also don;t recreationally ride in those places, where you had to get competition horses from point A to point B
Most people riding horses out, do so either in the country, as why else would you trail ride? They might also ride through relatively small towns, as I did , when starting Tonka, as I bought him in Black Diamond. I did eventually ride him into Calgary, as I had no trailer,, through thick traffic, including over the causway, , right to the suburbs my In laws lived in, kept him in their back year overnight, then rode him in the Calgary stampede parade
I admit, I sure don't haul to Calgary, in order to trail ride !
Of course, I am talking now, about riding along some highway, or a gravel country road, where most trucks slow down, but not all. Thus, you can have Oil trucks, tractors, trailers, ect, passing at speed, with nowhere to go, esp when there is water int he ditch
You had to ride those competition horses, to get;somewhere', but I doubt anyone here purposely picks heavy city traffic and narrow streets to go trail riding. I am 100% sure you knew what was best to do then, and that is where judgement comes into play, and not just what is 'generally done, where 'most' people ride


----------



## Smilie

So, not to be confusing again, with things going off tangent, of course, my advise far as body control, putting basics on a horse, before riding them out, being able to counterflex them, applies to where most people chose to ride a horse out, and not someone needing to ride a competition horse, where the average person would not chose to ride in the first place, and where even a relatively small horse (16.3hh ,like some of mine) can loose it, no matter how highly trained
Never implied that if a horse was highly trained, then you were immune from ever needing to get off, just that putting those basics on a horse , can help you ride him through stuff, esp where most RECREATIONAL riders chose to ride
Wouldn't think either that one of those competition horses, no matter how well trained, would take kindly to packing an elk= that is just using judgement !
Most people here, are also not going to chose to buy an Olympic competition horse, in order to enjoy trail riding
When in doubt, when the possibility exists of getting hurt-get off!


----------



## Smilie

gottatrot said:


> Sounds nice.
> 
> Before I ride a horse out, I like to have a saddle on.
> 
> Sometimes the horse and I are just meeting for the first time. That's where trust comes in. I trust that the person who says the horse has been ridden before is telling the truth. I'm still a bit younger than you, so I'm sure eventually I'll require a bit more than a saddle and a prayer.



Now, I see where the confusion lies, as you seem to be assuming, I am referring to doing those things each time before I ride a horse out!!!!

Not so! I am talking about when training colts, putting those things on them, before riding out.
While at my advanced age, so much older then you, while I no longer train colts, I am riding the three horses I trained, and who have those basics, so just ,like you, saddle up and ride off, even when those horses have stood tied up all night, in the mountains
I admit, I no longer just hop of friend's horses, as when they asked me to do so, form time to time, as a favor, but I hardly ride around home first, on horses that I have trained, as I know what they have on them!


----------



## Smilie

I also now understand alot more, far as where you are coming from,Trottin, when you put empathizes mainly on judgement, which of course, is also important, and little on trust and body control
Of, course, if you a meeting a horse for the first time, that you are going to ride, for whatever reason- payment, just a horse to ride,a favor, you are not going to know if that horse even has body control on him, and you certainly won't have built any trust!
You then aer truly left with judgement, your riding skills and a wing and a prayer!


----------



## sarahfromsc

This has been ....what is the word I am looking for....hmmm....interesting, meandering read.

I read a quote from either Ray Hunt, one of the Dorrence brothers, or Buck B. that basically stated, if you control the feet you can control the mind.

So I am with Smilie on body control. My horse may lose it for a second or two, but with repetitive training excersizes that promote listening to my legs and seat, me being able to control those feet, I can get him back with me faster and with less stress then if I didn't have control.


----------



## jaydee

Smilie - I don't live in Ontario
When you make sweeping statements you need to be more aware of how other people ride based on where they live. I was speaking only from my own perspective and experience of riding horses that can very easily/quickly get over reactive if something upsets them. It is more about temperament than training. For me rider safety is always what comes first and if a rider feels that they're safer getting off and leading the horse in a certain situation then there's no shame in it and it doesn't essentially mean that their horse is poorly trained. 
Quite honestly I think it's extremely dangerous to let people think that just because their horse is 100% responsive to all of the cues in an arena or around the property it's going to have full self control and listen to the rider when it's out of it's familiar surroundings. That's how novice riders get injured or worse.
There are still a lot of people in the UK that ride on roads every day - not to get from A to B but just to exercise their horses, hacking out for many people that don't have the luxury of bridlepaths and trails on their doorstep means taking to the roads so for them it is what's generally done
Where I live now the roads are wider on the whole but the only way for us to get to any trails or ride out of an arena without loading our horses up on to the trailer is to risk going on the roads. None of the horses we take in traffic have a problem with traffic but if a squirrel suddenly leaps out in front of them they're quite likely to jump sideways if they think the rider isn't fully alert. Since even here I've had cars pass by with so little space between my stirrup and them it would be all too easy for a fatal accident to happen - and no they don't slow down and some even find it amusing to pip their horns at you as they go by. If anything I find they're less used to seeing horses on the road than many UK drivers.


----------



## Foxhunter

It is not a matter of riding competition horses from stabling to competition/work areas, it is a matter of having to ride on the roads to get to off road trails. 

There are few places in the U.K. where you can just get on a horse and hit the trails straight away and even less places where you can ride for miles without hitting roads. 

Horse riders rely on a network of bridlepaths which criss cross the country, these are ancient rights of way. There are also footpaths which horses are not allowed along. As fields are a lot smaller this also means that you have a lot of gates to open and close. A ride I regularly used meant I had to go a good mile on a narrow single track twisty lane. Then riding through the fields five gates to open and close, more road work, then eight gates to go through and then another mile or so down the narrow lane. This was considered a good riding area. 

Admittedly there wasn't a lot of traffic but we would often meet large tractors and trailers giving only a couple of feet to get past. Not a lot if you were ponying another so they all learned to drop back behind the ridden horse. 

I would love to ride where you do, I would think of it as heaven!


----------



## Smilie

sarahfromsc said:


> This has been ....what is the word I am looking for....hmmm....interesting, meandering read.
> 
> I read a quote from either Ray Hunt, one of the Dorrence brothers, or Buck B. that basically stated, if you control the feet you can control the mind.
> 
> So I am with Smilie on body control. My horse may lose it for a second or two, but with repetitive training excersizes that promote listening to my legs and seat, me being able to control those feet, I can get him back with me faster and with less stress then if I didn't have control.


Yes, it has been a journey, with exceptions, applied of course that are not really relevant to the average rider, just wanting a safe horse to ride out Obviously, if you just ride a horse, for money, whatever, and with that person just wanting rides, versus training put on the horse,where perhaps body control was never even taught,you meet the horse for the first time, when you are asked to ride him, going to fly mainly with the seat of your pants and judgment (grabbing a saddle, most likely , first)
I also concede, that Jaydee , riding a fit jumper, probably on very good feed, probably stalled over night, in a hurry to get where he can actually move, through narrow streets and traffic, is going to be looking for things to spook at, and will do so, regardless of level of training. In fact, such a horse can add added ';athletic movements' beyond that 'relative short trail horse, movements that are not being asked for.
Again, not really applicable to someone, who owns the horse they are riding, and is riding that hrose, just for their own pleasure, and wants a horse that is reliable as possible to ride out


----------



## Hondo

sarahfromsc said:


> This has been ....what is the word I am looking for....hmmm....interesting, meandering read.
> 
> I read a quote from either Ray Hunt, one of the Dorrance brothers, or Buck B. that basically stated, if you control the feet you can control the mind.
> 
> So I am with Smile on body control. My horse may lose it for a second or two, but with repetitive training exercises that promote listening to my legs and seat, me being able to control those feet, I can get him back with me faster and with less stress then if I didn't have control.


This is a puzzle to me. When I influence Hondo to move his feet, isn't it his brain, (or mind), that decides to move his feet?

How can a horses's feet be controlled without going through the horse's mind?

I would have thought it would have been more like, "If you can control the horses mind, you can control his feet".

Newbie....wondering......


----------



## jaydee

@Hondo - I think some people forget that horse's have a brain and that at times it's able to make it's own decisions on what it wants to do!!!
I also find that the smarter the horse is the more likely it is to want to think for itself in some situations.


----------



## sarahfromsc

Horses, well mine did when I first started under saddle work, tends to move the feet first, then stop and turn to look at what was bothering them. I don't think the mind is engaged at that a point, it is just instinct or reflex, if scared. Their minds don't truly engage (logically?) until they turn to look at the object to see if it is chasing them.

My opinion is with the countless repetitive hours of teaching my horse to respond to my legs, that I can control his feet before his mind makes that decision. Like muscle memory. Or a 'second instinct' of listening versus reacting instinctively.


----------



## Dustbunny

sarahfromsc said:


> This has been ....what is the word I am looking for....hmmm....interesting, meandering read..



I was thinking more like "The Song That Never Ends." 
I think many have the same basic opinion but state it differently. The good thing is we can learn from a forum, and learn to maybe consider the opinions of others. It all works to improve our relationship with our animals and each other.


----------



## Hondo

But still, the foot bone connected to the leg bone connected to the hip bone connected to the brain.

But then, if Pavlov's dog hears a bell and starts salivating, maybe that's what you're getting at. A reflex that has been associated with a cue? Or something like that.

We'll have to get a behaviorist in her to straighten this out.

Who was controlling Clever Hans' feet? Trainer or Hans?

How can you be certain that your horse isn't thinking (sort of), "Ok, she did this with her legs, that means she wants me to do this with my feet"?

Quoting one sentence from my mornings Wynmalen read:

"_The trainer's object is the establishment of a clear language between the horse and himself and to perfect this more and more as time goes on_."

I've been quoting Wynmalen because he is the only author ever recommended by Tom Dorrance. I can visualize Tom Dorrance nodding in solemn agreement while he was reading.


----------



## sarahfromsc

It is repetition, repetition, repetition, horse training isn't exciting, like potty training a two year old. Consistency, expectation, and repetition. Maybe that does 'establish clear communication" of which you quote?

After all our reps my horse knows what leg at the shoulder, rib cage or hip means. So when the poop hits the fan, when he sees something new ( and since our move to TN, we are encountering things he has never dealt with before or seen), his reaction may be to shy, or spin, or teleport, but the muscle memory from all that repetitious and as some think BORING training will overcome it and his reaction to the objects isn't as violent and I can shut down his reactive instinct mind and engage the thinking brain.


----------



## bsms

This is how I think of it, based largely on two horses with uncommonly alert and decisive natures:

If Mia was about to spring forward into a bolt, and I gave a firm tug back on the left rein (she was better balanced to the left), she'd do a 180 left seemingly without thinking. I wasn't ripping her face off, pulling her head to one side, etc. It really was nothing more than a little sharper tug left than what I cued her to do a 180 on the trail all the time (she walked faster, didn't like standing still, so we did figure 8s on the trail waiting for others - all the time).

Why would she do a 180? Nothing about a tug on one side forces a horse to turn. I've been on a bolting horse whose nose was at my knee, and it didn't slow him any. The only explanation I have is that we did so many 180 turns, waiting for the slower horses, that the cue somehow passed on like an instinctive reaction.

When I switched her to a curb, where a tug back could not be avoided by grabbing the bit in her teeth, she likewise would honor it even when deeply scared - *IF, IF, IF* I got the tug in *BEFORE* she lunged a full stride into a bolt.

Once she was fully committed to bolting, no bit did much to stop her. But there was a moment of time where a well-practiced habitual reaction to a cue WOULD "control" her feet. Or, at least, turn her 180 or get her to pause, and breaking her flow into a bolt would prevent a full blown bolt from happening. The problem with the snaffle is we would do a 180, then another, then another, and by the time she finally stopped trying to bolt, she KNEW - REALLY KNEW - that the scary thing had caused ALL her problems!

That is why I define training a creating a habit of obedience. The US Air Force gave us "Boldface tests". Boldface procedures had to be memorized, word for word, and were tested weekly during training and monthly afterward. Get one letter wrong, or miss a comma, and you were grounded. Why? Because you might only encounter a spin in an F-4 once in your life. And in a spin, losing up to 15,000 feet per minute, there is no time to wonder what to do next.

Because we practiced the boldface so much, it became like instinct. When you encountered a situation - and I only did once in 20 years - you acted. You didn't think. Just acted. And I guess I view "Turn left", Turn right" and "Stop now" as boldface items for a horse.

But with a horse, it only works that way if you can slip it in before the horse commits itself to its own choice of self-preservation action. Once Mia was in a full-bore bolt, the only thing I ever found worthwhile was staying on and calling her name softly. When an ear flicked back, she was once again thinking and listening, and THEN she would stop normally.

Bandit is fundamentally saner than Mia. I probably have 2-3 seconds to make a suggestion - compared to no time a year ago. It used to be he'd spin 180, I'd make an input and keep his spin going for a full 360, and then he'd pause. Now he waits an extra second or two before moving...usually. And if he moves, he only moves as far as he can conveniently do so and then listens again. That beats the tar out of going 100 yards sideways on a horse!

I'm still careful with Bandit around roads. One of those 100+ yard sideways runs was due to seeing a parked car beside the road. We've worked our way up, on lead line and then in saddle, from parked cars to slow moving cars that he was looking at from off the road, to cars he looked at on the road, and now sometimes to cars coming up behind him on a road. Pipe trailers and stock trailers are still beyond him, and none of my horses have any business being around heavy traffic.

Also, both Bandit and Mia got a lot more excited about running in the open than in an arena. Even Mia quickly learned that running in an arena meant running in circles, and that didn't appeal to her. So she would stop very easily in the arena. But outside, with the trail stretching to the horizon? Whole different ballgame. And when she finally got a chance to run with Bandit's former owner in the saddle, against racing fit horses, she didn't slow for 4 miles...the first time.

And Bandit is realizing how rocky our trails are, and he is learning that ignoring his rider often means his feet start to hurt - and so he is listening a lot more. In a way, it is ideal. I can let him canter/gallop, ask him to slow as we get close to a rocky section, and if he doesn't? He punishes himself, and I end up looking like a smart and caring guy!


----------



## Golden Horse

sarahfromsc said:


> Horses, well mine did when I first started under saddle work, tends to move the feet first, then stop and turn to look at what was bothering them. I don't think the mind is engaged at that a point, it is just instinct or reflex, if scared. Their minds don't truly engage (logically?) until they turn to look at the object to see if it is chasing them.
> 
> My opinion is with the countless repetitive hours of teaching my horse to respond to my legs, that I can control his feet before his mind makes that decision. Like muscle memory. Or a 'second instinct' of listening versus reacting instinctively.



Feet first, mind catches up..


----------



## sarahfromsc

^^^ made me laugh. And so true and in some weird convoluted way, predictable....lololol


----------



## sarahfromsc

If a horse has had the boring repetitive training regarding listening to your leg, you can stop the spin. That is the whole point of boring repetitive training.


----------



## walkinthewalk

Since this thread just won't go away, interestingly enough there is another thread started on "--what constitutes and honest horse""--". I'm sure it won't be long until that question also gets dissected to absolute death.

For my part the KISS principle applies:

An honest horse = willing compliance. I know this because the horse in my avatar was an honest/willing horse.

A dishonest horse = aversive reflex. I know this because another horse, the conniver, has been with me for 20 years. He would rather ask forgiveness than permission and most of the time "forgiveness" is not in his vocabulary. 

Experienced horse owners should be able to tell the difference between the two


----------



## sarahfromsc

walkinthewalk said:


> Since this thread just won't go away, interestingly enough there is another thread started on "--what constitutes and honest horse""--". I'm sure it won't be long until that question also gets dissected to absolute death.
> 
> For my part the KISS principle applies:
> 
> An honest horse = willing compliance. I know this because the horse in my avatar was an honest/willing horse.
> 
> A dishonest horse = aversive reflex. I know this because another horse, the conniver, has been with me for 20 years. He would rather ask forgiveness than permission and most of the time "forgiveness" is not in his vocabulary.
> 
> Experienced horse owners should be able to tell the difference between the two


 I didn't mean to post on here, but, well, what can I say? Lolol

I won't on the other. Y'all have stated everything perfectly there!


----------



## Hondo

Aversive response, which should have been the second half of the title instead of aversive reflex, is when a horse does something because he has been punished in the past when he did not do what was cued.

As pointed out in the first responsive post of the thread, an aversive reflex is not learned. It is like blinking when something is about to enter your eye. Can't stop it. Has nothing to do with dishonesty. At all.

But neither does aversive response have anything to do with dishonesty. Aversive response is simply the result of aversion training.

And willing compliance has exactly zero to do with honesty, other than perhaps the utter honesty of the trainer.

Willing compliance is the result of training methods of Tom Dorrance, Wynmalen, and other both knowledgeable and honest trainers.

NASA didn't land men on the moon using the KISS principle then walk off.

BTW, horses are the most honest creatures on the planet. Horses never lie.


----------



## loosie

Hondo said:


> If some newbie hears or reads ask-tell-demand and does not understand the upper limit is the generation of fear or distrust, the newbie's horse may and often does suffer.
> 
> For that reason I feel ... is important to protect the newbie's horse.


Yeah, especially when we've only got eachother's written words to go on. Especially when we're so often talking about things in generalities, there are (as we've seen in this here thread even!) always going to be many misunderstandings & differences of perceptions, aside from different opinions. Everyone sees & learns & hears stuff, based on our own prior experiences & assumptions(back to the blind men & elephant story). It is SO important to keep that in mind I reckon, when reading/replying.

That is why I think 'disclaimers' (such as me frequently saying that I'm *generalising* & giving guidelines or 'educated guesses', not 'hard & fast' advice on hoof care here) are so important.

That is why I feel it is indeed important to understand & clarify what is meant by different terms, rather than leaving it to people's imagination to understand what is meant by some specific. That is also a big part of why I think learning behavioural principles/terms are important. I don't believe you can *use* behavioural training methods most effectively if you don't understand the theory/principles behind it, and you sure can't have a rational discussion with someone about it if you don't have the same understanding of the terms that are being discussed.

...& re the 'ask-tell-demand' thing, it's about as subjective & wide open to interpretation as saying 'be as gentle as possible, but as firm/strong as necessary'. A saying that seems to give people a license for anything at all, depending on their perceptions.

And of course, another thing that people often don't do, that I think is SO, SO important, is to use rational thinking & question everything, regardless of with how much authority some advice may be stated with. Don't accept stuff with blind faith! It's not the unanswered questions, but the unquestioned answers that could be the most dangerous!! ;-)


----------



## Golden Horse

Hondo said:


> BTW, horses are the most honest creatures on the planet. Horses never lie.


There is a whole 'nother debate, when a horse is 'masking' his pain is he lying?


----------



## Smilie

BSMS:

User Horses
Trained
bsms's Avatar
This is how I think of it, based largely on two horses with uncommonly alert and decisive natures:

If Mia was about to spring forward into a bolt, and I gave a firm tug back on the left rein (she was better balanced to the left), she'd do a 180 left seemingly without thinking. I wasn't ripping her face off, pulling her head to one side, etc. It really was nothing more than a little sharper tug left than what I cued her to do a 180 on the trail all the time (she walked faster, didn't like standing still, so we did figure 8s on the trail waiting for others - all the time).

Why would she do a 180? Nothing about a tug on one side forces a horse to turn. I've been on a bolting horse whose nose was at my knee, and it didn't slow him any. The only explanation I have is that we did so many 180 turns, waiting for the slower horses, that the cue somehow passed on like an instinctive reaction.

Well, you were not using any body control! I.m not going to post the entire thing again, as you just need to go back and read Cheri' stickie on creating a trail horse, or really watch the videos by Larry Trocha on spooking, bucking, bolting etc

Hondo, I already dissected to death, training that creates 'willing compliance, as per Tom D etc, and by the way, those guys, just like I, and others here, used a lot of correct application of Pressure and release, clear, fair boundaries, empathy, ect, that established willing compliance , as a standard response, HOWEVER, horses are still a herd prey species, and that willing compliance can go out the window, for a moment, a moment in which you use body control, getting that horse;s mind back on you
If you also don't demand (no abuse, ) that a horse that understands a cue, refuses to respond to, that willing compliance just doe snot stay there, as the horse reamins a herd species, and if you don't lead, he will 
No, horse;s don't lie, as in pretend to being friendly, ears forward, and charge or kick you, I also don't believe horses fake lameness, as some people claim, but they sure don't stay honest, all on their own, if never given boundaries
You train a horse, each and every time you ride or handle him. Allow a horse to balk, question where he will ride, or not, a few times, and soon he will make that executive decision more and more, with little provocation
He is not being dis honest, but rather you have taught him to be so. You have handed that leadership over to him
Anyway , this thread , I think, as out lived nay usefulness, and I see why many like Sarahfromfc decided to quit following it many moon ago.


----------



## Smilie

So Loosie, according to the above rational, a newbie can just as easily use food rewards incorrectly, and that sure happens more then using that 'demand', in the right amount,incorrectly and in the wrong situation
Go through the 'new to horses thread, or even the training threads, and you will find way, way more posts on horses with food aggression, horses that pull away, horses that have just plain intimidated that new horse owner, horses that were bought trained, at times, then became un trained
Great horsemen, like the ones Hondo so readily referrs to, did not need lectures in learning terminologies, they just needed good horse sense, empathy towards horses, working with many horses , so they learned to speak the language of EQuus.
A horse does not give a dam, what term you are applying to any training technique, just that you treat him fairly, are a source of security to him, give him clear and consistent cues, are someone he respects and trusts, but never fears
There is the KISS principle to horse training, and that is to actually train a large number of horses, with those horses turning out to be sound in body and mind, and horses that go on to being great partners to the homes they are sold to


----------



## Smilie

jaydee said:


> Smilie - I don't live in Ontario
> When you make sweeping statements you need to be more aware of how other people ride based on where they live. I was speaking only from my own perspective and experience of riding horses that can very easily/quickly get over reactive if something upsets them. It is more about temperament than training. For me rider safety is always what comes first and if a rider feels that they're safer getting off and leading the horse in a certain situation then there's no shame in it and it doesn't essentially mean that their horse is poorly trained.
> Quite honestly I think it's extremely dangerous to let people think that just because their horse is 100% responsive to all of the cues in an arena or around the property it's going to have full self control and listen to the rider when it's out of it's familiar surroundings. That's how novice riders get injured or worse.
> There are still a lot of people in the UK that ride on roads every day - not to get from A to B but just to exercise their horses, hacking out for many people that don't have the luxury of bridlepaths and trails on their doorstep means taking to the roads so for them it is what's generally done
> Where I live now the roads are wider on the whole but the only way for us to get to any trails or ride out of an arena without loading our horses up on to the trailer is to risk going on the roads. None of the horses we take in traffic have a problem with traffic but if a squirrel suddenly leaps out in front of them they're quite likely to jump sideways if they think the rider isn't fully alert. Since even here I've had cars pass by with so little space between my stirrup and them it would be all too easy for a fatal accident to happen - and no they don't slow down and some even find it amusing to pip their horns at you as they go by. If anything I find they're less used to seeing horses on the road than many UK drivers.


Jaydee, how many people here, buy 100 thousand dollar horses, just so they can trail ride them? The training you put on a top show horse, is not the same as that body control you put on a trail horse How many of those horses are taught to have their head taken away, hips disengaged. Sure, those horses are ridden out,to get from place A ro B, just like you jump some trail horses, but that doe snot make that jumper a trail horse, nor that trail horse a jumper
I am not doubting how close those cars pass, ect, and I am sure, in that case, you have the experience how to ride those horses in that traffic. In fact, what did you do, far as making sure they did not spook into the road, seeing that squirrel?
If you also really read what I said, it was that there is a time to get off, whenever you feel you can't safely ride a horse through some situation, as safety comes first.
I merely said, that body control, were you not to get off, sure as heck is an additional tool, more likley to make you successful in not having a wreak, and never implied that it somehow made you invinisble, able to stay on and ride through anything that might happen.In fact, I do think that I mentioned, getting off, holding both horses, while my husband shot over the head of an aggressive feral stallion
I also doubt very much, that novice riders were put on to ride those horses through the streets with you, nor should novice riders attempt to do so
Yes, we have idiot drivers here also, that like to see if they can spook a horse. Most will slow down, but some will roar by, spraying gravel, blowing their horn
Once, riding home, as old car came towards me. Smilie is used to traffic, so I did not even take up rein contact. Well, that car did slow, passing, close enough that I could have touched it, then gunned the motor, when barely past, causing that old car to emit several large backfires. Had I expected those backfires,, I would have at least taken up my reins, and maybe even gotten off.
Smilie took several leaping jumps forward, but stopped when I said 'whoa'

Now I know that is not going to work on every horse, in all situations, but it still helps me to have not just training on a horse I ride out, but also body control and ingrained , ;whoa;
If you go back and read some of these endless posts, I think I did day many times, that id getting off is right for you, in a situation, with the horse you are riding, then do so, In fact, I do think I told BSMS, if getting off , was working for him and Bandit, then to carry on!


----------



## bsms

sarahfromsc said:


> If a horse has had the boring repetitive training regarding listening to your leg, you can stop the spin. That is the whole point of boring repetitive training.


No. You miss the point utterly.

When Mia would start to bolt, in a snaffle, I cold turn her 180 degrees. Since we were on a trail, there generally was a choice of two opposite directions. So she would start to bolt, I could turn her forward motion into a 180...and then she would start to bolt again. Which would result in another 180 degree turn. Then she would try again, and we would do another 180.

It had nothing to do with leg cues, or what YOU call "boring repetitive training" - YOU call it that, not me.

It had EVERYTHING to do with HER WILL and her nature. Bandit can calm more in 30 seconds than she would in 10 minutes. And Trooper can calm in 5 seconds as much as Bandit does in 30. Always has. Different horses.

Habits take a lot of practice to make them habits, but a "habit of obedience" cue response only momentarily overrides the horse. If the horse still strongly wants to get out of Dodge, the horse will try to leave again.

Something I did not try with Mia was going for a full 360 degree turn instead of 180. It may be the biggest difference in using the curb was that it was a straight line stop versus a turn 180, and that left the scary thing still in front of her. It might be that it worked with Bandit because he would try the 180, and I would prolong it into a 360 - so he always ended up facing the same way. Maybe.

But Mia was a vastly harder horse to ride than Bandit. With help from the curb bit, I was able to teach her to hold her ground. Once she realized holding her ground often resulted in the scary thing 'running away', she stopped trying to bolt. She would still swerve or jump sideways when startled, but she stopped bolting. When she decided bolting was not helpful, she stopped bolting.

In the end, it is the horse's brain that controls the horse's body, and a horse who wants to reject your will bad enough can and will do so. No amount of repetitive training, boring or fun, replaces the horse's mind with the human's.

A few weeks after Bandit arrived, I made a conscious decision to change my approach. I had started giving Mia more freedom after reading Tom Roberts, and she got a lot better. But I never tried to incorporate her thought into our approach - because I was still trying to make it MY desire, not OUR desire. As long as I owned Mia, I was still focused on what I wanted, not what we could do together. 

So I started Bandit off with a new approach that said we would do things together or not at all. He wasn't used to talking to his rider and getting to make choices - provided those choices were also acceptable to his rider. So we started to work on things as a team. And he has become much calmer and much more willing.

Would it have worked with Mia? I don't know. She had calmed a lot, but she was a much harder horse to ride. Maybe it would have worked.

But we do not control horses with our cues, no matter how much repetition we use. The horse's mind controls the horse's body. And the root issue of this thread, IMHO, lies there:

Do we control the horse's body? Should we? Is that even a goal we should have? 

For a lot of arena sports, 'body control' is probably crucial. If the "real world" is the arena, then I don't have a common reference point for discussion. We live in different worlds, and I don't know what works well in Arena World.

For my part, I've rejected body control. I'm not interested in riding a horse where I'm the boss and he's the servant. That isn't why I ride. I don't feel safe riding a horse using the body control approach. But I do feel safe riding with a team mate.


----------



## loosie

Smilie said:


> So Loosie, according to the above rational, a newbie can just as easily use food rewards incorrectly, ...
> Go through the 'new to horses thread, or even the training threads, and you will find way, way more posts on horses with food aggression, horses that pull away, horses that have just plain intimidated that


I'm afraid I have absolutely no clue what track you've gone off on now, with the above. I must admit, I do have problems reading big blocks of text without paragraph breaks & such, so I haven't been reading all of what you've been writing...



> Great horsemen, like the ones Hondo so readily refers to, did not need lectures in learning terminologies, ...
> A horse does not give a dam, what term you are applying


I was unaware that this forum was only full of great horsemen, or horses. I thought this forum was for normal humans ;-)


----------



## loosie

Hehe, just remembered a lecture with Dr Bowker, when there was a very newbie horseperson sitting in... She put her hand up to ask how on earth the neurotic behaviours were linked to what we were discussing. Which was OCD - that is, Osteo Chondrosis Dessicans. But she had thought he was talking about Obsessive Compulsive Disorders!!:rofl: 

If that terminology wasn't clarified, she'd have come to some very bizarre assumptions, both on what was what and on Dr Bowker's beliefs!


----------



## Hondo

loosie said:


> It's not the unanswered questions, but the unquestioned answers that could be the most dangerous!! ;-)


I had that as a signature for a while as a quote from Dr. Bob Bowker.



@Golden Horse when a horse is 'masking' his pain is he lying?

Gulp! I think ya got me there. Certainly trying to deceive the predators.

My grandad liked to tell what he called "windys" once in awhile. I said, aw grandad you are lying to me! He said "did you believe me". I said no. He said, to lie is to deceive, if you did not believe me I did not deceive you. Therefore I did not lie.

Loved my grandad. He was about 75 I about 8 when that took place.


----------



## bsms

Smilie said:


> BSMS:
> 
> ...Well, you were not using any body control! I.m not going to post the entire thing again, as you just need to go back and read Cheri' stickie on creating a trail horse, or really watch the videos by Larry Trocha on spooking, bucking, bolting etc....


Why would I need to do that? What I did worked. And what I am trying now, with Bandit, is working even better.

Frankly, I DID try what Cherie wrote on that sticky, and it did NOT work with Mia. And when I PM'd Cherie, she said Mia was the sort of horse who would need a different approach. I respected her honesty and willingness to discuss Mia as Mia, not Mia as generic horse.

I also watched a video of Larry Trocha working a reining horse. He admitted the horse ended up failing at reining. And honestly, what I saw in the video was a horse who wanted to engage his mind, being trained in a sport that valued submission instead. I wasn't surprised the horse failed. His heart wasn't in it. He looked like he'd have made a good trail horse, but he had very expensive breeding for reining and no one wanted to turn a very expensive horse into "just a good trail horse"!

There is an approach to training that says the horse serves the rider. If you need to be adversarial to gain the obedience, then so be it. An obedient horse is the goal. Body control. Teach the horse to obey your cues. Then you are always in control. If the horse gets scared, you apply the body control you acquired through that boring repetitive training (not my words) and body control keeps you safe.

There is another approach. It says you teach the horse judgment, treat him as a partner, and then you can trust the horse because you are working together. You expose the horse to progressively more challenging situations, and let the horse learn from his mistakes - including learning that you are on his side and you have some ideas worth listening to. Then the horse's judgment and desire to listen to you becomes your safety. That was the approach that led to "horse sense" becoming a synonym for "common sense" back in the 1800s.

Seems to me someone who spent too much time reading about horses on the Internet would conclude they had no sense at all...

Folks will have to choose how they ride and how they feel secure. I'm 58 and Bandit is 8. If his legs were not damaged during his early years of riding, we might be together for 20+ years. And while Bandit is NOT Mr Steady Eddie, I feel safer on him than on any other horse (well, other than Cowboy, but I want Cowboy keeping my wife safe). I think he has the potential to be a horse I can ride securely and safely into my late 70s.

But if something happens to him, I'll look for a smart Arabian or Mustang and start over, using the approach I'm using with Bandit.

*It is as much about who I am and how I like to ride horses as it is anything about training*. Others make their choices. I've made mine. I feel no more need to imitate them than I feel a need for them to imitate me. I'm not telling anyone on this forum how they need to train or ride their horse. I'm just explaining something that is working very well for me and that matches my personality and riding goals. There is no going back for me. I'm not the same person I was 8 years ago. My horses have been training me...


----------



## Hondo

Smilie said:


> Anyway , this thread , I think, as out lived nay usefulness, and I see why many like Sarahfromfc decided to quit following it many moon ago.


Sorry to see you go smilie. You will be missed.


----------



## sarahfromsc

I like training, so to me the mundane stuff isn't boring. I do believe many people think it is. Rather intrigues means to why. Maybe it is the arena, or the drilling at times, or something. Who knows.

I am not sure if I am getting my point across. No where did I say the word obedience, even though I believe every animal, two legged or four legged needs obedience when living/dealing with a group. The terminology I used was muscle memory. That when I use a cue/aid it is the horse's body that is responding versus the walnut size flight/fight brain. Kind of like if my husband and I are walking through an antique district and I am being a look loo and he has to nudge me in the arm or side to keep me from walking over someone, or tripping over a planter by a shop door. The nudge doesn't hurt, nor is he trying to boss me around , but my body does respond to his nudge which brings me back to earth, if you will.

So my cues are my nudge to my horse bringing him back down to earth. Has nothing to do with being The Boss. 

We all need a little nudge every now and then.


----------



## Smilie

Lets be done with this endless thread, please!
I already told you, BSMS , use what works for you and the horse you now have. If gtteing off, talking to Bandit, sticking his nose on each and everything you encounter , do so!
Hey, if using a curb for control, gave you that moment to get Mia back to, you, =great! Does not negate that most horsemen, who have ridden countless horse on trails,,not in crowded cities, who, in fact, make trail riding activities a living, would rather use body control then a bit, for that moment where it takes to get a horse's mind back on you
I have ridden some horses, ruined by other people, where maybe a curb would be needed, as that horse really had no mouth left There is always a unique situation, where what generally works, is not applicable to the horse you have, thus you use what works.
If that means using a curb, versus getting that horse correct first in a snaffle, to keep control, do it! However, it does not change the fact, that any good trainer will tell you if it is not correct in a snaffle, it really won't be in a curb, at least not long term, as a horse can learn to run through any bit, and it is the mental conditioning, the mind, as per Hondo and you also ?, that in the end, controls the horse
You said upteen times that body control does not control a horse;s feet, but rather the mind-well, that applies to a bit, even more so!

Oh Loosie, I will work on my writing skills, but far as meanings being made clear-well, while just relating to horses, and showing, ROM meant register of Merit 
After I had knee replacements, it meant range of motion
Yea,irrelevant, but best way to end this topic, so it fits the general course!


----------



## Smilie

sarahfromsc said:


> I like training, so to me the mundane stuff isn't boring. I do believe many people think it is. Rather intrigues means to why. Maybe it is the arena, or the drilling at times, or something. Who knows.
> 
> I am not sure if I am getting my point across. No where did I say the word obedience, even though I believe every animal, two legged or four legged needs obedience when living/dealing with a group. The terminology I used was muscle memory. That when I use a cue/aid it is the horse's body that is responding versus the walnut size flight/fight brain. Kind of like if my husband and I are walking through an antique district and I am being a look loo and he has to nudge me in the arm or side to keep me from walking over someone, or tripping over a planter by a shop door. The nudge doesn't hurt, nor is he trying to boss me around , but my body does respond to his nudge which brings me back to earth, if you will.
> 
> So my cues are my nudge to my horse bringing him back down to earth. Has nothing to do with being The Boss.
> 
> We all need a little nudge every now and then.


Exactly, and why, when a horse is momentarily put into flight mode, thus has tuned you out, using some familiar exercises that he is familiar with, has him come back to you, as he responds to ingrained cues
A horse, in flight mode, concerned about something ahead, will stop, raise his head, tense, and stare intently. He has tuned you out, and is in flight mode
Asking for the head alone, getting him to lower it, soften his body and bend, as he automatically responds to those ingrained cues, will also bring his mind back to the fact that you are still on his back, still there guiding him, that you don't consider that object as something that is going to eat the both of you, so he relaxes, and brings that mind back to you
The lowered head alone, along with body softness and giving, helps to put him out of flight mode, and back into thinking mode.
If I can;t get a horse from staring intently, locked in place, neck up and tense, yup, I,m ready to get off!


----------



## sarahfromsc

Know the feeling. In our new home and new trails, the trail association does a wonderful job of maintain the trails. Erosion control is a biggie. The first time my Arab saw the anacondas......three five foot long fabric things filled with sand and laid out like steps.......well, it was interesting. But due to 'ingrained' cues and he only teleported over the last two. He wanted to spin and bolt away from the anacondas but I blocked that dip and spin. I was proud that he willingly stepped over the first black step and he was so intent on it, he didn't notice the other two. He looked up, looked down noticed he was straddling one and Teleported over the second and third.

At least I had some body control....lol


----------



## loosie

Hondo said:


> I had that as a signature for a while as a quote from Dr. Bob Bowker.


I did notice that. He's probably said it more than once then, because I have a feeling that's where may have heard it first! :biggrin: I love 'one line keepers'. Sure I've said this one here a number of times in the past, and it's been my signature line on my email for some years now.:thumbsup:



> My grandad liked to tell what he called "windys" once in awhile. I said, aw grandad you are lying to me! He said "did you believe me"


Oh wow, how bizarre, that my 'Gramp' used to 'tell a windy', which was generally something that was literally truthful, but designed to deceive!! For eg I remember he won a bet with my father(his son in law) once, by betting even at his age, he could still stand on one hand & drink a glass of beer. ...He then proceeded to squat down, foot on one hand & drink his beer!:twisted:


----------



## loosie

Hondo said:


> But neither does aversive response have anything to do with dishonesty. ...And willing compliance has exactly zero to do with honesty,


Down to terminology/perception again I feel. The term 'honest' does not mean 'truthful' here. To put it more simply... trying to avoid behavioural terms:wink:, an 'honest' horse in my understanding is one who is obedient and compliant, so 'dishonest horse'(not heard that term before) would be one who is not so obedient, is reticent, balky, tries to get out of stuff.


----------



## Hondo

loosie said:


> Down to terminology/perception again I feel. The term 'honest' does not mean 'truthful' here. To put it more simply... trying to avoid behavioural terms:wink:, an 'honest' horse in my understanding is one who is obedient and compliant, so 'dishonest horse'(not heard that term before) would be one who is not so obedient, is reticent, balky, tries to get out of stuff.


Well, I had not heard the term honest used in that way. Apparently neither has Webster. I couldn't even find any synonyms that even came close to obedient and compliant.

I'll put it down to a colloquial usage of the word. And I've no problem with colloquial, just did not know that particular colloquialism.


----------



## jaydee

Walkinthewalk absolutely nailed it - all horses are different and an owner learns to identify their horses and then rides them accordingly
There are horses that will always listen to the rider - provided the rider gets some advanced warning and the horse hasn't already leapt two feet across the road or trail or arena before the rider even notices the horse was going to do it. At that point you could be under a truck or you could have the type of horse that will then listen to his training - or you could have the type of horse that goes straight into panic mode and completely zones out
Unless a horse has had a full frontal lobotomy there's always a chance that any horse given the right pressure trigger will do that regardless of all the repetitive training so its wise to always have a Plan B for when Plan A fails @Smilie
I wasn't aware that the thread was purely for people who own trail horses.
You will find that the majority of competitive British riders also hack out regularly, including the ' dressage legend in his own lunchbreak' Valegro who I doubt you could put a price on.


----------



## Smilie

To be honest, sorta lost track of what this thread was really about,eons ago!

I know other horses get 'hacked' out, besides the ones used strictly for trail riding, a sit is good for their minds. My son started colts for a working cowhorse trainer, one summer, while going to University. One of his jobs, when those colts had about a month on them, was to ride them out, once or twice a week
My advise, on body control, was in context where I ride, and also included getting off, when the chance of body control, not bringing that mind back failed
So therefore, besides pictures of those tight streets, where I realize horse must be kept straight, beyond holding him between your legs and reins, perhaps with more in the mouth and on the face, how did you minimize the chance of a horse encountering a vehicle, besides doing the right thing , getting off when it was the smart thing to do? I perfectly accept the riding skills needed, to ride a fit competition hrose, and this is not a confrontational question, but an honest one
The people here, that asked /discussed riding horses out, mainly were those like Hondo and BSMS, with none of them asking about hacking out those types of horses you rode professionally, and under those circumstances, so, of course, my advise did not include those situations, and I am just as open minded to hearing as to how you rode them through those streets, as anyone else

Also, to be clear, of course many professionals hack out their top performance horses, as it helps preserve the mind, same as any show horse, BUT that still does not mean the average person, looking for ahorse to ride out, buys that type of hrose to recreationally ride.
Heck, many of those trail horses, are bought on kijiji , Craiglist, ect, or privately, with top prices paid, in the range of $3,500 to $5,000
Also, those professionals, hacking out their show horses, hardly need advise as how to do so!
My point was not that those horses were never ridden out, but there are not bought by amateurs, people new to horses, to use as trail horses
Any amateur that rides a 100,000 dollar show horse out, is, also working with a professional trainer, as that person who can spend that kind of money on ahrose, is not trying to train that horse by himself
I am humble enough to fully accept any pro riding those hroses out, certainly needs no advise from either me, or others that train trail horses and not performance hroses, that are hacked out as part of the program, by a very skilled rider!


----------



## Smilie

In the end, on the tangent of'body control, I accept perfectly, Jaydee, that there are situations on where it is not applicable, where you have to use other techniques, but I also feel, everytime someone brings up body control, and where it has merit, you seem determined to completely discredit ever using it on any horse, and on the type most people ride here, and where it would give them a useful tool-not the only tool, but a useful one, for the average rider, riding out a recreational hrose, and not hacking out a top performance horse, ridden already by someone who needs zero advise! Someone that can jump an International course, certainly needs no advise on riding that horse out!
I, have no interest in riding such a horse out, even. Kinda enjoy riding a sane trail hrose, one I can relax on, enjoy the scerary


----------



## egrogan

Smilie said:


> Lets be done with this endless thread, please!


Why? I have been reading since page 1. I find it fascinating to hear folks explain their theories and motivations. I do enjoy understanding the meaning behind how people use terminology, and hearing them debate how others interpret it. That's how many people learn. Why is debate and conversation so frustrating? I don't have anything intelligent to contribute to the conversation, but it's making me think.


----------



## jaydee

@Smilie
You have now written a seemingly endless load of words arguing with me on a subject that you have actually created yourself out of a short post that I made where I said that there have been times when, for my own safety. I have decided that dismounting a horse (usually when riding in traffic) was the wisest thing to do
No wonder the thread's gotten confusing at times
As for this statement of yours:
_Lets be done with this endless thread, please!_
If you find the thread to be of no interest to you because you can't relate to it or find it too annoying because you can't agree with most of it then please move on to a thread that does appeal to you so that those that are enjoying the discussion albeit a rather rambling one and maybe learning something from it can do so without having to wade though all of your arguments that are most often founded in your lack of understanding what someone is trying to say or you trying to make something out of a statement that isn't there


----------



## jaydee

@Smilie
You have now written a seemingly endless load of words arguing with me on a subject that you have actually created yourself out of a short post that I made where I said that there have been times when, for my own safety. I have decided that dismounting a horse (usually when riding in traffic) was the wisest thing to do
No wonder the thread's gotten confusing at times
As for this statement of yours:
_Lets be done with this endless thread, please!_
If you find the thread to be of no interest to you because you can't relate to it or find it too annoying because you can't agree with most of it then please move on to a thread that does appeal to you so that those that are enjoying the discussion albeit a rather rambling one and maybe learning something from it can do so without having to wade though all of your arguments that are most often founded in your lack of understanding what someone is trying to say or you trying to make something out of a statement that isn't there


----------



## Smilie

See.now you are taking the wrong slant on what I say.
I also realize that habituation, exposure alone get horses comfortable around traffic and crowds. You only have to see the Amish horses, going down a highway, and in town, or those horses in Cuba, used for transportation, where streets in Havana are extremely narrow
I imagine you took green horses, in traffic, out with seasoned horses. As you feel I am only negating anything you say, as I have already started time and time again, that if safety versus staying on is involved, then get off
You have yet really not answered, as to what you would do different, besides getting that horse exposure, or getting off, when that is the best thing to do, in traffic
I have seasoned green show horses, so know that exposure alone, acts as 'desensitization', so you really use that fact mainly
Another honest question, take that top show horse, desensitized to crowds and traffic, , out somewhere on a ride where he encounters cows for the first time, that are actually coming towards you, out of some trees. How would you handle that, without some body control?


----------



## Smilie

See.now you are taking the wrong slant on what I say. I am not minimizing anything you say, just trying to add context
I also realize that habituation, exposure alone get horses comfortable around traffic and crowds. You only have to see the Amish horses, going down a highway, and in town, or those horses in Cuba, used for transportation, where streets in Havana are extremely narrow
I imagine you took green horses, in traffic, out with seasoned horses. As you feel I am only negating anything you say, as I have already started time and time again, that if safety versus staying on is involved, then get off
You have yet really not answered, as to what you would do different, besides getting that horse exposure, or getting off, when that is the best thing to do, in traffic
I have seasoned green show horses, so know that exposure alone, acts as 'desensitization', so you really use that fact mainly in many cases
Another honest question, take that top show horse, desensitized to crowds and traffic, , out somewhere on a ride where he encounters cows for the first time, that are actually coming towards you, out of some trees. How would you handle that, without some body control?


----------



## bsms

Smilie said:


> ...I, have no interest in riding such a horse out, even. Kinda enjoy riding a sane trail hrose, one I can relax on, enjoy the scerary


Well, just got back from a short ride with my wife and Bandit and Trooper. By your definition of body control, neither of us has body control of our horses. But we HAD a relaxing ride. Bandit got a good look at his first jackhammer. Did fine. I had shortened the stirrups 3 holes, trying something, so I stopped at the jackhammer and dropped them down a hole. He observed, then I mounted up and we walked away.

My wife and I are part of a very small church, so we're part of the 4 person "choir". Singing ability is not required in a church as small as ours. As we walked down the wash, Bandit keeping a close eye and getting a little claustrophobic, as he tends do, I guess I started singing the song we're going to sing next Sunday. I realized it when my wife joined in.

Any good Natural Horsemanship trainer will tell you studies of wild mustangs have NEVER found a case of mustangs singing to each other. Oh well. Our horses, as they do so often, took it in the spirit it was offered - 75 degrees, sunny, two horses and two riders strolling down a wash in southern Arizona, singing a gospel hymn somewhat out of tune. IOW, life is good.

Took a new place to climb out of the wash. Bad choice. When we got to the top, cactus everywhere. There was a trail about 300 yards ahead, but we took 10-15 minutes to weave our way, back and forth, hitting dead ends, asking (not demanding) our horses slip between cactus inches from their hooves or rumps, turning every few steps - and Bandit and Trooper did it like champs. No hesitation, no balking, just getting the job done. I've been told what we call neck reining isn't REAL neck reining, but our horses were content.

We didn't have what apparently is body control, just as we didn't apparently do genuine neck reining. But our horses stayed with us the whole ride. If I needed Bandit to push through dead brush - which he hates - he looked, accepted responsibility, and went. We may not have had what reputable clinicians would call body control, but we both felt safe and confident on two horses who were working with us every step of the way.

Folks need to decide how they like to ride and what works for them. If they love arena work, have fun! If they want body control first - well, not my horse, not my issue. Enjoy! My approach may be beneath most riders...but Bandit isn't their horse or their problem. The more I ride Bandit, the more I trust him. He's starting to have a lot of horse sense! We had fun together today - all four of us, out as a team.

And others are welcome to do what works for them and their horses.
:cheers:​


----------



## Foxhunter

In answer to your question you do have to keep a horse straight and between hand and leg but that does not mean you are in his face.

I would rather ride a traffic shy horse than one that spooks. The former will go away from the vehicle the latter into it. My horses were use to tractors working about the barns, bringing in the hay and removing the muck heap. They were fed from the ATV saw cars driving about the place so when I started long reigning them out and about I never worried about meeting vehicles. 

The one good thing about winding narrow rural roads is that the locals know to expect meeting another vehicle, horses, walkers or flocks of sheep and drive accordingly. Visitors were worried about getting their cars dirty or meeting something else so they drove very steadily. 

The widest part of the lane past our place was the steepest part of the hill and cars would accelerate up it and race down but even that was only at a max of 40 mph for all pf 200 yards before they met the sharp corner. 

I led the youngsters from the ridden horses, they never bothered about the traffic though they would look at the white slow signs on the road and the other thing that would sometimes spook them was if the primary school children were out playing in the playground, lots of high pitched screaming and children running to the fence to see us ride by.

With horses that didn't like traffic I would rode them out and keep them covered by another horse. I would also take them to a really busy road if there was somewhere I could safely stand them and just sit on them sometimes for hours just letting them watch the vehicles go past, if they were afraid of tractors I would take them to a farm and rodemthem round and round a running tractor until they were bored of being frightened. 

Majority of rural drivers will slow for horses which all vehicles should do by law, nearer big towns drivers had less respect. Ifmamcar was coming fast on a straight road I would slow them down by riding across the road somtheir way was blocked. 

When I first came to the US imwas astounded at how wide and straight the roads are, here it is not so. There is a lot more traffic on the roads. American friends who visited here thought they could hire a car at the airport and drive down to visit me, around 110 miles in around two hours. It could be done in theory orminnthe middle of the night but during the day you could add at least another hour which, if there was an accident could be twice that! 

After seeing pictures of where you ride you would hate it here!


----------



## Smilie

BSMS, there are very few times I have to actually use body control, same as bit contact, it is there, just in case
That jack hammer did not run at you-a whole big difference, as when riding a young horse down the road, during spring, that has never seen cattle, does not live with cattle, and those young heifers, just turned out, come bucking and running up to that fence. Don't know about you, but I then like to have some body control, as I sure can't keep those young heifers from continuing to come
In fact, once I have a horse broke, I rarely need to use body control. Last time I used it on Carmen, was actually this summer, when a wagon, pulled by Percherons came trotting towards us, harness and bells jingling -something she has never seen before She had met that same wagon, earlier on the trail, but the rider saw us and stopped that team. No problem riding by it. Moving towards her, at speed, was an entirely new ball game


----------



## Smilie

Thanks Foxhunter, and if I ride a young horse out, for his first few times, with another horse, I do just have them face that traffic, green horse on the inside
I used to fit up young halter horses , ponying them along our road, at an extended trot, lots of traffic going by, but my pony horse was solid, so again, no problem
When I mentioned that counterflex, and when a B train came up on Charlie, unexpected, one winter,when there was nowhere to go, as ditches were field with snow, higher then the road, I guess I could have gotten off, as she was still green, and no other hrose was there to give her confidence. B trains are not supposed to go up our country road, but I just had her face that B train, had my legs on her, asked for her face, with her slightly counter flexed towards that ditch
She held it together, until that B train passed close enough to touch, at which point, she jumped into that ditch. It is not like I go along counter flexing using body control on my broke hroses, as they have that exposure that acts like desensitization. It is only one tool, when a horse wants to get out of there=now, before his mind gets back on you, and not something you need to use over and over on abroke horse, that you have given exposure to, that has learned to trust you


----------



## Smilie

BSMS, I am glad you are making progress with Bandit.
Sure, it is very easy, to ask a horse to gradually move up to something he is concerned about, just not pushing him too quick, past his comfort zone.Afterall, I do that very often, and as the horse gains trust.confidence, that process becomes easier and easier, esp if he has the company of another horse
It is entirely a different ball part, when the object of his concern, comes towards him
In fact, truth be told, I rode for many years, without using any body control, it is just another tool, I found useful, riding a green horse out, when his mind temporarily leaves him, and he is on the verge of flight mode
Fact be told, I never really put a one rein stop on any of my horses, as I want them to learn to stop square, and thus take the time to get them solid on the hwoa, before riding them out. I do make them soft, so i can take their head away, in an emergency, long enough to step off, if needed.
Again, the example when Smilie got into a nest of ground hornets, without me knowing it was there, and she was being stung, She was sure ready to blow, bolt, BUT I had that response to whoa, and wa able to take her head away, long enough to step off, Nothing that you are doing with Bandit now, would have saved you then. Maybe you can bale off faster then me, risk damaging your knees less, so don't need that moment of body control
I sure don't go riding down my road, on one of my broke horses, using body control, flexing them or anything else, as they have the exposure, have the trust, and are broke, where only in the very, very rare emergency, would I need to resort t o it. Don't know about you, but the more tools in a tool box, the better off you are. You then can select the tool you need to use, which is not possible, if it is not there!


----------



## Hondo

@Smilie

Just for fun early this morning I counted who and how many posted in the first 15 pages. Had something to do after that. You won with 35 posts in 15 pages. I was a close second at 25 posts. rcd, bsms and foxhunter were not even in the running at 15,12, and 14 respectively. The rest, 16 posters in all, were way way back there.

I don't believe you seriously want the thread to end otherwise you'd simply unsubscribe and get no more notifications of posts.

Are you a dishonest poster or are you just teasing?


----------



## bsms

Smilie said:


> BSMS, I am glad you are making progress with Bandit.
> Sure, it is very easy, to ask a horse to gradually move up to something he is concerned about, just not pushing him too quick, past his comfort zone....It is entirely a different ball part, when the object of his concern, comes towards him...


You mean, like cars do. Bicyclists do. Dogs do. Garbage trucks do. We have a buzzard of some sort here, big ol' honking birds, that sometimes swoop down toward a horse's head. No idea why. Maybe they think I ought to be dead meat since I'm riding a horse without body control. :biggrin: A plastic bag, shining in the sun, blew at and against his feet today. And a rabbit ran underneath him today. A jogger ran toward him, passing by on the other side of the street. Dirt bikes - loud, two stroke engine monsters ridden by giant helmeted horse flies - they've come right at us.

You live in Canada and on a ranch. Got it. You live where there are mountains. Got it. 

Your way is not the only way. Neither is mine. Lots of folks would as soon shoot themselves as bother with riding a horse on a ride like I took today. That's OK. Lots of folks do things on horses that aren't of interest to me, too! And I'm not them, and they are not me.

But if a middle aged person gets a horse and can't trust their horse and no one else wants it...the NH types seem to offer endless round penning. I've met horses who have been round penned for a year. And you offer arena training, until the horse has all the right buttons and the rider has "body control". Most of the folks with horses within 5 miles of me don't even HAVE an arena!

And I'm convinced there are horses who will never give you "body control" - but who WILL work with a team mate. And not just "willing compliance", but "thinking partnership". 

I don't know what you and/or reputable clinicians consider adequate body control. At this point, I no longer care. Bandit is turning into a level-headed, thinking, aware horse who also has a strong instinct for self-preservation. I'm liking what I'm seeing. Not sure how that can be a bad thing...


----------



## jaydee

@Smilie
What on earth has any of the stuff you're posting got to do with me trying to say that if getting off is the safest thing to do in a certain situation then do it?
It has nothing at all to do with:
How well your horse should be trained
How you have failed because you didn't spend enough time in an arena doing the basics
You didn't have another horse with you
You didn't make your horse stand and face the scary thing
How great a rider you are
How bad a rider you are
How valuable your horse is
If you compete at upper level or if you just trail ride
Where you live
And yet you have somehow twisted one simple post to incorporate all of those thing plus a few more


What you do with your horses is total irrelevant really because at some point in many rider's lives they will find themselves in a situation they feel that is out of their control, it's not all about you.
Foxhunter mentioned in another thread that she'd decided to get off a horse that would rear and flip over backwards - so would I.
You even mentioned yourself not so long ago that you got off one of your horses at a show and lunged it because it was getting a bit too wired - was that because you'd failed it? Were there massive holes in your basics which meant the horse wasn't listening to you or did you not feel that it was the safest thing to do at that moment in time?


----------



## jaydee

@Smilie
What on earth has any of the stuff you're posting got to do with me trying to say that if getting off is the safest thing to do in a certain situation then do it?
It has nothing at all to do with:
How well your horse should be trained
How you have failed because you didn't spend enough time in an arena doing the basics
You didn't have another horse with you
You didn't make your horse stand and face the scary thing
How great a rider you are
How bad a rider you are
How valuable your horse is
If you compete at upper level or if you just trail ride
Where you live
And yet you have somehow twisted one simple post to incorporate all of those thing plus a few more


What you do with your horses is total irrelevant really because at some point in many rider's lives they will find themselves in a situation they feel that is out of their control, it's not all about you.
Foxhunter mentioned in another thread that she'd decided to get off a horse that would rear and flip over backwards - so would I.
You even mentioned yourself not so long ago that you got off one of your horses at a show and lunged it because it was getting a bit too wired - was that because you'd failed it? Were there massive holes in your basics which meant the horse wasn't listening to you or did you not feel that it was the safest thing to do at that moment in time?


----------



## Smilie

Hondo said:


> @Smilie
> 
> Just for fun early this morning I counted who and how many posted in the first 15 pages. Had something to do after that. You won with 35 posts in 15 pages. I was a close second at 25 posts. rcd, bsms and foxhunter were not even in the running at 15,12, and 14 respectively. The rest, 16 posters in all, were way way back there.
> 
> I don't believe you seriously want the thread to end otherwise you'd simply unsubscribe and get no more notifications of posts.
> 
> Are you a dishonest poster or are you just teasing?


Well, what can I say, I just kinda keep being drawn in. It is winter here, I' m retired, don't do soap operas, coffee fests, so as I wander in and out, sometimes just putting a short ride on ahorse, or like today, pulling shoes, I just get drawn to 'talk' to fellow horse people, as I sip my coffee, even if we don't always agree.
I guess, I;ll leave that label up to you, LOl!


----------



## Smilie

jaydee said:


> @Smilie
> What on earth has any of the stuff you're posting got to do with me trying to say that if getting off is the safest thing to do in a certain situation then do it?
> It has nothing at all to do with:
> How well your horse should be trained
> How you have failed because you didn't spend enough time in an arena doing the basics
> You didn't have another horse with you
> You didn't make your horse stand and face the scary thing
> How great a rider you are
> How bad a rider you are
> How valuable your horse is
> If you compete at upper level or if you just trail ride
> Where you live
> And yet you have somehow twisted one simple post to incorporate all of those thing plus a few more
> Jadee, calm down, where in the heck do you read that I ever disagreed with getting off, if that is the best option to keep you safe, that what you do does not depends on where you ride, or the situation.
> I think you need to take deep breath also, when you think I am disagreeing with you, suggest never to get off a horse, as I;m very open as to how I ride,e sp now, and dam right, if a horse is going to blow, I;m getting off, as I sure don't bounce like I used to.
> Take a deep breath
> 
> A, I neither use body control in all situations, nor do I believe It is the answer in all situations. It is an extra tool, as when riding by an object, on a steep climb, where that horse can neither stop, or jump sideways, without going over the edge
> B I am well aware that even well trained horses can loose it, and the best option then is to get off, and do some ground work. If I did not believe that, recommend it, in a situation where it is the best thing for that rider to do, I hardly would have publicly posted where I did that
> C Just like you gave me example, where body control exercises would not work, and I totally believe that, I gave you some where they will give you an extra tool
> Riding a horse out, is not a simple mechanical exercise, that if you have button, abc, it will go perfect. I;m not stupid, have ridden in enough different places, to be aware of that
> Temperament, feeding program, exposure to things, miles, trust, judgement call of the rider, are all part of that package. Whenever there is a danger of being hurt, get off. Why in the heck do you think I posted, how body control, gave me just that split moment to get off Smilie, as she was being stung by hornets? I was not going to cowboy her through a blind bucking spree!
> Did I suggest staying on? I think you need to read more carefully, as to what I post, versus taking offense, or perhaps, that is a mutual thing between us
> WHERE DID YOU GET THAT I WAS AGAINST GETTING OFF< when ride safety was at stake?????


----------



## Smilie

As to why , Jaydee, I think it is most likely due to past history, we we both seem to take the worst twist from each other's post, reading implications that are not there.
I will try to do better, and not take a meaning that is not there.


----------



## gottatrot

Foxhunter said:


> I would rather ride a traffic shy horse than one that spooks. The former will go away from the vehicle the latter into it...


Knowing the horse is so important. If I didn't know a horse, I would not ride in traffic and be very cautious about leading. 
Both of my horses have been around tons of cars and traffic. Exposure isn't everything. I don't even think about traffic on Halla. She has decided that vehicles do not harm horses. If buses, RVs or log trucks go by, I don't care because my horse barely notices. 

Amore is unpredictable. She has had more years of exposure to these things than Halla. If something big shows up and she has any kind of concern in her body, I'm getting off. Once when I was leading her by a highway a big truck came by and she startled so hard from a stand still that her legs shot out too far and she fell down. That's classic Amore, rolling into traffic so they have to swerve out of the way. No one ever told me, "Watch out, if your horse falls down they might roll onto the road." You can't predict the type of danger she might get into, so I have to be very cautious with her. 



> *@Bsms:*
> Folks need to decide how they like to ride and what works for them...
> 
> ...And I'm convinced there are horses who will never give you "body control" - but who WILL work with a team mate. And not just "willing compliance", but "thinking partnership".


Exactly. My little Amore will never give you consistent body control and is always going to be a hilariously unpredictable ride. But I started with her 11 years ago expecting that consistent training would turn her into the kind of horse @Smilie likes to ride. My expectations quickly lowered and lowered as I learned that as someone said "Horses are not a gumball machine. You can't put in a quarter and always have a gumball come out." But this horse has taught me a thousand things that have made me a better horseman. She is always on my team, even when rolling into traffic with her eyes bugging out as she looks at me, "How will we get ourselves out of this?"
I wonder how many times I've had to tell this horse, "It's OK, you're still alive." She is always relieved to hear it from me.
@Smilie, I don't believe anyone is saying "don't post." They're saying, don't complain about a thread getting long if you're contributing as much or more than everyone else. Don't complain about tangents if you are following tangents yourself.

I'm with @egrogan, reading and learning from it all. But I also do ride horses that end up wherever the wind blows them.


----------



## loosie

Smilie said:


> See.now you are taking the wrong slant on what I say.


Oh for goodness sake!!! I agree with Jaydee(& others) that so much of this thread seems to be endless words about what you are misunderstanding/assuming/interpreting yourself... and arguing & getting angry about it, when there's nothing in it! I must ask, if you're so frustrated by it, have said a few times you've had enough of it, why are you still arguing??


----------



## Smilie

maybe,opening comment on ';little stock horse where you ride,'
past reference to stock horses needing to be pedalled' won;t react when a bomb goes off under them', just might have set the tone a bit?/


----------



## loosie

gottatrot said:


> @*Smilie* , I don't believe anyone is saying "don't post." They're saying, don't complain about a thread getting long if you're contributing as much or more than everyone else. Don't complain about tangents if you are following tangents yourself.


...Mostly Smilie, please try not to be so affronted & angry, when you're taking 'the worst twist from each other's post, reading implications that are not there.' Again, everyone is liable to do some of that, but we need to remember, what we 'read' may not be intended, so not worth getting upset & righteous about.

As mentioned many times, I respect that you are likely(as you have pointed out, I don't know you) a good trainer, and I for one, have agreed with & valued a HEAP of what you have posted in the past. But on this particular thread, you seem to be taking SO much SO wrongly, personally & jumping to conclusions, which you then feel you need to 'defensively attack'. I think YOU need to step back, take a few deep breaths, have a large whiskey(or few), and then come back to us, remembering that we're not all against you!:hug: As we all agreed on, misunderstanding/misinterpretation abound. So it's really not worth getting upset about, not worth assuming it's personal. Not worth arguing about. :cheers:


----------



## bsms

Just saw this:



Smilie said:


> BSMS...Again, the example when Smilie got into a nest of ground hornets, without me knowing it was there, and she was being stung, She was sure ready to blow, bolt, BUT I had that response to whoa, and wa able to take her head away, long enough to step off, Nothing that you are doing with Bandit now, would have saved you then...


Ummmm...you mean like when Mia - not Bandit, but *MIA* - lashed out against a staghorn cholla cactus, putting well over 100 spines in her left rear leg and butt?

And me with no body control!

But she stopped in a couple of strides, then I had to back her up while still mounted due to close proximity of more cactus, then dismount, then take out my pliers and remove all those spines, one by one, and then we continued on with our ride.

Or do you mean like a little while back, when a swarm of migrating bees passed over Bandit & I, and I had to lean flat to keep my head out of the swarm?

Sure wish I had body control then! Of course, Bandit lowered his head a little and walked slowly on, and the bees passed by. Strangest thing! No body control, no list of memorized and practiced cues, but my horse did the right thing - and got me out of there without running.

And there was Cowboy, last October, when some idiots started shooting at us and my friend could see the bullets cutting through the vegetation around Cowboy's legs. Cowboy was more nervous than I was...but he waited for me to tell him what to do! And my friend and I charged the shooters on Trooper and Cowboy. Pity we didn't have body control!

I'm a nobody rider with Craigslist horses...and my horses are doing what you claim they cannot do. Better lucky than good, I guess. But at some point, you might want to stop telling people what will happen (or cannot happen) if they try something you have never tried. “The proof of the pudding is in the eating”. Let those of us who have dined pass judgment on the meal.


----------



## Smilie

I also respect the opinion of many people here.
I never meant to imply you have to have body control, just another tool, that;s all
It is also a bit different, when hornets are actually stinging a horse, and just in the general area.
When a horse is actually being stung, trust, goes out the window, and even body control, would not have saved me long term-all it id, was give me time to get off
I already told you, that I rode for many years, before I even knew about body control-it is just another tool, you can either chose to use , or not
About a year ago, I was riding Charlie back tot he barn, and she acted very alert, suddenly, ready to spook. I did not notice a swarm of migrating bees, ahead, so urged her on.She obeyed, and when we rode through that swarm, I was glad that I had not' lied' to her, as I guess when bees swarm, to find a new hive, they are not very aggressive.
Thus, as I already told you, if what you are doing with Bandit, works, just continue doing what you are doing. Body control is just something i found as a little extra tool, as hubby never rides around home, thus I wound up riding green horses out by themselves. Not everyone needs it, nor is it the solution in all cases. It is just another tool.


----------



## bsms

Smilie said:


> ...When a horse is actually being stung, trust, goes out the window, and even body control, would not have saved me long term-all it id, was give me time to get off...


But when a horse has a bunch of spines in its butt, that doesn't count. Because if it did, then what I was doing with Mia might be valid.

Some years ago, we had two separate corrals because Trooper and Lilly would attack each other. Stupidly, we had a narrow walkway between them. Even more stupid, my oldest daughter led Trooper down that narrow walkway. I was too far away to stop her, and Lilly bit Trooper on the butt multiple times before they got to a spot wide enough for Trooper to jump forward without running over my oldest daughter.

That sure as heck wasn't body control. She was in front of Trooper, leading him. Nothing was holding him back. Nothing kept him from running over my oldest daughter - yet he did not. He only moved to save himself when he could do so without hurting her.

Why? How can that be?​


----------



## Foxhunter

I maintain that with more things than many people realise, come from the confidence and thoughts of the rider - not necessarily experience though obviously that helps. 

The slightest iota of the rider expecting something to happen odds are that it will. 

The animal gets its confidence from the rider/handler and it doesn't mean that they have to have a bond.


----------



## Hondo

Foxhunter said:


> I maintain that with more things than many people realise, come from the confidence and thoughts of the rider - not necessarily experience though obviously that helps.


I am beginning to think more and more this is true. Not metal telepathy, IMO, but skills at reading body language that we can only dream about.

Since this is an off topic thread in general, I had an experience with two horses today.

The ranch is unwilling to turn loose of Rimmey, the white horse in my signature, so Rimmey is back with the herd and Dragon, a five year old gelding that has been handled very little if at all since about 6 months and never had his feet trimmed, is in the field with Hondo.

Hondo and Rimmey ate out of the same feeder no problem. Rimmey was a little bossy sometimes but not much. They were long time buddies in the field.

Hondo WILL NOT let Dragon eat or even drink with him. He even threw Dragon into me and I did get on to Hondo for that. He said he was sorry and wouldn't do it again.

Yesterday I ponied Dragon around the 60 acre field. All went well. But today Dragon would not come along with Hondo when leading both. I finally let Hondo stand and Dragon led fine as usual. So Dragon was scared of Hondo.

When I finally began ponying Dragon I had to loop his lead through a night latch on the saddle to get him to follow. After about 1/4 the way around he led fine again.

I was going to post asking how to get a horse to like another horse, but I think I found my answer.

I went on a single ride with Hondo in the outback for a couple of hours. Fed him some yum alfalfa when we got back. He was all looking around in his pen, "Where's Dragon, Where's Dragon?". Didn't really care about the alfalfa and I know he had to be hungry.

So I started up my little motorcycle, opened the gate, and Hondo went galloping off. I raced around to watch the interface. When Hondo saw Dragon he stopped and started grazing nonchalantly about 200 feet away. Dragon was grazing and glancing at Hondo. I think he saw something different. He moved about 50 feet closer and went back to grazing. This continued until they were greeting each other muzzle to muzzle (to my delight!).

After 15 or 20 seconds Hondo said, ok beat it kid. Dragon moved off about 6 feet and went back to grazing.

This will be repeated several times in the coming days. Hondo does not like to be by himself, (being he's a horse)

I'll do stuff like giving them treats at the same time and I plan to maybe have leads on both of them at one feeder.

We'll see what happens. And it's not because Dragon is young. Had Wisdom in here for a while and he is a year younger than Dragon. Hondo and Wisdom ate fine together. Got along together.

Just can't figure why Hondo doesn't like Dragon who is a very nice friendly horse. I'll learn something out of this.


----------



## bsms

If so, then how could a horse surprise us? I've been totally, 100% confident and had the horse say no. I couldn't count the times Mia spooked where I had no idea it was coming, and no idea afterward what it was that spooked her. I can think of two times where Trooper balked, and 2 times in 8 years doesn't exactly ruin one's confidence.

Heck, Bandit's previous owner is and presumably was a very confident fellow. Yet while he could manage to "push Bandit", he admitted Bandit could put up a hard fight at times.

I'll grant that a fearful rider can create fear in a horse. But I wasn't exactly calm when Cowboy & I were being shot at, yet Cowboy waited for my decision. When that was to go forward into the gun fire, he went. Without hesitation. And to be honest, I was rattled more by the migrating bees than being shot at...but Bandit stayed completely calm.

I've watched totally confident riders, including me, be surprised when their horse had a very different idea. If there is a correlation, it seems a weak one.


----------



## Smilie

Horses, like people, are individuals, and what works in one relationship, might not in another
There was a great article once, In Horse and Rider, titled, 'when to know it is time to divorce your horse\ One horse that is mismatched with one person, might click with another, just like some second marriages
I do know that many people have been piled hard, when a horse was being stung by hornets I also work, so that my horses never consider me the path, of escape, when a more dominant horse puts the run on them, esp important when feeding a large group of horses
You don't know how a horse will react in nay given situation, until they are actually in it


----------



## Hondo

bsms said:


> But I wasn't exactly calm when Cowboy & I were being shot at, yet Cowboy waited for my decision.



Were they actually shooting AT you? Did you press charges? Wondering.......


----------



## bsms

My experience has been mostly with 2 rather unusual horses. For example, on the last couple of rides, I've noticed Bandit is now - after 17 months - paying attention to how Trooper or Cowboy act, and factoring that in his decision. Until this last month, he always assumed they were lucky idiots. If they got past a garbage can safely, it meant NOTHING to him!

Yet many people have had success with using a more experienced horse to demonstrate to a younger horse how to go past stuff. They were not wrong. And neither was I. Bandit was a bit odd. And now Bandit is watching to see what happens and using that information instead of ignoring it. If he keeps it up, the next few months of riding with a couple of darn good trail horses might open his horizons.

Clinton Anderson has been successful with many horses. The people who told me to whip Mia forward were not lying. It had worked for them. But it didn't work with Mia.

Heck, I've got an Australian Shepherd mix who needs a VERY different approach than my Border Collie!

And maybe part of it is where I live. I told a guy at church the other day that I went for a ride before church. He's about 70 and a really nice guy. The sort who would give you the shirt off his back. Well, he started telling me about all the horses he had ridden, how he had been able "_to muscle them around_", how the horses hated him, how dangerous it was to turn your back on a horse, and he finished with telling me I needed to understand "_You can NEVER, EVER trust a horse!_"

I suspect my jaw was hanging down near my knees. He looked at me like I was a Martian and walked away. FWIW, my SIL grew up in upstate NY. He had to work on his grandma's horse farm every day growing up. He hates horses. He knew mine for a couple of years before telling me my horses were strange. "_When you turn your back on them, they don't try to bite you!_" :eek_color: Another year passed before he admitted they seem kind of nice, even friendly...and after 8 years, he's going to allow our grand daughter to take riding lessons.

I don't exactly live in a hothouse of enlightened equitation...so maybe I over-react. For that, I apologize.


----------



## bsms

Hondo said:


> Were they actually shooting AT you? Did you press charges? Wondering.......


Three idiots with Glocks, shooting their pistols. Not only did they not have a backstop (other than a mesquite), but the trail went on straight past the tree they hung their targets in. We were pretty unhappy with them, but a prudent man measures his words when confronting three armed idiots out in the desert...

Didn't file charges. Wouldn't have had proof anyways.


----------



## sarahfromsc

Ride in the woods before rifle season. All you here is the bullets ripping through the trees and then the crack of the rifle.......at least you saw the asshats with glocks.


----------



## Hondo

Better start wearing orange? And bells?


----------



## sarahfromsc

Do both.


----------



## Smilie

For the most part, hunters here are pretty responsible, far as being sure as to what they shoot at, out west anyways, and I feel pretty safe riding there in hunting season,without any special coloured clothes
Around home, not so much, as we get 'road hunters;, hunting deer,, where after a few drinks, livestock, including hroses, begin to look like moose and deer, esp if you have woods as part of your pasture
I worry more riding across fields at home, in hunting season, then outwest, as for the most part, you only get serious hunters, where you can only access that hunting area on foot or on a horse, and where that hunting is on draw, for atrophy animal. The hunter has to make sure not only what he is shooting at, but if an elk is a six point, or a ram is at least 3/4 curl
Thus, you often ride out at dawn, i with rifle shots sometimes quite close, but trust that the guy with that finger on the trigger, has identified you and your horse as 'non trophy', LOL!
When we still lived on our acreage, we had a lot more horses then now, and a lot less pasture. I used to leg picket a young stallion out, in the ditch after I got home form work.
He happened to be black. On one particular night, a car came to a skidding stop, and several guys piled out, laughing rifles across the hood, sighting on that horse
My son, about thirteen at the time, went running up tot hat car, before I could stop him,I guess to tell those idiots it was a horse
They jumped back into that car, laughing, throwing beer bottles out, as they roared off. I still think how badly that might have ended!


----------



## Foxhunter

bsms said:


> If so, then how could a horse surprise us? I've been totally, 100% confident and had the horse say no. I couldn't count the times Mia spooked where I had no idea it was coming, and no idea afterward what it was that spooked her. I can think of two times where Trooper balked, and 2 times in 8 years doesn't exactly ruin one's confidence.
> .


I very much doubt that you were 100% confident in the fact that Mia would not spook at all. I would go so far as to say that you were 100% confident that she would and at the back of your mind were expecting it. 

With William, the spooky TB I previously mentioned, I made riding him a game. He had ten points at the start of the ride, to start he might loose three or four of those points going from his stable to the mounting block. 
He could gain points, going past a drain cover without spooking and many other things, but in the first month would come back with a high minus score. 

Two of us were riding back through the village when I remarked that William was still on a plus score I leaned forward a bit and just said "Boo!" and he shot forward loosing his plus point. There was no telling what he would spook at nor how violently that spook would be. The big difference was that I had the experience to stop the spook becoming a charge back home. No matter what he did my heart rate never changed. I treated it all as fun. 

When you are riding a horse back home after some 90 minutes of work at three paces, a lot of that work on steep hills, and a butterfly passes his nose and he spooks, then you know that horse is very different to the norm!

Mia was certainly a horse that was not suited to your experience at the time.


----------



## Foxhunter

@Hondo 

The interaction of horses never ceases to surprise me. My old mare, Madam, would have laugh at the way we humans graded a pecking order.

She was always the last to a feeder, would share with the youngsters to the point of allowing the foals to eat whilst she watched them yet no other horse would ever even try to drive her away. 

One mare returned from stud with a foal at foot. The mare wouldn't really settle on her own with the foal so I put Madam out with her. Cherry, the mare immediately took off across the field with the foal. Madam followed to a certain point and then stopped to graze, her bout towards the mare and foal, totally ignoring them yet that mare loved babies. Thirty minutes later all three were eating side by side, foal between them. 

Another time when I was feeding them in the field I was driving the ATV around each feeder. All seemed normal. The bossy mare was first to start eating. Madam was wandering over, she went straight past the feeder and walked to the bossy mare who immediately moved away, no fighting, totally submissive. Madam just followed her from bowl to bowl not allowing her to settle and eat. The other horses all moved away as bossy approached them, yeilding to her. 

I do not know what she had done but Madam was certainly correcting her! Next feeding all was normal. 

When she went to stud I was asked if she was bossy. I to.d them that she was the boss in a passive way. They said she could go out with the main herd I told them to put her in the smaller field with the trouble makers. These were around eight mares that would fight the other horses continuously. 

As we turned Madam out so they all charged over, pushing and shoving, head high and bodies tense, ready to fight for their position. Madam totally ignored them, just walked out into the field and started to eat. When one mare turned to kick her she just moved away still eating. An hour later they were all grazing quietly around her and the stud owner told me that since her arrival all that field had settled and become best friends. 

I never once in twenty years ever saw her do anything more to another horse than shake her head with her ears slightly back, never pinned. 

She was bomb proof with everything bar a camera and then the whirring would send her off at a rate of knots!


----------



## Hondo

Love those stories about horses! So individual. Cloud Dancer here on the ranch is much like Madam. Nobody messes with her. She messes with no one. And she actually has what I call a very very "pretty" face. Partly by shape but mostly by expression.

Funny about Madam "quietly" getting her point across to Bossy.

Cloud Dancer was unable to have a colt for many years. She was always hanging with newborn colts. She finally had one about three years ago and again last spring. Made her very happy.

Cody, an aged gelding who was used very hard by a very harsh cowboy and who is one of the saddest looking horses in the face I've seen, decided to adopt Cloud Dancer's baby last spring. He just stayed outside the field where her and the baby were. He wasn't going out to graze with the herd and the ranch lady finally got worried about him and turned him in with mom and baby. At first Cloud Dancer wouldn't let him near and he didn't push it, but before long they were all together. I missed taking a beautiful picture of him with his neck stretched out across Sage, the baby, with his neck actually touching the baby. When all were back in the herd he stood guard near Sage lest any of the colts tried to pick on her. He kept a watchful eye and nobody did.

There is a story for every horse here and probably for every horse in existence. They are indeed marvelous creatures.


----------



## bsms

Foxhunter said:


> I very much doubt that you were 100% confident in the fact that Mia would not spook at all. I would go so far as to say that you were 100% confident that she would and at the back of your mind were expecting it...
> 
> ...Mia was certainly a horse that was not suited to your experience at the time.


Disagree and agree.

Of course, there is no way I could PROVE that I felt confident on Mia at the time of a spook. Anyone can say I secretly held on to fear and she was responding to what I didn't realize was in me.

But, from March 2014:



bsms said:


> Today was supposed to be my second day checking out Mia in a new bit. It turned into the day I first practiced an emergency dismount...from a total standstill. And it looks like a Motrin kind of night tonight...
> 
> Everything started off normal. Just a day for riding in the arena, since the wife & youngest daughter are out of state on vacation, and the two oldest are married and out of the house. Cleaned Mia off, saddled her up and mounted. sat still & scratched her withers. Scootched [_technical term for wiggled some_] to get my legs loose and deeper in the saddle. Started at a walk. Did some easy turns. Neck reining well. Then...
> 
> Well, I don't rightly know. She exploded. I instinctively pulled with the left rein because her balance is better to the left. We did a full 360, and continued around for another 180, since we stopped facing the opposite direction. Imagine a horse galloping in a 5 foot diameter circle. But she stopped.
> 
> Hmmm. What is wrong with this picture? Why is my left foot level with her back? Why is the saddle horn parallel to the horizon, and the saddle completely on her right side? It wasn't like this about 5 seconds ago!...


http://www.horseforum.com/horse-riding/my-first-emergency-dismount-mia-while-377705/#post4940497

I was there. I remember it well. It was a very quiet day. No wind. She was relaxed. We were in the arena. Still, calm, relaxed. I was just about to pull my feet out of the stirrups to do some no stirrup work, when she exploded. And then she was standing still, puzzled at the odd feeling on her back.

Last I heard, she still does these sorts of spins. She is considered a kid's horse where she is at now, and the kids just laugh and they go on riding. And it has occurred to me that maybe Mia has a few connections missing inside her head.

But I've been totally relaxed and had her spook at objects. And it is not just me.

When Bandit spooked and tore off sideways a few hundred yards at the sight of a car parked beside the road, he was being ridden by a friend. I wasn't even there. My friend is 6'3" tall, riding a fairly small horse, with my daughter and another friend. He's ridden his entire life, although he is also in his twenties. Calm day. Three friends out for a ride. And...Bandit reacted, fast and very hard, to a car parked by the side of the road. In his defense, the car did have an empty trailer attached. But NO ONE was expecting anything! What horse spooks over a car? I seriously doubt my friend was tensing up inside, secretly, over riding past a car...

When Mia spooked at a mud puddle the first time, it shocked me. Her corral got very muddy at times, and it didn't bother her. I now know a lot of Arizona horses fear Puddle Sharks & Wild Water. But the first time it happened? It had never occurred to me a horse could spook at a puddle!

I cannot prove it, because anyone who holds to the confidence theory can always say the rider was secretly concerned. But I know darn well I'm not the only rider who has felt utterly confident, who had no idea their horse was afraid of X, and who had their horse react strongly to X. I have a hard time imagining someone more self-confident around horses than Bandit's previous owner, yet he admitted Bandit could put up a fight when he was nervous.

As for Mia and I not being a match made in heaven - of course that was true! And when someone came along who I thought would be a better match with a better environment for her, I barely hesitated at swapping. I never even saw Bandit before he arrived here, other than a couple of photos on the guy's phone.

And my inexperience caused me to dig a number of holes, and she got much worse under me before getting better. Heck, I spent 3 years trying to ride her bitless because a lot of "experts" - Dr Cook, anyone? - said all bits were cruel! So she arrived with a lot of holes, and I added more and dug them deeper!

And then I had to start filling them in. What I discovered was that the commonly accepted wisdom often was making them worse, and filling them in required me to do the unacceptable:

I taught her to run thru a snaffle. So I used a curb bit, taught her to hold her ground, and she ended up often riding in a snaffle again. But many here, including @Smilie, find it hard to accept the idea that someone would use a curb bit to teach a horse what it needed to know to do well in a snaffle...

I made a lot of progress in calming her. The almost psychotic spins or sideways hops never fully ceased, but a horse who is calm before and 5 seconds after a violent spin may not be spinning out of fear. But we went from multiple bolts in a single ride to not bolting, and multiple spins on every ride to spinning about once every three weeks. And a key part of that was insisting on riding her with slack reins. NOT body control. To get better control of her, I needed to give up control of her.

The same has been true of Bandit, although he doesn't seem to have any disconnected wires in his brain. But giving him more freedom has been a huge part of getting him not to take advantage of that freedom. I only have extensive experience with two horses, but in both cases, I needed to give up control to get control.

That may well be the wrong thing for many horses. I haven't ridden many horses. But it HAS proven very effective with the two horses I have ridden hundreds of times. It also works well with Cowboy and Trooper, although neither is spooky by nature.

But in this sense, Mia WAS the right horse for me. She forced me to dig past the accepted wisdom. She forced me to try things that many say cannot work - and find that they did. She taught me that many things accepted as carved in stone by many riders did NOT work for her, and thus are not things that work for every horse.

She also forced me to delve into what I think many middle-aged newer riders need to know - how can a middle-aged rider, with minimal experience and not a lot of athletic ability, get a horse they can trust?

So yes, we were a total mismatch. But unlike a lot of mismatched horses and riders, we stuck it out for 7 years, rooted in the fact that we both liked each other. And if she is now a "kid's horse" in the open country of northern Arizona, and I learned what I needed to know to change Bandit around...maybe there was a purpose behind us coming together. Bandit is much better for me and I'm glad Mia has a foal now - but I still miss her sometimes. She was a sweetheart:








​


----------



## Dustbunny

bsms said:


> ...I'm glad Mia has a foal now - but I still miss her sometimes. She was a sweetheart:



I think you miss her a little more than sometimes. : )


----------



## phantomhorse13

Foxhunter said:


> When you are riding a horse back home after some 90 minutes of work at three paces, a lot of that work on steep hills, and a butterfly passes his nose and he spooks, then you know that horse is very different to the norm!


Or you have an endurance-fit arab. Heck, we have 3 that I could easily see doing that this time of year.. :rofl:


----------



## Foxhunter

phantomhorse13 said:


> Or you have an endurance-fit arab. Heck, we have 3 that I could easily see doing that this time of year.. :rofl:



I fully agree with you but William wasn't even three quarter fit!


----------



## Smilie

I agree with Foxhunter.There are many parameters, that come into play
I sure know, that when I am confident, Charlie is also
Horses, as prey species, have to be very tuned in, to slight body language. You can see feral horses, grazing around a fellow equine, that wolves have taken down. You can see sort of the same thing, in those African clips, where those prey species know when lions are on the hunt, and when they are not.
Thus, when I am able to convey, with my body language, even heart rate, that there is nothing to fear, that horse will, if he has gained any trust , confidence in your leadership, dampen any ingrained flight reaction. I absolutely know this is true, as , with my age and other issues, I can not at times convey that \all is well
It was time for me to stop training colts~
I gave the example before, of a horse known to spook in traffic, that was at a riding stable. The Owner would tell anyone riding that horse, of his problem. One day, he left, forgetting to tell his assistant to the warn the ride 0f that horse
He returned, worried about the worst
He was pointed out the rider, who,had ridden that horse, and asked as to how bad he was in traffic. That puzzled ride said he was fine, never reacted
There are many things involved, in creating a horse that is a tur joy to ride , and often you can drop some 'tools' as that horse becomes more solid
Sure, trust, respect, exposure, all play apart, and sometimes you can use them alone, along with judgement, knowing that individual horse, but there is no disputing that horses as prey species, have learned to read very slight body language, very well, and often, if you expect a horse to spook-big time, he won't disappoint you


----------



## Smilie

phantomhorse13 said:


> Or you have an endurance-fit arab. Heck, we have 3 that I could easily see doing that this time of year.. :rofl:


 Very true. Sometimes horse just spooks, as they are feeling well and fit, forgetting it is a thing that is fine out in pasture, but not when ridden
There are different reasons horse spooks, and our approach has to reflect that
I also had a filly, full sister to Smilie, and when she was in heat, show fit, a butterfly or bird was enough of an excuse, or a cat, climbing a tree, ect


----------



## jaydee

In terms of what looks to be a pecking order amongst our lot Willow is most definitely at the bottom of the heap by a long way, where the others might occasionally change places she is always stuck down there below them and yet if there's anything scary around and they need to have one to hide behind or take confidence from - it's always Willow they turn to. I think the only times I've known her to really spook at anything is when she's doing it deliberately to dump you on the ground because she doesn't approve of what you want her to do or she simply 'thinks she can' because she senses you've gone to sleep, I'm sure it amuses her when she does that.


----------



## gottatrot

Foxhunter said:


> I maintain that with more things than many people realise, come from the confidence and thoughts of the rider - not necessarily experience though obviously that helps.
> 
> The slightest iota of the rider expecting something to happen odds are that it will.
> 
> The animal gets its confidence from the rider/handler and it doesn't mean that they have to have a bond.


I agree with this but I also agree with @bsms. The odds are that with confident body language a horse will be more bold. But it is no guarantee at all. It is also no guarantee that if you are nervous it will make the horse less confident, but with some horses it will.

I think of it like someone who is afraid to jump in the water with you. Chances are, if you tell them it's no big deal and bolster them up with your courage, they'll find courage and join you. But some people are not going to be open to your input. Their own feelings will override your signals. This can happen even if they trust you 100%, if their own fear issues are too strong.
Likewise, as Foxhunter says, if you just met someone you might still carry them along with your confident attitude about doing this thing they are nervous about. You don't have to have a bond. But they also might not believe you.

My thought is that confidence can never hurt, but don't use it like insurance.

What I dislike is when people see that confident riders can lead to horses gaining confidence, so they take it to the extreme belief that horses will not spook or be nervous if you are confident. But even though @Foxhunter says confidence is good, she still describes the horse William as being very spooky despite her confidence.

It's similar to what @bsms was saying about how he's seen that horses can do better with more freedom. I've found this too, that a horse can become more trustworthy if I give them more freedom to fail. But I don't believe in taking this to the extreme either, that this is a guarantee. Which is what I've read on some bitless forums - that if we can just ride a horse in whatever is the least painful (such as a halter or even bridleless), that all horses will respond and give us their best. I can say I've proven to myself there are limits to the freedom we can give, because horses have a will of their own and might just want to gallop for miles if we have nothing that gives them incentive to stop. 

These are great guidelines and philosophies, and each horse will be on a different place in the spectrum when it comes to implementing them in real life.

Amore will not go over any jump unless you are 100% confident that you want to go over it. Once I was 100% confident she could push aside a small branch on the trail that was at the height of her neck, and she thought I was 100% confident she could jump it. So she did. I prefer horses that rely heavily on their own judgment when it comes to many things such as distances, how to place your hooves, angle of lean to the body, how to change gaits, where the trail is, etc. versus those that rely too much on the judgment of the rider. In my experience those who rely too heavily on the rider are very difficult. On another occasion Amore smashed her head into a tree because she thought I was telling her to go there - I just wasn't paying attention and thought she'd follow the trail. Another horse I rode named Kelso was similar and he'd put his hooves down all wrong if you didn't tell him how to do it, or try to jump over impossible things just because he happened to be running toward them.


----------



## bsms

I've quoted this on other threads, and maybe here...this thread has gone on so long that I forget. But it is an interesting thread with mostly civil discussion, so...








​ 
That marked a turning point for Mia. I didn't understand it at the time. But what it really does is bring the horse's mind into the equation,and gives them a chance to become an actual partner in the process instead of being a totally submissive slave.

I am sure some horses do well with a very directive rider. At least, I hear it is so, and Clinton Anderson has sold a lot of stuff, and many folks say his methods have worked very well for them.

I am even more certain that some horses do better when their feelings and thinking is brought into the actual decisions. That doesn't mean total freedom, which is why I've argued for setting boundaries and enforcing them, and for looking for a (not the, because there is usually more than one) "mutually acceptable compromise". Mutual rejects the idea the horse makes all the decisions. I am trying to go bitless with Bandit because he has an odd mouth, not because I don't like bits - and I like curb bits better than snaffles, on the whole. On yesterday's ride, I was going to try him in a rope sidepull, but the winds started picking up so we finally headed out with him in the sidepull AND the dreaded Tom Thumb curb bit - although the Reinsman version of a Tom Thumb has some unusual features and I'm not sure it functions quite the same:








​ 
For whatever reason, he wanted to go down a path that he's been down before, that takes him past some "scary spots" and drops us into a narrow wash he dislikes. I had no where in particular to go, so we went that way. He did very well entering the wash, going past the previously scary places without a glance. But once in, he was at the upper end of his confidence. He regularly wanted to turn around...but that was not acceptable to me. In each case, after about a 5 second pause, he accepted responsibility and moved forward.

That included going forward in some spots that challenged his balance and required him to do stuff he hates, like pushing into heavy brush, and one time, forcing his way over some brush - just brute force. There was only one time where I squeezed with my legs. Never used my heels. It was pretty much, "Turning around isn't acceptable. The sides are pretty steep, and look to have a lot of cactus on top. So...what next?" 3 months ago, he'd have panicked. Had I tried to force him through, particularly back then, he'd have fought.

That is where judgment comes in, and judgment comes...well, from past bad judgment, for people as well as horses, and Bandit and I (and Mia) have done enough bad judgment that I'm starting to judge things better. It is what the cavalryman from 1868 meant when he wrote, "_and under a rider that understands how to indulge it in all this without overtaxing its powers, will work willingly to the last gasp_", or what Ray Hunt meant when he wrote, "_Don't be afraid to expose your horse to something he hasn't quite been exposed to yet, but don't snow him under._" It involves a level of judgment on my part that I didn't have with Mia, and that I could NOT have had, because I hadn't failed enough to learn better judgment. Much of what is working with Bandit (and worked with Mia later on) was based on those years where Mia and I exercised a LOT of bad judgment!

But some of it also involves philosophy. A LOT of experienced riders poo-poo the very idea of giving a horse freedom. On another forum, a very experienced rider told me all horse society is based on dominance, and any time you let a horse make a decision, you were teaching him to dominate you. That has NOT been MY experience, and I find it sad that some experienced people view it that way. If you asked me to give an example of where my horse took advantage of me, any of the ones I've owned...about all I could come up with would be Cowboy, shortly after he arrived as a bitter ex-lesson horse. My horses don't seem interested in competing with me, or "winning" at my expense!

From a safety viewpoint, as an older rider who will never be a well-balanced and fearless rider, I took great comfort yesterday in giving Bandit a chance to accept responsibility. Once he accepts that something is the right way to proceed, he works at it with a vigor, an enthusiasm, and even a boldness that was never there at my direction! If he accepts responsibility for going the next hundred yards, he won't turn back partway, or panic, or start fighting me. I feel a hundred times safer on a horse who has decided WE need to do X, than on a horse I am trying to MAKE go do X!

But I know of no way to get a horse to think "WE are doing X together!" without actually letting the horse make some decisions. That is why I don't like "Ask, Tell, Demand" - because if I am willing to finish with demand, then my ask was not asking at all. When the Godfather makes you an offer you cannot refuse, it doesn't matter if he whispers softly at first.

Starting at 50 by riding a horse who I had no business riding, safety is important to me. When we talk safety on horses, we tend to focus on helmets, or saddle type, or (me only, I suppose) sheepskin saddle covers, or stirrup position, or knowing cues. But when I tell my horse, and practice, "_You are never alone. We will do this together, or not at all_.", I feel far, far safer! It felt really good - and safe - yesterday, trusting my horse because WE were riding TOGETHER. I cannot imagine going back to telling my horse what to do, and demanding he did it. It would scare the tar out of me!


----------



## Smilie

Well, the ask, ask louder and demand, has to be taken in context of where and how you apply it
Of course, trail riding, you allow the horse to have input, esp in cases where you yourself are not sure of the safest route
My example, is applied more towards creating alight horse, that listens to the lightest cue, and not a scared truly horse,'forced to comply
For instance, the horse knows how to sidepass, but choses as to when to comply, and when not to. 
You ask horse to sidepass up to agate, for instance, to close it, but he is intent on leaving that gate, for various reasons-wants to finish a trail course fast, wants to follow horses continuing on down the trail. Thus, that horse knowing how to move away from that leg, instead sidepasses into it, in the direction he wishes to go
I will take that horse away from that gate, make him move off that leg, and then take him back tot hat gate, allowing him to move off that leg, with a light cue, side passing up to that gate
How you apply that 'ask, ask louder and demand, has to be in context of the level of training on that horse, and the situation, and not just a blind application in all cases, nor used in the same way on all horses
For instance, on a horse that knows how to move his hips over, standing tied, and you gently ask him to do so, with just a verbal cue at first, and light touch, just tunes you out. Then when going to the ask louder, pins his ears, maybe cocked a hind leg in warning, you then do move on to the demand
We can have countless examples of when to use that ask, ask , louder, then demand, and when not to, and always give examples to support either view, when in the end, it comes to that rider/handler, knowing when to use it, and when not to, and to the right degree.


----------



## bsms

Smilie said:


> Well, the ask, ask louder and demand, has to be taken in context of where and how you apply it...My example, is applied more towards creating alight horse, that listens to the lightest cue, and not a scared truly horse,'forced to comply...


And I have no problem with how you use it. You are right. Ask, Tell, Demand is meant as an approach to teaching a horse to respond to light cues. The ask might be nothing more than looking at a path going toward one side, and the tell nothing more than a small rein movement, and the rider's expectation, in that situation, is always that the horse needs to obey. But the rider is using Ask, Tell, Demand to teach a light response.

I was reading a book by Tom Moates the other week, and he made a comment that I agree with. He said (paraphrase) "_Make the right thing easy and the wrong thing hard_" is a good rule, except so many people focus on making the wrong thing hard, and never think about making the right thing easy. But if you make the right thing easy, then you may never need to make the wrong thing hard.

Maybe I'm a sensitive type. Seems awful unlikely, though. :rofl: But I get tired of reading online about riders who seem to believe everything is about demand. If the horse isn't forward, the FIRST response is "Carry a crop". And carry a crop might be the right response, but shouldn't it come last?

If the horse doesn't want to leave "the barn", then make the barn a bad place to be. But why not first think about making the trail a good place to be! We seem so often to immediately jump to '_make the wrong thing hard_'! 

If my horse tries to spin away with me, I plan on making that a "hard decision". With Bandit, teaching him "_Spinning away will not profit you_" was very important. But even more important has been teaching him that if he talks, I will listen. If he is worried, I will help him. If he is feeling overwhelmed, I will help him feel back in control and relaxed. When he learned that he could talk, and I would listen, and I would help him in response to what he told me, he stopped having a reason to spin. He still has a startle reaction, but even that is getting smaller with time - because he is learning that listening to me results in my bringing him to a place where he feels safe and IS safe - and he wants to be there!

It seems to me R+ isn't just about click or treat, to use a Halloweenie expression. Might R+ include: "_...to get enough there to where if the horse gets troubled he will come to me; or to where I can get him to come to me for security and cover."_ And then the next sentence: "_Without that foundation I feel very insecure on a horse..._" (Tom Dorrance)

Maybe, particularly for newer riders, it should be, "_Make the right thing easy and the wrong thing...well, ignore it mostly_". (Which is now my new signature)

Or as Ray Hunt put it: "_Admire the horse for the good things he does and just kinda ignore the wrong things. First thing you know, the good things will get better and the bad things will get less._"

Nothing wrong (IMHO) with ask, tell, demand if used by an understanding rider to teach soft cues. It just seems to me a lot of folks focus on the demand. That seems to come natural to us humans...:frown:


----------



## Foxhunter

As I have said before it is a matter of knowing your horse. 

For me there is a different feel between a horse that says 'I'm not sure' and one that says, 'I'm not going to!' 

Madam was not the easiest of rides, if you got in her face that was it she would either buck or just plant and nothing would make her move. Her real job in life was to care for others less strong, foals, weaners, sick horses, she was there. I even saw her standing over a lambing ewe keeping the other youngsters away from her and licking the lambs as they arrived. 

Odd thinking about it, my GSD was known as Florence Nightingale because she too has to tend to anything injured.


----------



## bsms

Options I've seen include "I'm not sure...", "I just can't...too much, too soon", "I don't understand" and "I don't wanna and you won't make me!". And each needs a different response from the rider. But I've also seen folks say it was option 4 when it was really 1, 2 or 3...and I've been the one who assumed it was option 4 when it was not. That is where experience and feel does come in, along with being open to the horse. Like horses, we often need to make mistakes to learn.


----------



## Smilie

Yes, I do think educating people, esp new riders, how to apply that ask, ask louder, then demand, must be taught/explained, so it is not misused
Even,interpretation as to what is meant, by \good citizen, in the statement; ' be as gentle with a horse as possible, but also as firm as needed, to make that horse a good citizen"
How is a horse a 'good citizen? Well, to me that does not mean a horse living under some unfair dictatorship, blindly obeying, because he fears the rider more that whatever is concerning him, with that rider never allowing the horse to have input
To me, that horse is one that is respectful, in the sense that he never acts aggressive towards a person, invades his space, walks over him, ect. He also willingly complies, to aids he has been taught, when he is neither in pain, or in a true state of fear
Thus, the horse that balks, leaving home, because he is buddy sour, is a horse that needs that ask, ask louder and demand applied, to make him a'good citizen'
A horse that balks because he is un sure of the footing, and where ever you are not sure if it is safe to go there, is allowed input, and does not have that demand applied. Sure way to loose trust of a horse, is to insist some route is safe, and then have it proved not to be so, with a bank giving out, as an example.
All these variables, interpretations just under line that there is no cookie cutter application of any simple statements, when it comes to applying them to actual situations.
That is where horsemanship comes into play, knowing when a horse is just being a 'bad citizen', or one that just is trying to have input, in a true concern


----------



## Smilie

Just reading the last two posts, I think most of us have been saying the same thing all along, and that mis understanding resulted not in doing whatever worked, was right in a situation, understanding the horse you are riding, but rather just application of statements, as they are read, blindly, removed from actual situations across the board, and not in context
Thus, in the end, is is just as wrong to say never to go to 'demand', as to say 'always to go to demand' You can't take horsemanship out of the equation


----------



## Hondo

If part of the horse owners goal is to have a willing partnership with the horse, the demand in ask-tell-demand must never cause fear or nervousness and also certainly never pain.

I'm more and more inclined to believe many if not most of the things people have trouble with, including barn sour, are based on the natural fear and suspicion that is built into the horse. When those are absent, and I mean absolutely absent, the horse has been reported as a very willing animal, and I'm more and more inclined to believe that is true.


----------



## Smilie

Agree with your top statement, but not completely with the second part
There are horses, that have learned to become barn sour, simply by that horse being rewarded, for not riding where asked, when they would rather be back in that field with buddies


----------



## Foxhunter

The thing with nappy (barn sour) horses is that if they have resisted, for whatever reason and got away with it, then the behaviour can become a habit. 

I have had more than my share of nappy horses for remedial training. Majority just needed a determined rider who was not going to give in to their antics. Some, who had had plenty of big stick treatment, and still napped, were of a nervy disposition and needed firm encouragement and plenty of praise for being brave.
Others had learned their own strength and looked forward to the challenge of a fight with a human. Those I sat out. They stopped and napped. I just sat on them keeping them facing the way I wanted to go. I did nothing other than keeping them straight, in the end they got bored and wanted to go but I made them wait. Big Tom was the worse - three hours in the middle of the village X roads! I gave them nothing to fight against, spoiled all their fun.


----------



## Hondo

@SmilieNotice I said many things not all.

Being with buddies is the principle safety for horses. To stay with the herd is, I think, hard wired into them. For those that didn't have that hard wiring, well, they died before they got their genes spread into the gene pool.

I tried a lot of things with Hondo when I was first leading him away from the herd. A person at the ranch quipped, " A lot of it has to do with just spending time with your horse". 

I think that may have had the most to do with it. Hondo got to know me well enough, finally, that he felt safe leaving the herd to go with me.

Edit: Plus I did not make any statements that I claimed as fact, merely that I was leaning that direction.

As far as a horse being rewarded for staying at the barn and not going where asked, well heck, can you blame him? He's just doing as taught. But that's not what I was talking about. Being taught to stay at the barn is not barn sour. Or at least not what I think of as barn sour.

Edit: Also note I did not claim my leanings to be fact but rather just my own leaings.


----------



## bsms

I think horses may be more tense about going out than many realize. Bandit's previous owner got him to go out, often many miles, but Bandit was very tense when he arrived. One of the things that has surprised me the last few rides is how RELAXED his back has been, even when in a spot where he was going to have to work. In my avatar, coming back from a ride, his back is tense. Yesterday, going down a narrow wash through spots he doesn't really like going, it was much more relaxed than in my avatar. It has me wondering if a lot of horses go 'willingly', yet not really willingly, finding trail rides to be like going on a war patrol.

If so, then maybe some of those barn sour horses are more *trail sour* - and simply are tired of going out on patrol in what they view as hostile territory. If so, then maybe the answer to their barn sour is _to make them less trail sour_, by taking the time - 17 months and rising with Bandit - to teach him he CAN relax, and feel genuinely safe, while away from 'the barn'.

I don't know that and never will. It would take experimenting with a lot of horses, and seeing if a barn sour horse who knew how to go out was actually a tense horse who was obedient but not genuinely willing - and I'll never have those horses to test. I spent 8 months thinking I'd put Bandit up for sale in May of 2016, but he could take me riding into my mid-70s. Even when he struggles with his footing, I've felt safe riding him lately.

Lots of miles of racing like this, and preparing to race like this, had not taught him he could go out and be safe:










 @*Foxhunter* : "_Majority just needed a determined rider who was not going to give in to their antics. Some, who had had plenty of big stick treatment, and still napped, were of a nervy disposition and needed firm encouragement and plenty of praise for being brave. Others had learned their own strength and looked forward to the challenge of a fight with a human..._" - That sounds completely plausible to me. OTOH, it would be interesting to know how well "This will profit you not" & "Quiet persistence" would play out, even with those horses. And maybe trying to figure out a way to make a trail ride a reward as opposed to work - making the right thing easy, and keeping it that way until the horse figured out the right thing was easy. Momma told me it took two to argue. But I think Bandit is in the "_firm encouragement and plenty of praise for being brave_" category...
@Hondo: "_Hondo got to know me well enough, finally, that he felt safe leaving the herd to go with me_." - This too, with Bandit.


----------



## Foxhunter

One thing I was always taught was to never judge a book by its cover. When doing a lot of starting with the racehorses it was all to easy to know the horses breeding (most were not yet named) and pre judge by what previous horses by the same sire or out of the same mare had behaved like. Expecting them to be the same or very similar usually did get similar responses, was this breeding or was it because of my expectations? 

There was one jumping sire, standing in Eire, he had sor d a few good winners though nothing spectacular. I had never had anything to do with his stock before. 

We had consignment straight from the big jumper sales and there were three horses all by the same sire. All big strong three year olds, good looking animals which certainly gave no initial indication of difficulty but, all three were terrible to start under saddle. They were not rushed or hassled but just downright out to get you if you did something like put a roller on them. 

I had no pre expectations but after that was always aware that horses by this sire were not the most trustworthy. 

When you are working professionally with a horse time is a great factor. Of Bandit came to me to get 'bolder' and less spooky, you would not be wanting to pay for 18 months + of training. You do have to get on with it and produce calm and confident horses for the owners in as short a time as possible.


----------



## Smilie

Hondo, I am not arguing with you, far as exceptions, reading a horse, knowing that horses are prey creatures, and where herd security is part of survival, and that can, in some cases, be a reason for not wanting to leave the barn/herd, esp when a green horse is concerned
That is also why you work on trust and leadership, so that horse transfers that herd security to you, when you ride or handle that horse
All of these factors come into play, when you use the ask, ask louder and demand.
I seldom had a problem riding any green horse out by himself, as I got that trust and willing compliance, before I rode him out, thus you never need to deal with a horse that truly balks, bolts, ect
There is another thread here, started on that ask and demand principle, where people have given examples where you do need to go to strong demand, on a horse that is aggressive. If a horse were to attack me,based on whatever bad handling he had in the past, I will use whatever it takes, so I won't wind up in that horse;s jaws or under striking front feet
Sometimes, these horses are created by being forced into the fight mode in the past, having flight option taken away, but not always. There are horses that have learned that they can run over people at feeding time, can say 'no', and then you do need to be as firm as needed. Yes, in almost all cases, these horses are man made, but that does not change any results, when they learned they can be aggressive towards humans
As i said before, you have to take the horse, the situation, the training level, any fear, pain issue, all into account, before applying the correct response


----------



## Smilie

Well, of course, horses can become sour at any job, if not allowed to relax. That can include either show sour, or not wanting to ride out, if that riding out means winding up sore, pushed beyond fitness level.Does not matter what activity, if the hrose associates stress or pain with it, then he is not going to show 'willingly compliance
Again, a example of exception , is being used, this time applied to barn sour, and where the reason for that bar sourness should first have been taken into account.
If a horse is in physical pain, like a poor fitting saddle, lameness or even mental distress, then you would start by removing those things first. On the other hand, if a horse has just learned to say, 'no' often in a violent manner, such as rearing or bucking, you have to work through those, so the hrose says 'yes, and not 'make me.


----------



## Hondo

@FoxhunterWhen I was a kid and we had draft horses, it was just get the hay hauled in, or the wood hauled in, or the field plowed, then put'em up and go feed the chickens (a few thousand) then go milk the cows.

They were cared for but not a lot of bonding partnership stuff.

But when a horse is a pet on top of a riding partner, I think the rules or guidlines are different.

@bsms You made me think of Wynmalen talking about a horse being suspicious of the contraption you wanted him to enter (closed trailer).

I think you may be onto something when you say the horses may be a little more hesitant to take off into the unknown than some think.

I think rather than fear, I'd use the word apprehensive. This seems to often describe Hondo for the first 1/4 mile or so. He's often alert looking left and right in quick succession.

Wynmalen claims the horse is gentle by nature and also very accommodating by nature.

Maybe barn sour has become a catch all for not knowing quite what is wrong or time to figure it out. And if it is just being apprehensive, I can see how a determined rider could ride over that if not a very strong apprehensiveness.

Foxhunter?


----------



## bsms

Smilie said:


> ...There is another thread here, started on that ask and demand principle, where people have given examples where you do need to go to strong demand, on a horse that is aggressive. If a horse were to attack me...


A dangerous horse who wants to maim or kill humans ins one thing. But I guess I've seen more aggressive humans than horses. There are plenty of people who cannot imagine riding without a crop, or who believe in using split reins in part because that means there is always a whip in your hand.

"... and a little reflection will generally suffice to point out the means of remedying something that, if left to itself, would grow into a confirmed habit, or if attacked with the energy of folly and violence, would suddenly culminate in the grand catastrophe of restiveness..."

I guess I get frustrated reading online at the number who reject "a little reflection" and instead attack "with the energy of folly and violence".











Grabbing a whip is easy. Thinking about how to motivate a horse is hard. 

The book from Chris Irwin arrived ("Horses Don't Lie"). Here are two quotes:
."The word I want to hear, the word that sums up our goal with the horse, is control. Control has become a bit of a dirty word these days but we need to come out of denial *and admit the truth that control is, in fact, exactly what we need*. Whether you're a rider or a driver or a vet wanting to handle the horse smoothly, this is about control." - page 44

"With all the other horses I've trained, *their spirit became a tiny bit smaller after I was finished with them, their energy slightly dimmed*. The change grew less noticeable as I got better at my work, but something was always lost in the domination." - page 128​.
I understand there is a need for control. But I'm also seeing that my best control comes when the horse controls himself to accomplish OUR goals. I may only achieve that only 1, 2 or 5% of the time with Bandit, but when I do, Bandit's spirit becomes BIGGER afterward. He is enhanced, not diminished. His energy becomes greater. His boldness blossoms. He's more determined and more focused. He is MORE horse when I achieve teamwork.

It seems to me we settle for less, and then say less is all that is possible.
."Therefore, everywhere - out-of-doors or in the haute ecole - success with horses is to him who applies this maxim of Baucher...

'*Let him think that he is our master, then he is our slave.' There dwells an eternal equestrian truth!*

'The horse is the sole master of his forces; even with all of our vigor, by himself, the rider is powerless to increase the horse's forces. *Therefor, it is for the horse to employ his forces in his own way, for himself to determine the manner of that employment so as to best fulfill the demands of his riders*. If the rider tries to do it all, the horse may permit him to do so, but the horse merely drifts, and limits his efforts to those which the rider demands. On the contrary, if the horse knows that he must rely on himself, he uses himself completely, with all of his energy.'" - 5 May 1922

-- Horse Training Outdoors and High School, Etienne Beudant (1931)​.
But it seems to me the real truth goes further - let us drop master and slave, and strive for team! And if I only get it 3% of the time, isn't that better than not trying at all?


----------



## Smilie

let me give you an example of barn/buddy sourness, where I would use demand, and where quite a few cases have been posted here
A gelding lives in a herd setting, and as always ridden out well. A mare is added to that herd, which that gelding becomes possessive of,as some geldings will, regardless of having been gelded correctly 
Now, that gelding refuses to ride out, not wanting to leave 'his' mare
Some people will not pasture geldings and mares together, for this reason, although I always have, and all of my geldings rode out fine, even if they actually mounted some of those mares,, when those mares were in heat
Yes, barn sour has been used as a catch all, and why I stated horsemanship has to come into play also, reading that horse, and not just some blind application of an unofficial 'rule'
It is also a well known fact, that horses relax more, once they are out of sight of home, and true 'barn sour horses will ride out okay at times, but the minute they are turned towards home, want to speed up, get tense if held back, even try to bolt, if that habit is not nipped in the bud
An example would be, the horse my friend tried, before she bought Cody. I have no history on that mare, so am not trying to say why she was that way.
My friend always had a rule of trying a horse out, three times before buying. She tried her twice in an arena, and was ready to buy her, but wanted to ride her out first
Sne did not ride her out alone, but with that owner and another hrose. That mare rode out okay, but the minute she was turned towards home, she tried to take off, and when held back, reared. That is a horse who is barn sour. She was not afraid to ride out, esp with that other horse along, but that barn had a powerful draw
yes, a human created that horse, but now she needed a rider to show her that the only way she got to go home, was at the speed asked for, on a loose rein


----------



## Smilie

I am not defending those techniques, never ride with acrop, and I do ride with split reins, as that is what I show with, but I ride with them bridged on a trail ride. They also allow me to ground tie> Since I only have closed reins on my English bridle, I ride with split reins
My reference to the other thread, was not in support of just using force or harsh techniques, but rather to show where some people have felt the need to use demand, mostly towards an aggressive horse, and that one cannot say 'never' either in using that demand, or always using that demand, and regularly or routinely.


----------



## bsms

Smilie said:


> ...but now she needed a rider to show her that the only way she got to go home, was at the speed asked for, on a loose rein


Isn't that a case of using R+? You place some limits on the horse, because those limits involve safety. But if the horse will work with you, you will help the horse get what it wants. You take something "bad" - and dangerous, even - and use it to motivate the horse to change. You redirect the horse.

That means being formidable enough to limit the horse's choices, but you draw on something the horse wants a lot to help teach the horse to work with you. Or that is how it seems to me. Am I missing it?

With Mia, FWIW, I made it simple: She could control the speed, and I'd control the direction. Want to speed up? Great, let's head away from home! Want to relax? Let's go home and relax fully! Because if I tried to control all of it, she'd fight. And yes, I do believe in demanding: no bucking, no spinning, no bolting, no biting, no kicking - those are demands. Those are not negotiable. But if the horse finds a better way to communicate, I'll help the horse get what she or he wants...at least, eventually.

A team has two members. If it is all horse, it is not a team.


----------



## Smilie

bsms said:


> Isn't that a case of using R+? You place some limits on the horse, because those limits involve safety. But if the horse will work with you, you will help the horse get what it wants. You take something "bad" - and dangerous, even - and use it to motivate the horse to change. You redirect the horse.
> 
> That means being formidable enough to limit the horse's choices, but you draw on something the horse wants a lot to help teach the horse to work with you. Or that is how it seems to me. Am I missing it?
> 
> With Mia, FWIW, I made it simple: She could control the speed, and I'd control the direction. Want to speed up? Great, let's head away from home! Want to relax? Let's go home and relax fully! Because if I tried to control all of it, she'd fight. And yes, I do believe in demanding: no bucking, no spinning, no bolting, no biting, no kicking - those are demands. Those are not negotiable. But if the horse finds a better way to communicate, I'll help the horse get what she or he wants...at least, eventually.
> 
> A team has two members. If it is all horse, it is not a team.


You will have to ask Loosie is that is R+or not, as I have always simply considered it in the frame of making the right thing easy, and the wrong thing hard. It can take a lot of patient work , also!

We once had a gelding, that we has used both as a stud, and in games. He was fine, until some other horses passed him, got on the muscle, and then he would prance and dance, esp heading home, or back to camp. Thus, once my son, who was riding him, took a book along, and when he wanted to rush home with his fellow riding buddies, he simply tied him to a tree, sat down and read that book. About an hour later, with those buddies long gone, Classie rode back on a loose rein. In that case, it just took getting his mind back on the rider, and not those other horses that he was 'feeding off'
Had my son just fought with Classie, he might have gotten him slowed, but not relaxed and focused on him That is just applying horsemanship, to the situation.

I also agree on forming a partnership with a horse,built on trust, although I remain the controlling partner, able to call a veto in the right circumstance

Glad you got that book by Chris. I should read it again, as a refresher


----------



## loosie

bsms said:


> Isn't that a case of using R+? You place some limits on the horse, because those limits involve safety. But if the horse will work with you, you will help the horse get what it wants. You take something "bad" - and dangerous, even - and use it to motivate the horse to change. You redirect the horse.
> 
> That means being formidable enough to limit the horse's choices, but you draw on something the horse wants a lot to help teach the horse to work with you. Or that is how it seems to me. Am I missing it?.


I missed - well, didn't think I'd bother commenting - until Smilie pointed it out, but technically, if 'getting what it wants' is relief from pressure - a loose rein for eg, that is negative reinforcement. If you also gave the horse something it wanted such as good scratch, a food treat then, that is positive reinforcement. If the horse really wants to run and you allow that as a reward for something, that is positive reinforcement. They could all be classed as rewards though, that not being such an objective term. 

I know that seems pedantic to you two... well, it IS pedantic, I admit, but why I feel it's important to understand is that while either(used well of course) will teach the horse the basic behaviours, it does have different effects on the horse at an emotional level, to reward by giving something Good or by removing something Bad. And I do think that matters.


----------



## Smilie

Not really negating using correct terminology, Loosie, and am glad you clarified, as the more we learn,the better horsemen we become
I know that I am a stickler on de worming, versus worming, and on the term shanked snaffle, even when it is understood by most horsemen, that it is implied that bit is a curb with a broken mouthpiece. Same deal with hackamore, and mechanical hackamore- both parties have to know what you are referring to
If nothing more, it improves communication clarity,between two parties, as to what you mean. I do see your point, and will try to become more versed in those terms, in regard to 're -enforcement, and try to apply them correctly


----------



## bsms

I'm not worried about R- or R+ in technical terms. And "pedantic" is fine - it is part of learning. But if you allow a horse to do something it likes to do, provided it works with you, then the horse learns to enjoy working with you. I view it as similar to Trooper's sire. He was a terror, but when he learned humans would make it possible for him to go boss around really rough cattle...hmmm...suddenly, humans were worth working WITH. The stallion who enjoyed attacking humans turned into my friend's all time favorite horse.

I also liked the story of Smilie's son reading a book. It takes two to fight, and her son stepped out of the ring. The horse really had nothing and no one to fight. And when the horse was ready to cooperate, the rider helped him do what he wanted to do. Simple, yet so many - including me - miss it.

That sounds so much smarter and so much more effective than buying a double-twisted wire bit or working the horse until he gave up. My farrier told me he started with trying to boss horses around. But as a farrier, he concluded he could work more horses with fewer injuries by working with a horse in a give and take.


----------



## Foxhunter

I use to take the horses, including Tom to the beach in the winter especially if the ground was frozen. It gave them a good work out and trotting through the sea in deeper wate r worked them hard. 

Most of the sands were hard from where the tide had come in but there was alaway an area of soft sand and here I would take the saddle off and allow them to roll. It was a well earned reward. 

Tom, the moment I hit that soft sand would start to buckle at the knees but, he never went down until I had the saddle off his back. He would go over and over (I was holding the reins, he would get up and shake then I would let him looses so he would wander to a fresh spot and continue with his rolling. The other horses would also roll but not as vigorously as Tom. 

We would load the other horses and load them up. Tom would be a distance away by this time but as soon as the last horse was in he would come charging back bucking and kicking out, stop at the bottom of the ramp and have his halter and blanket on and then jump into the horsebox. He loved it.


----------



## gottatrot

bsms said:


> I also liked the story of Smilie's son reading a book. It takes two to fight, and her son stepped out of the ring. The horse really had nothing and no one to fight. And when the horse was ready to cooperate, the rider helped him do what he wanted to do. Simple, yet so many - including me - miss it.
> 
> That sounds so much smarter and so much more effective than buying a double-twisted wire bit or working the horse until he gave up. My farrier told me he started with trying to boss horses around. But as a farrier, he concluded he could work more horses with fewer injuries by working with a horse in a give and take.


I guess people have a lot more mental energy than I do. I get bored trying to run a horse around a field until they're tired, sitting and waiting out a horse that balks, or turning a horse back a hundred times because they want to rush home. 
My preference is with Smilie's son. Find out why the horse is doing something, and deal with the reason. If the other horses are too exciting, let's sit here and let the other horses go home first. 

Probably other people are more goal oriented than I am. I used to be that way, but the horses' goals never seemed to match mine so I ended up revising my goals until finally we were just all having a good time instead of worrying about goals. 

What I've found is that most of the time if I take on a problem another way, it ceases to be a problem. Horse doesn't want to go out alone. Fine, I bring a buddy, horse gets confident out there and several weeks later the horse goes out alone just fine. I could have battled it out, but this way I just kept going out for enjoyable rides instead of spending my time arguing. 

Horse doesn't want to go in tiny straight load trail. Fine, we'll put that horse in the bigger slant load and put the other horse that doesn't care in the straight load. 

What I've seen work really well is to ignore the problem if this is the first time you've seen it. If it keeps on being a problem, then don't face it head on, find a way around it that the horse finds more acceptable. Eventually go back and see if the thing is even still a problem.

Horse doesn't like bridle over his ears. Fine, unbuckle it each time until he's so used to you messing around up there he doesn't care anymore. Try different tack. Do whatever it takes other than pinning the horse down and forcing that bridle on or spending two hours trying to get the bridle up to his ear while he keeps pulling his head away.

This is just my take on things as a person who'd rather spend most of my time having fun rides and hanging out peaceably with horses rather than arguing with them. Training seems to happen incidentally along the way.


----------



## Foxhunter

gottatrot said:


> I guess people have a lot more mental energy than I do. I get bored trying to run a horse around a field until they're tired, sitting and waiting out a horse that balks, or turning a horse back a hundred times because they want to rush home.
> My preference is with Smilie's son. Find out why the horse is doing something, and deal with the reason. .
> 
> Horse doesn't want to go in tiny straight load trail. Fine, we'll put that horse in the bigger slant load and put the other horse that doesn't care in the straight load.
> 
> What I've seen work really well is to ignore the problem if this is the first time you've seen it. If it keeps on being a problem, then don't face it head on, find a way around it that the horse finds more acceptable. Eventually go back and see if the thing is even still a problem.
> .


I will not run a horse around the field because it doesn't want to be caught, I haven't the energy to do it and quite honestly they have a lot more energy than I do and I dislike running and positively hate running if the field is muddy, I am wearing boots and it is raining stair rods in a force nine gale! 

As for sitting it out in a horse that is napping I will do it. With most of this type of horse that comes in for breaking of the habit, the motive seems to me to be either to frighten the rider or to get into a fight. The latter have learned their own strength and majority of the time they have learned they can win. 

You cannot con them into going out on their own, you cannot fight them because they are stronger than you. Sitting it out gives them nothing to fight against. 

Murphy Mobbs was a true heavyweight cob, only 14.3 he had learned his own strength. Hos owner fox hunted and had to hack him to and from every meet because he would not load in a horsebox or trailer. I had seen men using strong arm tactics and all that happened was that they got hurt and Murphy won. 

He would load perfectly up fine in a trailer at home when he was fed in it but, if he was going somewhere - forget it! 

He came to me whilst hos owner was away. I was determined to load him come hell or high water. I set the trailer up, two horse straight load, no partition and front unload door open. I just had him in a halter with a lunge line as a rope. Led him to the ramp and he immediately charged down the side. I let him run but hung onto the line. He stopped at the stables. I walked up to him, patted him and gave him a mint. Led him back to try again. This went on for quite some time. In the end he looked at me gave a sigh and walked in. I led him straight out and turned him out in the field. 

Next day it took less time until at the end of two weeks he was walking in fine even if he was tacked up to go somewhere. 

Battles were over and his owner was able to load him after an initial session of him trying to get her to fight him. 

Just for fun he was shown in heavyweight cob classes and qualified to championships at Horse of the Year Show. He was placed in the finals. 

We were going home the following day and I walked over to the arena where I had left some stuff we had bought with the vendor. As I made the long walk back I saw an ambulance coming in. Sixth sense told me it was Murphy! I was right. His owner had gone to load him and he had played up. Several people had taken over and tried to string arm him in despite hos owner saying "No!" 

One man had a busted leg and another had a nasty cut on his ear from a flailing front foot. Murphy had a grin from ear to ear. He was put back in the stable and left for a while. I got him out and tried to load him. He gazumped past the trailer, me hanging into the line until,he stopped. Mints, scratches and pats, he did it two or three times more and then walked in. 

People watching were all saying that it wasn't the way to do things, I pointed out to them that I had to agree it was very different but, the horse was in the trailer, no one was hurt so, what was wrong with it? 

One brood mare we had could be very hard to load. She travelled well but going up the ramp was an issue. The farrier happened to be there one day and when she refused to go in he walked off, returned with a wad of straw, sprinkled that on the ramp and she walked in like an angel. So simple.


----------



## bsms

Foxhunter said:


> ...People watching were all saying that it wasn't the way to do things, I pointed out to them that I had to agree it was very different but, the horse was in the trailer, no one was hurt so, what was wrong with it?...


:iagree:

​ 
How very true. We too often try to insist every horse do it our way, or the proper way. I guess I felt the same about switching Mia to a curb when she would fight a snaffle. She learned the curb in 3 arena lessons, held her ground against a motorcycle the first ride out...and never bolted again. Spin? Yes. Do The OMG Crouch? Yes. But a horse who had bolted multiple times in a single ride, squirting cow pies out the back, never bolted again. 

So it may have been "wrong", but it was right for her. 

Need to find out if any of my horses like mints...


----------



## Woodhaven

I personally would like to ride without a curb bit but am the first one to use it if I am riding a horse that has learned that he can bolt and ignore a snaffle bit. Once they figure this out you can work with them and get over it with time but if something frightening comes up, they revert right back to old habits.

If a situation comes up where I do need to have a curb, I prefer a pelham bit so I can ride on the top rein which is not a severe bit at all and just use the bottom (curb) rein if I need it. This seems to work for me.

One mare I had was a tough mouthed old thing and would just ignore you if you used a snaffle and do what she wanted, you could ride her in a snaffle in an arena and she was a well trained horse but out on the trails was a different matter, if you had the pelham you never needed it but if you didn't have it, you sure wished you did.


----------



## Hondo

There's been a lot of discussion on Reward and Punishment here and elsewhere so I'm deciding to post a quoet of Wynmalen's take on the subject.

Quote:

"Reward and Punishment(?)

Many books about riding make a great deal of play about getting results by means of reward and punishment. I don't know.

There are two forms of reward particularly appreciated by the horse; the first is a calm and confident rider to whom he can give his unmitigated confidence; the second is an observant and sensible rider, who eases him often, in prompt appreciation of an effort well done. I can see no reason why these two forms of reward should not be always with the horse.

And as to punishment, well, I think i do know; or at any rate I hold a most determined opinion! I have never yet seen any case of real punishment do any horse any good, but I have seen a goodly many horses ruined in the process. A capable rider, who knows what he wants and who has the understanding, the tact and the patience to see that he gets it through quiet determination, will need no other form of punishment.

Naturally, any horse may be a little naughty at times, or a little cunning; he may suddenly get it into his head to sham inability to do some particular work which he fins especially strenuous, or for some other reason not very much to his liking; then, provided the rider is quite certain that the demand made by him is with in the horse's capabilities, that the question has been put to him properly and that the horse is shamming, or naughty, he may certainly use a flick of the whip or a touch of the spur somewhat more severely than normal.

But such action is only a call to order and need not, and should not degenerate into punishment. Certainly the well -trained horse must respect his rider,* but it is of the utmost importance, in my opinion, that he shall not fear him, nor his spur, nor his whip!"*

End Quote: Hi-lite/underline mine.


----------



## bsms

Used in a western style, and used correctly, curb bits may be gentler than bitless. I got Mia back to riding in a snaffle, and was thinking about trying her bitless again...but she was calmer, more eager and more confident when I used a curb.

If you ride with slack in the reins, and the curb bit is well balanced, then the curb bit will rotate freely in the mouth for 45-60 degrees before the curb strap locks the top of the side down. Only then does any real pressure get applied to the mouth of the horse. So if you use slack reins, and don't jerk on them, the horse will always feel the mouth piece and sides rotating before any pressure is applied - and most will decide to respond then and not wait for pressure. Think of it as an "Ask-Demand" bit, with the horse often deciding it can respond before the demand.

Not every horse likes them or responds well to them. Some WANT constant contact and the feeling their rider is always 'right there'. Bandit arrived here thinking any contact meant slam on the brakes. Then we had a phase where he often liked contact because I was asking him to make decisions and he wasn't comfortable doing so. As he gains confidence, he's doing well with minimal contact. I'm trying to take him bitless because it is hard to find a bit that fits well in his mouth. But at the moment, he is also doing very well in a Tom Thumb curb bit made by Reinsman.

It is well balanced in his mouth - the weight of the reins doesn't rotate the sides automatically. Notice they thinned the metal out on the lower shank, and added extra metal to hold the curb strap on the top. Did they do that to balance the weight?








​ 
The sides are not totally straight, and actually match Mia's old Billy Allen curb. The knuckle in the middle is no bigger than the mouthpiece itself, unlike most cheap Tom Thumbs. And copper is nice if the horse doesn't chew the bit, and Bandit doesn't chew this one:








​ 
I think it is gentler, overall, than the rope sidepull I've been trying on him. The knots on top can really dig in without me meaning for them to do so. I have ordered a similar one with softer rope and no knots on the nose, which should arrive this week. And notice Bandit, when relaxed, holds his head at a steep angle than many horses. It is who he is - and that affects the balance of the bit:








​ 
Gotttrot's journal thread ( http://www.horseforum.com/member-journals/why-i-gotta-trot-645777/page23/#post9486377 ) has discussed some other ideas, such as a jumping hackamore and gottatrot's modified leather bridle. Like a lot of things, this is one where a rider needs to keep an open mind and let his horse tell him what makes the horse feel right.

The problems I had with Mia in the snaffle were self-created. I tried to hold her back with pressure, which only desensitized her to pressure AND taught her how to stick her nose way out when she wanted the bit to go against her molars instead of her tongue and bars. Her snaffle problems were my fault, and my fault alone. A lot of her issues were due to me and how I rode, which is why I dislike skipping "_Make the right thing easy_" and jumping to "_and make the wrong thing hard_". As I learn to make the right thing easy, the wrong thing often fades away...


----------



## Judah

Nicely said. And I have to agree, I've never seen punishment do any good to the horse. I know a few guys with a real hard handed way of training and I've watched as they beat and punish (always in different ways, no baseball bats or other weaponry used) and the horse reacts and reacts and nothing helps until the trainer stops thinks and adjusts and then the horse suddenly starts responding better. Ask them how it went? "Its a good thing it was ME doing it because that horse needed its a* kicked before it decided to learn"

And what can I say? They 100% believe that all their force was NECCESARY in teaching that horse something that day, so anything I try to point out would be brushed off and they would try and make their point even more that only they could have worked that "problem" horse. What really happens is the horse trained THEM to do the right thing and get the right response.

All the punishment just made the horse wary, jumpy and nervous even in some cases. Most of you (based on what I've read) would never resort to heavy handed training as what I'm talking about, but I think mild punishments aren't helpful either. To me horses seem pretty straight forward, if they understand they will do it because its easier to just go along with what you want. If they have bad habits, I agree with what gottatrot said about letting the kinks work themselves out gradually by not trying to fight them so hard. It builds trust and trust is insanely important when you are sitting on top of a gigantic living breathing animal with a mind of its own.


----------



## bsms

Hondo said:


> There's been a lot of discussion on Reward and Punishment here and elsewhere so I'm deciding to post a quote of Wynmalen's take on the subject...


I initially disliked his book, but it is growing on me. That happens to me a lot!

There is also this, FWIW, from the US Cavalry manual. I do not agree with all of it, but it was written for horses used in a different way than I ride. Still, it offers an interesting take on this thread:

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

5 - WILLINGNESS - All horses have this faculty in varying amounts. Some submit to the rider's control with little trouble and hesitation, while others, on the contrary, offer great resistance. Under certain circumstances, all horses display stubbornness. The rider must always expect to encounter this stubbornness, which he must seek to avoid by the employment of proper aids; by demanding of the horse only what he is able to do, taking into account his degree of training and his physical attributes. Moreover, the rider must judiciously employ rewards and punishments to assure his supremacy over the will of the horse.

6. REWARDS. The horse is susceptible to rewards and understands their meaning. They stimulate his desire to please, encourage and reassure him when frightened by an unknown demand, and restore his confidence and submission....Rewards should not, however, be given the horse promiscuously. Riders are often seen caressing horses which are completely insubordinate. This is a bad error. If the horse, upset through fear or ignorance, becomes excited and does not allow himself to be controlled by the aids to the degree demanded, he should be calmed by use of the voice and by stroking. But if he knows what is wanted of him and for no reason whatsoever resists, it is an error to caress him. Such action will encourage him to resist and cause him to doubt the rider's firmness, and will necessitate sharper and more repeated correction, and lesson the effects of rewards. Stroking the horse calms him and is a means of persuasion. It should only be employed with an excitable horse, or after the horse has yielded to some demand; never during a disobedience...

7 PUNISHMENT. If the horse merits a reward after a good performance, he also deserves punishment when he disobeys, but such action should be taken properly and at the correct time. Corrections should follow the fault immediately, in order that the horse may understand the reason for the pain he suffers. In this way only is the correction effective, for otherwise it would be misunderstood by the horse, and would be considered as an unjust and uncalled for attack.

Punishment should not only be given at the proper time but also with justice. Should the horse disobey through ignorance, fear or defects in his conformation, he should not receive punishment...The rider must at all costs be the master, and should not hesitate, upon proper occasion, to combat his horse...

...Punishment should be administered without anger...The rider should remain calm in order to give only the needed amount of correction. In this way he obtains greater obedience, whereas in exceeding this limit he provokes the horse's resentment and leaves him with the memory of an injustice...

*...The fact must be borne in mind that punishments are very rarely necessary. Most of the faults committed by the horse are due to his ignorance and lack of training, or to the insufficiency of the means employed by the rider. In either case, severity becomes an injustice and causes such harmful results that it is better not to punish at all than to punish wrongly."
*
--------------------------------------------

For myself, and I think for a lot of inexperienced riders, the last paragraph says what needs to be said about punishment. Because I'm likely to punish the horse for things that are not the horse's fault, I'm better off not using it - or certainly only as a last resort.


----------



## Hondo

My only problem with bits, other than the fact that Hondo hates them, is when used with a beginning rider on a horse that bolts or acts up. I as a beginner without that much skill in staying with a wheeling and bolting horse will tend to use the reins to hang on and stay on. And it is my understanding that pain caused by a bit will cause a horse to run harder under a fear/panic situation.

When used as only a communication device as Wynmalen describes the whip and the spur, I have no biases against them.


----------



## Hondo

bsms said:


> The rider must at all costs be the master, and should not hesitate, upon proper occasion, to combat his horse


This is the part that I most strongly disagree with and from what you've said, I expect you do alo.

As far as punishment, I agree with what you said except "as last resort". I think the "last resort" should be avoided altogether.

Except, of course, with aggressive action by the horse in effort to establish dominance over a human. But not aggressive action in what the horse sees as his own self defense.


----------



## Smilie

Hondo said:


> There's been a lot of discussion on Reward and Punishment here and elsewhere so I'm deciding to post a quoet of Wynmalen's take on the subject.
> 
> Quote:
> 
> "Reward and Punishment(?)
> 
> Many books about riding make a great deal of play about getting results by means of reward and punishment. I don't know.
> 
> There are two forms of reward particularly appreciated by the horse; the first is a calm and confident rider to whom he can give his unmitigated confidence; the second is an observant and sensible rider, who eases him often, in prompt appreciation of an effort well done. I can see no reason why these two forms of reward should not be always with the horse.
> 
> And as to punishment, well, I think i do know; or at any rate I hold a most determined opinion! I have never yet seen any case of real punishment do any horse any good, but I have seen a goodly many horses ruined in the process. A capable rider, who knows what he wants and who has the understanding, the tact and the patience to see that he gets it through quiet determination, will need no other form of punishment.
> 
> Naturally, any horse may be a little naughty at times, or a little cunning; he may suddenly get it into his head to sham inability to do some particular work which he fins especially strenuous, or for some other reason not very much to his liking; then, provided the rider is quite certain that the demand made by him is with in the horse's capabilities, that the question has been put to him properly and that the horse is shamming, or naughty, he may certainly use a flick of the whip or a touch of the spur somewhat more severely than normal.
> 
> But such action is only a call to order and need not, and should not degenerate into punishment. Certainly the well -trained horse must respect his rider,* but it is of the utmost importance, in my opinion, that he shall not fear him, nor his spur, nor his whip!"*
> 
> End Quote: Hi-lite/underline mine.


See nothing that I don't agree with


----------



## bsms

When Bandit wanted to spin and run away, a bit helped me to keep the spin going until we were facing the scary thing - and thus made spinning an unproductive reaction on Bandit's part. I don't know if a sidepull could have done the job.

Mia had learned to evade a snaffle. The curb bit was simply different. Maybe a Cook's bitless would have worked as well. I'll never know. She needed different, but might not have needed a curb.

Horses can decide to ignore their riders. Mia would do it anytime she got going fast. Fast was simply too exciting to stop doing just because the monkey on her back wanted her to slow. A bit she could not easily avoid was then the difference between being able to slow her and not being able - and she would have tried running across the desert if not slowed.

I really dislike this sentence in what I posted from the Cavalry:

"_The rider must at all costs be the master, and should not hesitate, upon proper occasion, to combat his horse_."​ 
But there are times when a horse, due to upbringing (Mia lived in a corral and didn't know what the desert was) or poor training (me) or just from excitement, decides to take total control. That can be every bit as dangerous as a horse attacking you with teeth and hooves. The horse may mean no harm (Mia). But horses are not as smart as humans, and a horse who runs happily in the wrong area can kill both herself and her rider - all with good intentions.

I don't want my horse's unquestioning submission. Neither will I submit unquestioning to my horse! And I have no problems with *demanding* my horse work with me, not over me. I consider that self-defense.

In my case, at least, I didn't tend to balance with the reins. Don't know if it was the riding I had done 25-35 years earlier, or following Littauer's teachings combined with an Australian saddle (with horn). I'm convinced my Australian-style saddle saved my life more than once, and Littauer remains this western rider's favorite writer! Whatever my faults in position were, I could know I was going to stay with her...just had to hope she wouldn't slip and go down, because I would have gone with her to the ground as well. But forward, back, spinning, jumping sideways, even down - we were staying together as long as the girth held:


----------



## Smilie

I think we need to leave bits out of this discussion, as it alone can be a huge subject
I myself like curbs, use them on my finished horses, and agree, if the horse has learned to carry that curb, work on a loose rein, most horses then prefer a curb, as they are more designed to be used with a loose rein, and also to be just packed by the horse,esp riding one handed
I don't think this is the topic where the debate of the correct use of a snaffle and reasons for going to a curb, should be gotten in to
I guess, I could give a similar example, using a stud shank, where it was used for ingrained response, no actual application, to get a desired result
My one mare, the dam of many of my good horses, including Einstein, and who I had also shown successfully in hand, and under saddle, had been taught that response to a stud shank, shown in hand. Just like a response to a bit, that becomes more of a signal, then any actual application, a horse , once he learns light response to that lead shank, using the stud shank at first, as a secondary cue, then taht stud shank never needs to even be engaged again, with it just staying loose , run under that chin, and never engaged. Same as using spurs correctly, where you seldom need to touch ahrose with them, as you always give them the chance to respond to light leg alone.
Anyway, "Scoots' , had to be trailered, when I decided to breed her to an outside stud, and where those stud owners would not ship semen
Scoots had always loaded very easily, but in that breeding fiasco, she got a uterine infection, needed vet visits, where she was palpated, 
ultra sounded, flushed, ect, tot he point she started to associate being trailered, with going to the vet, and thus became for the first time, not always easy to load
I had hauled her to the vet, where she again was subjected to those procedures, that women here can identify with!
When I went to load her, she balked. We were on pavement, and no way did I want a wreak, but could not very well stay at that clinic's loading area
I thus ran a stud shank under her chin, like she had been shown at halter. Thevet looked a bit alarmed, but I told him,'don't worry, I won't even have to use it'
Scoots loaded on a loose shank, with that chain never even coming into play, and with the vet remarking, 'that is actually funny!
She just needed an associated memory, to load willingly, over ride that bad recent association with being hauled, that resulted in no real force needed, no battle and no trauma


----------



## jaydee

I read a short comment yesterday on something that was a 'taster' for a longer article or a video that you had to buy that made a lot of sense to me. 
I'm a great believer in making the right thing easy and the wrong thing hard or unpleasant even. 
This guy said that too often people, especially new owners make the wrong thing too easy because they don't challenge the horse when they don't do the right thing even when the right thing's available for them.
I've seen it happen so many times so could understand what he was getting at, by avoiding a confrontation because it seems 'kind' they've instantly they've trained the horse to do something they actually don't want it to and the deeper you dig that hole you're in the harder it is to get out of it.


----------



## Bondre

gottatrot said:


> Probably other people are more goal oriented than I am. I used to be that way, but the horses' goals never seemed to match mine so I ended up revising my goals until finally we were just all having a good time instead of worrying about goals.
> 
> What I've found is that most of the time if I take on a problem another way, it ceases to be a problem.
> 
> What I've seen work really well is to ignore the problem if this is the first time you've seen it. If it keeps on being a problem, then don't face it head on, find a way around it that the horse finds more acceptable. Eventually go back and see if the thing is even still a problem.
> 
> This is just my take on things as a person who'd rather spend most of my time having fun rides and hanging out peaceably with horses rather than arguing with them. Training seems to happen incidentally along the way.


This sums up beautifully what I have experienced up to now. The more you try to "fix" a problem and to enforce your own agenda, the more likely it is that your horse will protest and refuse to be fixed. Lateral thinking is the key. 

Your horse doesn't want to move forward. I think there are three principle approaches: 1 to oblige them (P+ and R-); 2 to wait them out and bore them into moving (R-); 3 to reward them every time they take a tiny step in the right direction until suddenly they understand and unlock (R+). And of course the best additional approach is to ask why they have locked up in the first place. 

On the subject of barn sourness, I very much agree with bsms and Hondo that many horses are apprehensive about going out into the great outside. All of the 5 horses I have had in the past three years have had barn sour problems at some stage. I posted about this prevalence in my journal some time last year, and Sue C came up with the interesting theory that domestic horses that are raised in relatively confined conditions are particularly prone to barn sourness. When you've lived in the confines of a dry lot for your whole life, the outside world is very big and threatening. Whereas a horse that has been raised free on several (hundred!) hectares is way more confident about the world. 

Most horses in Spain are sadly kept in very confined situations. Maybe that is why I have had to work on barn sourness again, and again, and now all over again with our most recent horse Duna. I can't help thinking that there are no quick ways to solve this one, much as I would love to discover a quick fix, but rather as gottatrot has explained so well, you just carry on doing whatever you can do with these horses, try and enjoy yourselves together (even if that means messing around 10 yards from the barn), and little by little the problem will fix itself.


----------



## Foxhunter

As a child riding the naughty ponies, I saw older and more experienced riders get whip happy with an animal that was misbehaving. One such 13.2 pony had learned how to drop a rider by bucking. Several had had a go at riding him but always ended up in the clinker of the arena. I was told I wasn't experienced enough to rode him but after a few sessions of watching them bite the dust I was allowed to climb on. I think we went about three steps at a walk and I was on the deck but I held the reins and without getting angry climbed back on. I was never athletic but I was agile and majority of the time I landed on my feet so I just got back on. He soon stopped trying to pull away when I came off and just stood there, realising that I was not going to get after him. In the end he just gave up. This pesky little novice had more determination to stay on than he had to drop me. He was expending to much energy. I had him walk trot and canter. One of the older girls decided she wanted a go. She mounted and was on the floor in no time. I will say it pleased me so much! 

That pony was eventually fine, he worked in the riding school on a daily basis. He was used for either lead rein riders or good riders for a couple of years and then anyone could rode him. He was one of the cheapest ponies the stables ever bought! 

What I learned from these remedials was that you had to assess them, listen to them, find out what set them off and work from there. 

They taught me so much including how to fall.


----------



## bsms

jaydee said:


> ...This guy said that too often people, especially new owners make the wrong thing too easy because they don't challenge the horse when they don't do the right thing even when the right thing's available for them...


I don't quite agree. I'm not sure challenge is the right word. I prefer the Tom Roberts approach of '_This will not give you the result you want. Please try again. I've got all day._' 

If a rider gives up when the horse chooses the wrong option, or accepts it, then that is teaching the horse the wrong thing is right. I've done that a lot.

I was thinking about it getting in a short 30 minute arena ride this afternoon. When I asked for a trot...I wasn't really asking. I expected him to trot regardless. But the flip side was that we alternated. We'd do some trotting. We'd stop. I'd adjust some tack while he ate, then mount up again. We did things my way for a while, then did what he wanted. And he had no problem with that.

Maybe horses understand give & take, doing what we want for a while and then getting to do what they want - while still with us.

I also think listening is a huge part of it. Trooper, Cowboy and Bandit all came here tense and worried. But their riders listen to them, and they have all learned to talk. It is as though they don't mind my sometimes saying, "No, do it my way" as long as I've listened to them first. Maybe horses use "Ask, Tell, Demand" - and often have riders who won't listen below "Demand". So that is what horses resort to doing...

"_Lateral thinking is the key_." - @Bondre​
That is a good expression. Equine judo. Rather than match strength against strength, move laterally and approach laterally. But judo still involves fighting, and good lateral thinking gets us out of the ring and leaves the horse with no one to fight. Or fighting himself.

An ideal situation for me, for example, is trotting the horse down the trail and "asking" for him to slow before we get to a rocky spot. If he refuses or ignores me, he hurts himself. That is his problem, and he can hardly blame me. My idea becomes what he wishes he had done!


----------



## Hondo

'This will not give you the result you want. Please try again. I've got all day.' 

Another excellent quote! And funny! Almost a complete training manual for beginners.


----------



## Hondo

Smilie said:


> I think we need to leave bits out of this discussion, as it alone can be a huge subject


Is that an ask, tell, or demand?:rofl::rofl:

Did you notice you posted approximately 33 lines pertaining to bits after that opinion?

Sorry, the devil made me do it.:riding:


----------



## Smilie

Yes, already mentioned as why a horse might be 'afraid',to ride out thus hesitant, as in a horse that has always just been arena ridden, but to me, that is not what is meant by the term 'barn sour'
A barn sour horse often has ridden out very well, until he learned he could decide when to head home, and when not He is not the same as a horse that lacks experience riding out, thus lack of confidence in riding out-way different approach needed, far as dealing with the problem.
On ahorse never ridden out, you gain his confidence, working gradually so he is more and more comfortable ridden out, making that riding out a pleasant experience, a reward even.
Riding a show hrose out, after a schooling session, demanding no more then he goes along where asked, on a loose rein, , maybe stopping for a bite of grass, is the way many good trainers keep a show hrose from becoming sour, giving him relaxation time
The barn sour horse, on the other hand, often just starts to become that way, maybe wanting to go back to buddies, or just back to that green pasture. He usually starts out in little ways, and if he has a rider that does not nip it in the bud, soon adds spinning towards home, offering to buck, into that list. The rider then accidently rewards the horse, decides to not ride him past where the horse wanted to return home, lets him have his way, rides back, and turns him back out with those buddies
He might first have started that balk, somewhere along the way, when the rider tried to ride him past a place he usually turned around at, or took a different trail, then the one that headed back home. Rather then argue with the horse, he heads back home. allowed to go on, and these horses often can't be ridden past the end of the laneway, eventually
The true barn sour horse is man made. All horses, never ridden out, are going to be somewhat hesitant/un sure,when first asked to ride outside of their comfort zone, some more then others. That is just a horse training fact.


----------



## Smilie

Hondo said:


> Is that an ask, tell, or demand?:rofl::rofl:
> 
> Did you notice you posted approximately 33 lines pertaining to bits after that opinion?
> 
> Sorry, the devil made me do it.:riding:


Yes, but note I never went into the 'ideal'reason for going to a curb'
I then, instead, gave a similar , but different example, where a stud shank, also can just induce ;learned behavior, without needing the 'action of that stud shank itself (of course, on a horse already taught lightness at one point, using that stud shank , and would have been the wrong thing to use, on a horse that never was taught lightness, in the beginning, by using that stud shank, just like spurs, to create lightness to the initial soft ask

I think we all can agree that many things, from bits to spurs, to crops, lunge whips or even just our hand, can be abusive, if used on a horse never taught to either understand or how to respond to a cue, yet can be just a mild form of communication, allowing a whisper to serve, versus a shout
A spade bit (sorry, seems the best analogy i can come up with ) can be a great communication bit, used with finger tip signal, on a horse that received the proper education that creates a spade bit horse, and with a rider who understands how to ride with a spade.
It would be extremely harsh,int he mouth of an uneducated horse, or in the hands of someone who has no business riding a horse with a spade bit


----------



## Smilie

A good example of a true barn sour horse, that I can come up with, is the pony Larry Trocha mentioned, in his videos on spooking
He got him when he was just a kid, and that pony was very good at spooking, then taking off for the nearest clothes line to run under, hoping to get whatever kid was riding him, off
He was not scared to ride out, but like many ponies, never ridden or maintained by an adult, learn to take advantage of their rider, esp when asked to go some place they rather would not
Full grown horses are the same, and those that are ridden in consistent ways, have good minds, develop trust, never become barn sour in the first place, although they might be timid , riding out, until they learn confidence and trust
To me, a barn sour horse, is one that is not afraid to ride out, has been ridden out, but has learned he can say , 'no'


----------



## loosie

Hondo said:


> And as to punishment, well, I think i do know; or at any rate I hold a most determined opinion! I have never yet seen any case of real punishment do any horse any good, but I have seen a goodly many horses ruined in the process.


Yep, while it depends how... pedantic you get about definitions of it, but in the way people generally use it - as a physically painful affair that comes after the behaviour that 'earned' it, definitely agree there. I do not agree with that kind of punishment at all. Even when we're talking 'real' punishment *at the time of* a behaviour, I only use it in self defense/emergency type situations. I think of it as an 'emergency measure' to 'buy you time' to *correctly* train alternative behaviour. But a measure that very often also sets back your other training.

Bsms, that's a thin & badly designed looking rope halter you have there! I noticed you said you've ordered one, but if that's not to your liking, you can always look up the instructions online & make one, to your own stipulations(I can send if you can't find). Firstly I use top quality double braided SOFT yacht rope, about 8mm diam. so it's not too thin or 'sharp. I do away with the knots on the nose completely, and set the ones at the side down further. I also put a few stitches through the doubled rope over the nose, to ensure it stays flat - more comfortable. I fit the halter - as you have done - with the nose piece up well above the sensitive muzzle(hate seeing them low!). 

I generally ride with them as a rope hackamore(reins tied under the chin), but have also put rings through the side knots, to attach reins as a side pull, to be more direct. I've also found, for my daughter & her green horse, it has helped to use a... don't know what they're called, but I'll call it a curb rope - a strap that runs through each ring & under the chin, the reins attaching to that, rather than directly to the rings. The tightening around his jaw somehow makes for a less... disputed aid than just having the pressure over his nose.


----------



## Hondo

Today I was almost wishing Hondo was a little barn sour on the way home. We were up a ways where the good native grass grows, he knew we were just out and about, and he was constantly saying, "Hey, c'mon, it's been two days since I got any of this, and not much then. You taking medicine or what? I'm a horse ya know".

I am very well trained. We ate a lot on the way back. He seems to have me wrapped around his fetlock.


----------



## Smilie

I agree connotation of punishment, like anything else , needs definition, and in rare cases, like an aggressive hrose, making it a 'me or you ',type of situation, pain should never be part of it
Punishment can be the simple thing to me, as not rewarding unwanted behavior
Thus, on a true barn sour horse, that could be a gelding, wanting to rush back to anew mare, that became the love of his life, or hurrying back, because he is always fed, soon as he gets back. 
To me, just tying him up for awhile, after he gets home, versus feeding or turning out with buddies, or even working hima round home, would be 'punishment, or simply making the wrong thing hard


----------



## Bondre

Smilie said:


> A barn sour horse often has ridden out very well, until he learned he could decide when to head home, and when not He is not the same as a horse that lacks experience riding out, thus lack of confidence in riding out-way different approach needed, far as dealing with the problem.


Yes, absolutely - how many people with a horse that doesn't want to leave the barn don't appreciate this fundamental difference of WHY? They look up some videos on YouTube on how to train the barn sourness out of their horse and start working the snot out of them next to the barn, when in fact the problem might be that the horse is genuinely scared of the unknown world and needs a more gentle approach. That's the problem with labelling behaviours; inexperienced horse people grab the label with glee but don't understand you have to examine the horse's motivation before deciding on a suitable remedial action. 

Our new horse is very barn sour and nervous. She has been since day 1 so not a behaviour I've created. And yet her previous owner says he rode her out all over his considerable acreage, used her for moving cattle, and all kind of things that just don't square up with the horse I see. 

On that basis, I first tried using the typical "work her hard near the barn" approach with the result that she got close to boiling point with the nervous tension that hard work created. When we left the barn area, which was supposedly a quiet time when you relax in contrast, well, relaxation just wasn't happening. So I junked the idea that she is a truly barn sour horse, despite the indications that she used to ride out well, and have accepted that she is genuinely scared of the world on her own. This obviously requires a quite different approach, with the emphasis on building trust. It is slow and constant work, no fast results or quick fix available.


----------



## Hondo

Smilie said:


> like an aggressive hrose, making it a 'me or you ',type of situation, pain should never be part of it


I do reserve the use of pain for one condition only. And that would be a horse using aggression to establish dominance over a human, if that actually ever happens.

But a horse using aggression as a defense should not be punished at all unless necessary for the safety of the human.

All that said, I'm not sure if I could tell the difference unless there were a lot of signs leading up to it.



Smilie said:


> Punishment can be the simple thing to me, as not rewarding unwanted behavior


That is exactly a fine example of negative punishment. Typical positive punishment would be pain.

Negative reward is REMOVAL of something UNDESIRABLE. (release of pressure for instance)

Negative punishment is the REMOVAL of something DESIRABLE. (no TV tonight for instance)

It can be hard to keep those terms straight unless one works with them often. I've had to go back and refresh myself at times.


----------



## Smilie

How about time out, as used on my grandchildren, by their parents?
Just kidding, although standing tied, after trying to rush home, could be 'time out, LOL


----------



## Smilie

Glad you are trying to figure your new marew out, Bondre
Did you actually ride her out, before buying her? Not saying the seller might not have been right up front with you, but it is best to always try a horse in an intended job, before buying.
Also, if he only rode her on that acreage, it also could have become a 'comfort zone
Another example would be, a green show horse, riding great in the home arena, even around that property, but being very nervous taken to those first shows, until that horse becomes ;show seasoned'
I guess, without having actually tried to ride her off that property, before buying her, and by herself, you never really had a true indication as to how de sensitized' she was, to riding with confidence in unfamiliar surroundings
She truly might be fairly green, far as being relaxed, riding out anywhere, trusting her rider. Good luck in getting her there!


----------



## Hondo

Smilie said:


> How about time out, as used on my grandchildren, by their parents?
> Just kidding, although standing tied, after trying to rush home, could be 'time out, LOL


I'm not even clear what a time out is. Must have come into vogue after mine.

Is it like sitting in the corner with a dunce cap on like in days of old?

That could be a combination of P+ and P- plus a dab of public shaming, well, unless it was a boy who had a bunch of friends in class with whom he just earned extra status points which in that case it could be R+.

Are you confused yet. I am


----------



## jaydee

Bsms - Probably 'challenge' isn't the right word - I'm not sure which one is. The main thing is that you always have to be very careful not to somehow 'reward' a horse for doing the wrong thing and that can break down into so many options. 
The people we bought Flo off used to give her peppermints to placate her when she threw a tantrum - which actually worked in an odd sort of way because she'd stand still when she was beings stuffed with them but she was addicted to those sweets and had soon learnt that if she acted up she'd get a whole lot of them
To go back to spooking - even if the horse is actually afraid I won't start patting it and saying good boy/girl if its just hauled me halfway across somewhere because at that point the horse doesn't know if its being 'rewarded' for spooking at something in too extreme a way or being told the scary thing isn't going to hurt it
Barn sour/buddy sour/napping - whatever the reasoning behind the behavior it usually comes down to the same thing. For some reason the horse isn't enjoying its job and if you can figure out why you can solve the problem
Trying a horse out when you buy doesn't always guarantee it won't 'fail' when you get it home. I knew one dealer who would let you take their horses out on your own around his area but they knew it so well they'd go on their own plus his son and later on his daughter in law were very hard tough riders that could persuade any horse not to argue with them but a lot of their horses were like Jekyll and Hyde when a more novice rider got them home.
The pony one of my friends bought early this year was a different thing altogether, she bought that off a teenager that was moving on to horses, not a great rider but she trusted that pony, my friend tried it out on its own and it was great but for some reason she just couldn't feel confident on it when she got it home and the pony was a nervous wreck in a few days. She sold it and it went right back to being safe, calm and reliable again


----------



## Smilie

yes, confused, as my grandkids sit in that corner, having time out, while having a good laugh at times
I know we are off track, but put a correct label on what I used to do , regarding my kids, besides making the right thing easy, and the wrong thing hard, LOl.
I was still working full time in the lab, thus I expected my two boys to keep their room 'reasonably ' cleaned up-not much more then picking toys up, and putting dirty clothes in the laundry hamper. After harking on them endlessly for 'willing compliance', I would take action on a day off, having given fair warning
I would clean those rooms, but some of those toys, comics, wound up in the burning barrel. My boys would get off that bus, and be very up set, lesson was learned though.
They still now refer back to those days, as grown men, as we are all apt to do, part in amusement, but also like em, wondering what some of those GI Joes would be worth now!
I then remind them, that my mother gave away my extensive collection of the comic books, like Bullet, Trigger, Hi Ho Silver, The Lone Ranger, Gene Autry and Champion and Fury, just because I went away to college!


----------



## bsms

^^ I agree with your entire post, jaydee.

The Cavalry manual was the first book I read on riding. Unfortunately, I didn't understand it because I hadn't seen enough to know what I was reading. But what they wrote makes sense to me:

"_Riders are often seen caressing horses which are completely insubordinate. This is a bad error. If the horse, upset through fear or ignorance, becomes excited and does not allow himself to be controlled by the aids to the degree demanded, he should be calmed by use of the voice and by stroking. But if he knows what is wanted of him and for no reason whatsoever resists, it is an error to caress him. Such action will encourage him to resist and cause him to doubt the rider's firmness, and will necessitate sharper and more repeated correction, and lessen the effects of rewards. Stroking the horse calms him and is a means of persuasion. It should only be employed with an excitable horse, or after the horse has yielded to some demand; never during a disobedience..._"

If Bandit actually spun, for example, I wouldn't reassure him while we were facing away. He was going to spin and keep spinning until he was facing the scary thing. If need be, I would THEN direct him to turn around and WALK away. At a distance where he felt safe enough, we would turn and face the scary thing. Then I'd dismount, take whatever time was needed - usually 3-5 minutes - to show him there was nothing to be afraid of. Then I would mount up on the spot, and we would ride away.

A few hundred yards later, as he would snort and blow, I'd scratch his neck lightly and tell him I understood.

If he was getting resistant about going forward, I'd wait and assess: Is he scared, or is he just being a turd? I know some folks disagree, but I"m pretty sure Bandit sometimes says no just because he doesn't feel like it, not because of fear. And it is very important to distinguish between the two...and yes, sometimes I make mistakes. Can't learn without them.

If he was scared, we might back off or might just wait. He hates waiting, so if he was mildly afraid and waiting - he'd go. That goes back to judgment and reading your horse. Sometimes I'd turn him, we would walk 10 yards back, turn again...and wait. And many times, assessing things from a slightly greater distance, he'd decide to move ahead.

But I don't like to fuss over the horse while they are not doing what I've asked. That was one of the many errors I made with Mia, and it took a long time to climb out of some of those holes I dug. It is easy to teach the horse the wrong thing.


----------



## Bondre

jaydee said:


> The main thing is that you always have to be very careful not to somehow 'reward' a horse for doing the wrong thing and that can break down into so many options.
> The people we bought Flo off used to give her peppermints to placate her when she threw a tantrum - which actually worked in an odd sort of way because she'd stand still when she was beings stuffed with them but she was addicted to those sweets and had soon learnt that if she acted up she'd get a whole lot of them


I starting thinking along these lines yesterday. I've been teaching my horse to stand still for mounting (and I mean really stand still, instead of fidgeting and more or less doing it right) using the clicker and treats. She's learned it really fast but I realised that now she stands nicely she'll just get one or two clicks and treats, whereas when she was in progress she'd get maybe ten. And so in fact it's in her interests to stay at the fidgety stage when she gets more frequent reinforcement. Fortunately she hasn't copped onto this detail - yet! 

This is true in all aspects of clicker training - you start off reinforcing the horse liberally to get the behaviour established, but once they understand and start doing it right, the quantity of treats falls off hugely. So could a horse maybe try to keep doing things badly so as to keep up the frequent schedule of reinforcement? - just like your horse learned to act up to get her sweets. Instead of perfecting their behaviour and receiving fewer rewards?


----------



## loosie

Smilie said:


> How about time out, as used on my grandchildren, by their parents?
> Just kidding, although standing tied, after trying to rush home, could be 'time out, LOL


Yep, negative punishment(removal of freedom/company). IME, -P has very limited value for animals generally, although many people use it(time out) on dogs. Again, think it comes down to timing & animals being able to link 'abstracted' ideas. Eg. take the dog away/quit playing may be effective -P, but lock him in a room for x minutes... pointless, with regard to the previous behaviour.


----------



## jaydee

I'm sure a lot depends on how smart the horse is as to how fast or if ever they clue on to getting treats for the 'wrong thing'. Flo was really clever, too clever for her own good in many ways but after a few days with us, DH having been kicked when she struck out in a tantrum and me having my hand smashed against a door frame when she had a tantrum the only thing that cured her was a really hard whack with a sawn off broom handle. It might sound harsh but she was dangerous without really nasty natured, just a spoilt brat and I think getting walloped shocked her so much she never did it again
Bsms - I know for a fact that some of my horses will fake a spook in the riding arena's to try to get out of working in there, they each have their own 'places' to do it but if they're loose in their for some reason they never spook at anything.
K has been acting out on the front paddock today, its where Flo used to be kept and where she was euthanized and maybe it sounds like I'm a bit crazy but apart from Honey who was Flo's buddy none of our horses like being on it, she was racing around and leaping about threatening to come over the fence (her usual way in to the barn when she gets bored with the field) so I went and caught her, immediately calm and well behaved and was happy to go on one of the other paddocks.


----------



## Hondo

At first Hondo would sometimes move away when I went to mount. He was doing it deliberately as he would watch me and do it at exactly the last minute. That was when I was using a mounting block, rock, or log. After a try or two, I'd cinch up a hole for a ground mount. I may have been inadvertently punishing him by tightening the cinch.

But now he's so good that he'll take a half step to put the stirrup just where I want it. And then he says, "I did good, do I get a treat?". He usually does.


----------



## bsms

We all view things, honestly, through our own experience. Mine is both rather limited and rather unusual. Mia was very spooky, for a long time. I certainly got a lot of training in riding out spooks and spins and bolts. But she was also extremely honest, used in the dictionary sense. She never faked a spook in her life. She was, by nature, an uncommonly WILLING horse.

Once I concluded I was likely to die, I hired a professional. The pro had an 8-month waiting list, so I rode Trooper to improve my riding while waiting. The first week the pro worked with Mia, she was bewildered by her. She eventually concluded Mia had never really been broken to ride at all. She told me I might have a horse who was extremely nervous, very demanding - and almost heroically willing. Four months later, she thought Mia might never be truly safe for riding in the desert...but that she would try, as hard as she could. Because that was who she was.

I can't imagine Trooper or Cowboy faking a spook. I could imagine Bandit doing it, and that has been interesting for me. Not because he's trying to get out of work, or to avoid going forward. But I'd swear you can see the gears turning in his head, trying to work up something ahead as being spook-worthy. It may be the exact same clump of vegetation he has strolled past before. And he'll be perfectly willing to avoid it by an extra 30 feet, even pushing through heavy brush to do so, and then continue on. He'll work much harder, willingly, to avoid it. 

But if I catch him at the right moment, a pop in the gut with my heels will send him on by. He acts as if he has been startled out of the train of thought that was building into a spook. And then he goes by with barely a glance!

The cavalryman I quoted obviously had a big impact on my thinking, to the point of boring y'all. But when he wrote, "_...Horses don't like to be ennuye, and will rather stick at home than go out to be bored; they like amusement, variety, and society..._" - could that include spooking, at least a little, because they are getting bored? Can a horse sometimes act like a teen going to see "Halloween III"?

Mia did not. And Bandit has often been truly afraid of things I'd assume any horse knew were not scary. There has been a release in tension in his back on some recent rides beyond anything I've experienced, and a confidence I haven't experienced. Yet it also seems he sometimes starts building up to be scared of X, and if you break his train of thought, he'll be past X before he remembers that X might be scary. Does that make sense?

And would that mean he was faking a spook, or is he genuinely afraid then of something he built up in his imagination - something horses are not supposed to have?

Horses! :think: You can learn enough to ride in a single lesson, and yet a life is not long enough to truly master it!


----------



## Hondo

Now this is a serious question about behavior modification. Have this 5 YO baby Dragon in with Hondo now. I believe he may have a very serious mean streak in him.

He seems to delight in pulling my gloves out of my back pocket when I'm not looking and delights when I'm looking around for, "What did I do with my gloves?".

Five to six seconds is max so far for holding his front foot up, but when I'm inspecting one of Hondo's hooves and trying to figure out the best I can do for Hondo, Dragon finds it irresistible to pull my hat off and throw it on the ground.

He does not use his teeth, only his lips. That said, if I'm sitting cross legged in a chair, his lipping may turn to a more exact inspection of the laces with his teeth. Does his feet hurt? Does he want my boots?

If I go out and sit under a tree to peacefully watch them graze, Dragon comes over and proceeds to do anything he can think of just to pester me.

If I'm filling the water tank and turn my back, he seems to delight in throwing the hose on the ground. He has no sense what-so-ever of water conservation.

Sometimes he seems bent on causing me to distress over his turning over stuff or anything he can get into.

He is somewhat high fear although I admit I'm not sure what high fear is for a young 5 YO. But he is VERY people friendly and getting (worse or better?)

So what P/R +/- should I use? Should I beat him mercilessly, or give him a treat, a big smile, and a big hug.

I think sometimes behavior modification can get in the way of what we, or at least some, really really want with our equine friends.


----------



## Avna

Hondo said:


> Now this is a serious question about behavior modification. Have this 5 YO baby Dragon in with Hondo now. I believe he may have a very serious mean streak in him.
> 
> He seems to delight in pulling my gloves out of my back pocket when I'm not looking and delights when I'm looking around for, "What did I do with my gloves?".
> 
> Five to six seconds is max so far for holding his front foot up, but when I'm inspecting one of Hondo's hooves and trying to figure out the best I can do for Hondo, Dragon finds it irresistible to pull my hat off and throw it on the ground.
> 
> He does not use his teeth, only his lips. That said, if I'm sitting cross legged in a chair, his lipping may turn to a more exact inspection of the laces with his teeth. Does his feet hurt? Does he want my boots?
> 
> If I go out and sit under a tree to peacefully watch them graze, Dragon comes over and proceeds to do anything he can think of just to pester me.
> 
> If I'm filling the water tank and turn my back, he seems to delight in throwing the hose on the ground. He has no sense what-so-ever of water conservation.
> 
> Sometimes he seems bent on causing me to distress over his turning over stuff or anything he can get into.
> 
> He is somewhat high fear although I admit I'm not sure what high fear is for a young 5 YO. But he is VERY people friendly and getting (worse or better?)
> 
> So what P/R +/- should I use? Should I beat him mercilessly, or give him a treat, a big smile, and a big hug.
> 
> I think sometimes behavior modification can get in the way of what we, or at least some, really really want with our equine friends.


How about using his inclinations to teach him tricks? It will connect him with you, get him to listen and respond, and not just pester. But don't be surprised if he runs through all the tricks you've taught him to get you to play with him more.


----------



## Smilie

He just sounds like a curious young gelding, and I am quite sure your are asking about P/R+/-, tongue in cheek
By now I know you are aware that only you, relating with that horse, can decide the right mix, while you are obviously enjoying his younger playfulness!
Have fun!
How about a picture of Dragon ?
Need to get a yearling gelding next, LOL!


----------



## Smilie

Yet it also seems he sometimes starts building up to be scared of X, and if you break his train of thought, he'll be past X before he remembers that X might be scary. Does that make sense?

And would that mean he was faking a spook, or is he genuinely afraid then of something he built up in his imagination - something horses are not supposed to have?

Horses! You can learn enough to ride in a single lesson, and yet a life is not long enough to truly master it!'

I would think you just got his mind back on you. I don't consider that a true fake spook
Hubby's one trail horse, many moons ago, was nick named Moose. He was by the one halter bred stallion , I raised, and before I leaned better,far as using halter blood All his offspring were more spooky then those out of the same dams and our other stud
One trail riding out of the Ya Ha Tinda camp ground, has a huge boulder, right by a barrier to prevent anyone trying to drive up that old reclaimed road. he must have passed that boulder four days in the row, morning and night, and each time shied away from it, although less violently then the first time, probably as hubby was getting tired of the game
Charlie can find things to spook at,, in the indoor arena I ride her at, esp, when at times, snow slides off that roof, and she remembers those spots
She is much better now, and I can bump her with my legs, tell her, 'quit' and she then concentrates better on me, versus as to what is going on around her


----------



## tinyliny

I assume, Hondo, that you are joking when you ask about the choice being between beating him mercilessly . . .or . . giving him treats.



what happens when you ask this little corker to move away? is he accepting of that? or does he threaten to kick at you? 

i know you are very easy going wtih horses, but at least it's good to know that you CAN move him off if needed. maybe set up a situation where you have 'your' food, and you get that fellow to knowing that it's yours, not his, until you get bored with it and move off.


----------



## Hondo

@tinyliny Kick at me? I don't think he has it in him. I've been drawn to him for three years but didn't think I had the experience to be involved with that young of a horse.

If I really want him off, he'll move off fine.Yes, tongue in cheek.

@Smilie	;

Ok. Here is a couple of pictures. Now here's a test. He is the product of two registered purebreds. What are their breeds?


----------



## loosie

I too am taking your post mainly tongue in cheek Harold. He sounds like a fun horse! With a great sense of curiosity... & maybe of humour! But since you started with 'this is a serious question'...

Ditto to Avna's suggestion. If he takes your hat for eg, you could put that on cue. I personally wouldn't encourage him taking it off your head, but perhaps you can put it somewhere(or some other item) and teach him to 'fetch' it. I taught one of my horses to pick up my hat for me, so I didn't have to get off if it fell off on a ride. Always wear a helmet now, so that trick's obsolete...



Hondo said:


> Five to six seconds is max so far for holding his front foot up, but when I'm inspecting one of Hondo's hooves and trying to figure out the best I can do for Hondo, Dragon finds it irresistible to pull my hat off and throw it on the ground.


So I'd be asking ATM for only 4-5 seconds from him, reward him well, then release *before* he tries to take it. Start there & get him reliable about that, before asking for more.

Re his 'interfering', agree with Tiny mostly. It's up to you, what boundaries you teach him, what you allow, but for safety, I'd be ensuring he WILL move off politely when told, and personally, taking things from your pockets or unoffered should be 'out of bounds'. 

Re when you're messing with Hondo's feet, in that situation, whether you tie the dragon up or not, he should not be in range of you or Hondo. Speaking from experience, especially when you're head down, bum up with a hoof in hand, that's definitely a safety concern. How you teach him boundaries/manners - whether you slap him around some:razz:, you will want to do it in such a way that it doesn't spoil his curiousity.


----------



## Hondo

Smilie said:


> Need to get a yearling gelding next, LOL!


Oh there's one here born last spring that I would almost die for. But alas, the owner feels the same.

There are two more in the basket for next spring. One by accident one on purpose. The accident was the owner of Rimmey and she wants to keep him as she'll need him for a back up later on. But down the line, well we'll see. Meanwhile, there have been some big positive changes in Dragon so in a month or two or three I may not be so hot for Rimmey, although I have done some serious bonding with him the last few months. It was so fun to go out with him ponying even with no salt. Not ready to do that with the kid yet.


----------



## loosie

Hondo said:


> He is the product of two registered purebreds. What are their breeds?]


Equus Cabellus, I'd say.


----------



## Smilie

Hondo said:


> @tinyliny Kick at me? I don't think he has it in him. I've been drawn to him for three years but didn't think I had the experience to be involved with that young of a horse.
> 
> If I really want him off, he'll move off fine.Yes, tongue in cheek.
> 
> @Smilie	;
> 
> Ok. Here is a couple of pictures. Now here's a test. He is the product of two registered purebreds. What are their breeds?
> 
> View attachment 840385
> 
> 
> View attachment 840393


Well, how about AQHA and TB, although, not possible is you go 'hardline', far as purebred


----------



## Hondo

loosie said:


> So I'd be asking ATM for only 4-5 seconds from him, reward him well, then release *before* he tries to take it. Start there & get him reliable about that, before asking for more.


I had to get him reliable at 0.5 seconds before I finally got up to 4 seconds. Me? Reward well? Heehee

Naw, he's a very good horse. I've always liked him. He could get his feelings hurt very easily if I pushed him off aggressively. He responds well to a gentle, neu, neu, no, no, and gentle push.

My point really was that there's just so much more to it than just behavior modification important though it is.

I really believe they do see and understand something called heart. But still I know, they are not as sophisticated animals as we are so that has to be taken in consideration.

Edit: That would be really cool if he would pick up my hat when brush takes it off. I hate when that happens. Not often but it does.


----------



## gottatrot

Hondo said:


> If I'm filling the water tank and turn my back, he seems to delight in throwing the hose on the ground. He has no sense what-so-ever of water conservation.


Very funny!

I'm going to say Dragon is a QH/TB cross also.

There was a question about if a horse was aggressive towards humans from fear versus trying to dominate and what the appropriate response would be. It's easy to think that if the horse is fearful and acting just to protect themselves, that we don't want to make that fear worse.

But I also think from my experience that even with domination it's not best to meet aggression head on. Honestly, the only thing that has been helped by an aggressive action on my part toward a horse is a brief alleviation of my temper. And when that is the case, I am disappointed that I lost my self control.

What I've seen with a horse that is trying to dominate a human is that they are approaching us as they would another horse. They need to learn we are not a horse. The aggressive mares I've met were happy if you would fight them. They wanted to battle and thought they could win based on the fact that they'd beaten all the other horses they'd come up against. 

With one mare, we thought we could just reprimand her for her actions, that she didn't understand what was wrong such as biting and kicking. But she actually was interested in that, seeing how and when she could bite you or kick you - as if we were in this power struggle with each temporarily coming out on top.

It didn't work to do battle, instead we had to teach her that we were different from horses. If she wanted to bite, we showed her that we could lead her some distance and she had to follow us. We could back her up and tie her and put a saddle on, have her do all kinds of things that she had to do just because we were smart and didn't fight back head on. She eventually understood that we were some other kind of creature, not a horse that she was working out her place with but something else that could have her do things without fighting. This is what made her give up the fight. Otherwise I think we would have battled every day.


----------



## Foxhunter

bsms said:


> When Bandit wanted to spin and run away, a bit helped me to keep the spin going until we were facing the scary thing - and thus made spinning an unproductive reaction on Bandit's part. I don't know if a sidepull could have done the job.



Thereby could well be your problem of Bandit continuing to spook. 

If a horse shies away from something then the most important thing is to NOT turn it in a full circle but to turn it back against the way it is going.


----------



## Bondre

The baby Dragon looks a bucket of laughs. Just take care he doesn't burn your butt off one day ;-)

A curious lippy horse like him can be taught all sorts of useful tricks as Loosie has suggested. I'd consider teaching him to pick an item off the ground and work up to him bringing it to you. Then you can teach him the names of two or three different items and ask him to select the right one and bring it. Hat / rope / brush for example. 

Of course, as Avna pointed out, the more tricks you teach him, the more varied his behaviours for pestering you.


----------



## Hondo

@gottatrot What you said just makes so much perfect sense to me. I had sort of just said what I said based on a lack of defense for hitting a horse under those conditions. You have provided me with the defense I lacked.

Your assessment and treatment of that horse represents, to me, an uncommon level of horsemanship.

Fox trotter and Quarter Horse. Hopefully he will single foot. Or somebody (said) that cross will single foot sometimes. Don't know anything about it but it's supposed to be smooth.

@Bondre I actually, of course, enjoy him pestering me. I'm not sure he will work out for me yet but it's looking better and better. If I get a bill of sale I might try teaching a few tricks but until then I'll concentrate on his feet and ponying him.


----------



## Foxhunter

When Rufus came to me he was a miserable animal. Very aloof and sour. Not over nice as he would be sly in trying to kick me first thing I did was to do some adjustments across his diagonal, change his saddle and ride out his antics. We had some ground issues and they had to be sorted but, never once did I do more than verbally correct or a poke with my finger. 

Soon he developed a strong character - most of it very cheeky rather than naughty and he knew just how far he could go. He was quite lips in that he would feel around me with his top lip, one day he was doing this as I hung his Haynes, next thing he had removed my woollen hat, he turned his butt towards me, standing with his head over his water manger. I,went to get my hat and he dunked it in the water before returning it to me. 

Rufus never grew up in that he was the instigator of play.


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

Dragon sounds wonderful. Agree with Smilie that he sounds like a curious young gelding.

Here is what I have found though, if you find that to be an endearing quality, you can keep it so that your curious young gelding becomes a curious older gelding who understands parameters of proper behavior around humans but, still enjoys their company as well as retaining that curiosity about the world around them, as he gains confidence.

Caspian is our smartest horse. We got him at just turned two and soon found ourselves at a fork in the proverbial road. He didn’t have any concept of boundaries. He was mouthy, pushy and as I mentioned very smart a combination that could lead to a nightmare horse or a horse who is a bundle of fun. 

He is the only horse I own that has ever managed to push me into anger but, in my case, it was actually a good thing.

Shortly after we got him, I was leading him and he bit my hand. I wheeled around, stepped into him aggressively and hit him three times on the shoulder with the lead rope, hard. Then we walked on like nothing happened. He has never again bitten my hand or my daughter’s on lead…never even mouths.

Was he afraid? Oh yes. Yes, he was. Do I feel bad about being the cause of his moment to terror? No not really. Had he bitten my daughter’s much more delicate hand, he might have broken it. Did it destroy him and turn him into a dull eyed shell of his former self? No.

The opposite actually happened. In the years that have followed (he is about to turn 6) that is the only time I have ever hit that horse with a hand, a whip, a flag, the end of a lead throughout his training and riding. He has never needed that kind of response again.

Unlike many people these days, I spanked my children. There are five of them. Three only ever received one spanking; open hand on the rear end, one strike, in the moment of bad behavior. After that, just a firm look from one of us was enough to get compliance. 

One received three spankings before he got that same message and the third child…spanking was not an effective way to change his behavior (he was like me, ‘that didn’t hurt, hit me again’) so we changed tactics.

All five are now at least teenagers, three are grown, married (or engaged) own homes and two of those have children of their own. All three were financially independent by age 19. 

Contrary to what most parents say, the teenage years for us were wonderful years. It was a time where they spread their wings, grew in understanding of the world around them, took responsibility for their decisions and oddly enough, respected us when we put our foot down on something without argument, defiance or attitude. As adults, they still look to us for advice. 

The use of spanking in four out of the five was a very effective tool in our bag of parenting tricks for establishing boundaries. Used sparingly and wisely with good timing, it was quite effective. Effective because it was never needed to be used again. 

They say insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result. If you find yourself having to escalate (ask, tell, demand) or constant need for correction, rather than finding that you are on a course of de-escalation and extinction, whereby less and less pressure is needed, then it would probably behoove you to examine what you are doing and make some changes. IMO this is also true if you see your curious young horse turning into a horse who has lost both curiosity and confidence.


----------



## bsms

Foxhunter said:


> Thereby could well be your problem of Bandit continuing to spook.
> 
> If a horse shies away from something then the most important thing is to NOT turn it in a full circle but to turn it back against the way it is going.


1 - Bandit is not continuing to spook.

2 - I wrote: "When Bandit wanted to spin and run away, a bit helped me to keep the spin going until we were facing the scary thing - and thus made spinning an unproductive reaction on Bandit's part."

So if we were heading east, and the scary thing was ahead of us (east) and Bandit spun around to the west...I should let him go west? I should NOT keep him turning until we were once again facing east?

Because Bandit has totally given up spinning away from things by making sure he always ended up facing the scary thing. I don't see how letting him run away from scary things would teach him not to spin and not to run.

And with Mia, teaching her to keep facing the scary thing taught her the scary thing wasn't nearly as scary as she thought, and that ended her bolting. She did continue to spin, but I don't think those spins were fear spins. She did and does those when showing no sign of fear, and would then be completely calm 5 seconds later. I think the spins she has continued to do have something to do with some wires in her brain not connecting. Her new owner agrees.


----------



## Smilie

I agree with Reinin, that if you constantly need to use, ask, ask louder then demand, you are not applying it correctly. You are in fact,doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result.
Once that message is clear,the hrose always given a chance to respond to the light ask, he will need no more then that light ask. The entire concept of producing alight and respectful horse is hinged around that
It is obvious that if you regularly need to use that demand, you do not have a light horse
I have not dealt with many aggressive horses, asI raised most of the horses we had, and did not train outside horses.
I did encounter a few,as my son trained outside horses, but I bought the odd one, who was never taught proper \order', in relationship to people
I do get after a horse, that not just offers to kick a human, but just acts food aggressive towards other horses, during feeding time, when I am out there
My main herd used to consist, during the winter, of around 15 horses, both mares and geldings, of various ages. I had a large chore slede, with which I hauled out hay, putting out piles of hay, a few more then horses
All my horses knew that they were not to act food aggressive, thus perhaps accidently kick me, or run another horse over me. 
One time, I bought a two year old mare, assuming she was mannered, like my horses, thus went to pat her ,as I often would one of my horses, as she came up for her pile of hay
She acted towards me, like she would,towards another horse, protecting her food from another horse, thus kicked out, catching me, but I was close enough the blow was not hard. I did smack her, hard as I could, with the handle end of the hay fork. She never offered to kick again
I knew of several cases where people got seriously hurt, feeding a large group of loose hroses, and one young mother was killed, accidently kicked by a horse, who was being aggressive towards another horse
The person who always looks after our hroses, when we are gone, thus did the winter feeding, when all the hroses weer turned out, remarked a few times as to how she never felt worried feeding my horses, as she did some of the other places she horse sat at
Fear aggression only occurs, once you force a horse from flight mode, into fight mode, and by reading a hrose correctly, should never push him into that fight mode int the first place. Far as a truly aggressive horse, I have no problem putting him in his place, even if some pain is involved
My son had one Morgan mare in to be trained. As her owner stated, she 'loved people'-ie walked all over you. About the second day, when my son went to halter her, she decided to charge him. A couple good smacks with that lead shank, moving her feet around that corral, and she stood respectfully to be haltered, never offered to act aggressive again, was easy to train, and turned into a nice horse for her owner
Might not be politically 'correct' on this thread, but I will be honest and not afraid to say that I have no problem using using that demand at the level indicated, not in anger, but enough to get the message across, so you never need to go there again.


----------



## Avna

bsms said:


> 1 - Bandit is not continuing to spook.
> 
> 2 - I wrote: "When Bandit wanted to spin and run away, a bit helped me to keep the spin going until we were facing the scary thing - and thus made spinning an unproductive reaction on Bandit's part."
> 
> So if we were heading east, and the scary thing was ahead of us (east) and Bandit spun around to the west...I should let him go west? I should NOT keep him turning until we were once again facing east?
> 
> Because Bandit has totally given up spinning away from things by making sure he always ended up facing the scary thing. I don't see how letting him run away from scary things would teach him not to spin and not to run.
> 
> And with Mia, teaching her to keep facing the scary thing taught her the scary thing wasn't nearly as scary as she thought, and that ended her bolting. She did continue to spin, but I don't think those spins were fear spins. She did and does those when showing no sign of fear, and would then be completely calm 5 seconds later. I think the spins she has continued to do have something to do with some wires in her brain not connecting. Her new owner agrees.


When my young horse spooks and spins I always turn her in the direction of the object if at all possible, that is, I reverse her direction. Practically speaking, this is because I want to stay on, and she could easily keep spinning until I came off. As soon as she is forced to face the spooky thing, she stands. Then I can go from there in a calmish manner. 

I have been taught to treat any kind of spook reaction as simply disobedience to my aids. I asked for a straight line, she spun to the left. Hence I apply pressure to move her back to the right and into the position I originally asked. A spin is just a very energetic deviation -- it's more likely, with my horse, to be a change of tempo, gait, a waver, a curve away from the object. Each of those is corrected just like any other deviation from the aids. This seems to work the very best for me. A 'recall to her duty' as it were. I always just ignore the object (except for mountain lions and monster trucks). It really encourages her to do the same.


----------



## Smilie

Agree with Avna, that were a horse to spook and try to spin to the left, away from that object, I would make that horse s do a turn on the haunches to the right, until facing that object. When the horse spun tot he left, unasked, he was moving against that left rein on his neck and your left leg. Use taht left leg to make the horse face that object


----------



## bsms

I guess where I differ then is in viewing it as a simple disobedience to my aids. The horse is not disobeying. He's trying to save his life from something scary - and this applies to a horse who is genuinely afraid of X, not a horse who just doesn't feel like doing something.

When Bandit or Mia would spin, they'd have a 180 finished before any correction could be done. Neither floated around. So we were heading east, and now they violently turned to the west. They normally did it by turning left, which was the best balance direction for both. This left me with a fait accompli - we were now facing the wrong way.

And in turning them back - or keeping the turn up - turning them in their best balance direction made sense to me. I see no sign it made ANY difference to the horse. The horse never turned left while I was asking for a right. And from a spooking viewpoint, all that seemed to matter to Mia and Bandit was that we did, in fact, end up facing the scary thing. Thus what they wanted to get out of a spin away - to turn tail and run - did not happen.

And since spinning away did not work, they eventually gave it up. 

Mia is a partial exception, but the spins she did during the last couple of years I owned her didn't seem to be related to fear. It was calm, boom, calm. And then a horse who was bewildered at why I had made her spin - because she would then look back at me as if asking for an explanation. I don't think she knew she caused it. And I'm told the same is still true...

I've heard the '_if they spin away left, you must force them back by turning right_' theory. All I can say is that I found reversing direction hard to do, and I saw no sign it mattered to the horse. The horse was trying to turn and get away. If the horse finished the reaction facing the object of its fear, then spinning was unproductive and the horse gave it up.

This may be the difference: "_were a horse to spook and *try* to spin to the left_" - @Smilie. With Mia and Bandit, there was no "try to spin". If a horse is wiggling toward the left, then turning them back to the right makes sense. But what Mia and Bandit did were violent 180 degree turns. Boom! Done!

On a few rare occasions, Bandit would spin 90 left, in which case I'd turn him 90 right. But the desert trails don't often allow for a 90 degree spin. Even Mia didn't REALLY want to turn 90 degrees and race through cactus! As a rule, they would do a 180 or not try to spin at all.

I probably also ought to point out I prefer to go past scary things with a loose rein. Most people tighten up and direct the horse past. I loosen, usually by moving my hand forward, giving some extra slack that I can then take out. There were two things that really helped Mia: Learning how to stop dead in her tracks, and watch the scary thing move away from her, and Tom Roberts advice on giving the horse some freedom.

If I tried to direct Mia or Bandit past something, I turned it into a fight. If I gave/give some freedom, then WE can often work past something in a mutually acceptable manner. That may not be true of all horses, but it has worked very well with my two.


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

bsms said:


> If I tried to direct Mia or Bandit past something, I turned it into a fight. If I gave/give some freedom, then WE can often work past something in a mutually acceptable manner. That may not be true of all horses, but it has worked very well with my two.


Child #3 was my dare devil, my adrenaline junky, my confident and curious risk taker and is my amazing young adult who attacks life with zeal, knows what he wants and goes after it with everything he’s got in him without fear of failure. He also has ADHD, dyslexia and dysgraphia, a blood clotting disorder and mild Lupus.

Everything he has in life he worked and struggled for but, was never allowed to use his disabilities as excuses for bad behavior. He was recruited at age 16 and left home to play Jr. League Ice Hockey on the East Coast at age 17. After that first year he was being recruited by the Canadian Jr. Teams but he decided instead to “get on with his life”. The decision was his alone to make. 

He was only 5’7” and 135 lbs, a defenseman and knew he would never make it in the pros even if he emerged physically unscathed from the Canadian leagues. What he lacked in size, he made up for in smarts, work ethic, attitude and skill and it made him attractive to teams. 

He is not unlike my horse Oliver.

Handled incorrectly through force, #3 is a defiant nightmare (he was my one child I truly worried might choose the wrong path in life if not carefully guided) who will direct all of his considerable physical, emotional and mental capabilities at fighting you. (It made him a good offensive minded defenseman) The threat of physical pain does not deter him.

Handled correctly, given options, guidance and the chance to make decisions for himself, he is a personable dynamo where the world is his for the taking and he will happily bring you along with him for the wonderful ride of positivity, can do attitude, exploration and a true joy in living. 

What a difference an approach can make! 

I took the same approach with Oliver as I did my son. Exercise, Goals/challenges, Baby steps/Rewarding a good try, Making the right thing easy and desirable (lure of rewards rather than avoidance of punishment), Mental Stimulation, Offering options with guidance.

What works with one, does not necessarily work with the other.

So it is with horses.


----------



## bsms

I find nothing wrong with a rider directing a horse to a much higher degree than I like, and nothing wrong with using contact and cues to 'control' a horse past something. If it works, and I'm certain it works well for many horses and rider - great! I'm glad they can do it and end up both content! Anything that results in a happy horse ridden by a happy rider makes me happy.

Bandit's previous owner told me Bandit could get pretty feisty, and that I just needed to take control and make him. That may have worked to a degree his previous owner liked, but it resulted in a horse who would buck and race sideways and spin - even with a friend who is a lifelong, confident rider. I took the approach I used with Mia, and extended it. And I'm very happy with the results.

Maybe others could have taken him further and faster. I'm certain many could. But I'm me, and my approach has to account for my weaknesses - physical, experience, goals in life, etc. Bandit is not a great trail horse, yet. He probably will never be what a lot of folks would like. But he and I are headed in a direction that is giving us both increasing confidence, trust and even pleasure out riding. He is starting to genuinely relax, deep inside, sometimes. Me too. I think that is a new experience for us both.

I accept that I may be the big limiting factor. That is OK. We'll take small bites, chew thoroughly, and eventually eat the whole enchilada!


----------



## Smilie

We are right back to what I stated before, you have to apply what is right, in any circumstance, on the hrose you are riding, and that is where horsemanship comes in
I ride with a loose rein on trails, and there are many times my hrose might see sudden moment ahead, a suspicious log, ect, and just start to stall out a bit, maybe even suggest she might be thinking of reversing direction. It is very easy then to just continue on a loose rein, bump with a leg, in the direction she was thinking of turning, and just continue on, riding with that loose rein
Sometimes, a deer pops out suddenly, of a grouse flies up under the nose of the horse, and I just continue on, as if that spook never happened,, long as that horse has no thoughts of following that spook up with anything else. Once they are a bit experienced, seldom do they do more then spook in place for a minute, when that deer jumps out, or that grouse flies up. In fact, last year, riding down a trail, and with our dog along, a 'stupid' rabbit,, first ran off into the brush ahead of us, without the dog seeing it.
It must have been a domestic bunny someone let go, as he came hopping back onto that trail ahead of us, and our dog was deaf to any re call!
The dog chased that rabbit right under my horse , Carmen, but knew better then to try and follow ! Carmen just froze for a minute, but did no more. Bunny hopped out, and became doggy prey.
I will give an example, where simply giving a loose rein is not enough, as that object of concern is coming towards the horses!
We( my husband, myself and our two sons ), were riding along a trail with a rock face of a mountain on one side, and a small strip of trees on the other, with a drop off to the river below on the other side of that narrow strip of trees
The dog had been popping in and out of trees all day, chasing grouse, squirrels,but this time, he brought back an angry cow elk, within a few feet of the horses, who were sure set on leaving! She must have had a new calf in those trees, and dog or wolf-what's the difference?
Yes, I had to use that dirty word, 'body control', to prevent my horse from bolting. 
That cow elk would return to the trees, but each time we tried to ride by that spot, she would charge out again. It was the only way back, without retracing miles and miles.
Finally, my oldest son galloped his horse up that trail, calling the dog to follow. Down the trail went my son, dog behind his horse, and cow elk bringing up the rear. When the dog was far enough past where her calf must have been, she doubled back, and we had no trouble riding by, without the dog
I am not saying what I do works in all cases, should be used in all cases, only that you have to adjust as to what you do, depending on the hrose and the situation
NOw, I do ask for that slight counter flex at times, while not allowing the horse to loose forward motion ,in a place, where both stopping or spooking sideways could be a disaster Climbing a steep trail, in a place you can;t loose forward, without sliding backwards, where the horse is concerned, about some object up ahead on the opposite side of that drop off. 

Riding down the road, in early spring, on a green horse,, who has never seen cattle, is a place I will ask for that face and keep the hrose moving forward. Those heifers, just turned out, don't just stay out in the field, minding their own business, but come bucking and leaping up to the fence to check the hrose out
That can be interesting riding a horse that has not been exposed to cattle, and I know few, if any green horses that would just stand there, on a loose rein, with those heifers coming bucking towards them! Not all scary objects stand still, for the horse to check out!
I then find, I can in most cases, ride that green horse past those cattle, asking for the face, and using some body control, although I am not above getting off these days, if it look like I might not be successful, and have taken the odd horse up to that fence,after having dismounted, getting those heifers to move off, to show that ;we; can move them. I then use the bank of the ditch to get back on, and continue the ride away from home
By the time we head back home,and ride by those heifers, my horse is okay with actually going into that ditch, towards those heifers, and I use my voice to move them off. This is 'success' for the hrose, and my hrose will then relax, eat a few bites of grass, while those curious heifers look on
There is no one way, that works in all situations


----------



## Foxhunter

I will always turn them back against the way they spun. 

My sister was show jumping a pony. The course had a small wall set up by the collecting ring. Without exception all the riders were having their ponies run out to the left back to the other horses. They all did a circle and repeated presenting the horse to the wall only for it to run out again. When my sister had a run out at the same fence she immediately stopped the pony with her right rein, turned back towards the fence and popped over it. 

We were taught to always go against the direction they wanted to go when misbehaving.


----------



## Foxhunter

This is Rufus instigating Lumpy to play. No rubber feed bowl lasted more than an hour!


----------



## Smilie

I will need to find an old picture, and scan it in, but Rambo, a young stallion, would play 'catch the stick, with the dog. Rambo would grab a stick, gallop off,rear, drop it, with the dog picking it up, running away, then dropping it so Rambo could pick it up again.
Fun watching horses invent ways to play, knowing playful horses have their primary needs taken care of, thus engage in play! Only healthy horses play, with gedlings more then fillies


----------



## bsms

^^ I would too, Foxhunter, in the situation you describe. That seems different to me from a horse slamming into a 180 turn with the intent of getting the heck out of Dodge.

If there is a pile of brush that Bandit doesn't like - not entirely without cause, since snakes COULD be there - he may shy away toward the left. Not a "180! Run!" but an "I don't wanna go quite that way". If he shies away toward the left, I turn him right. Then try to go past on slack reins. If I am actively turning him right to go around, and he tries to turn hard left - we may fight over that. But I cannot remember the last time that happened.

The situation I was describing is what I most frequently experienced: We're going west, there is something scary ahead, and "Boom!" - we've done a 180 to the east and the horse is gathering herself/himself for a leap away, followed by a fear bolt to the east.

If, after 150 degrees of turn left, I input a "keep turning left" cue, Bandit will end up facing the scary thing in the form of a single, smooth, 360 degree turn. And since that did NOTHING to help him get away...he stopped doing it. It's probably been close to a year now that he hasn't even tried. We were averaging several a ride when we first started.


----------



## Smilie

It worked for you, so nothing wrong with that.
I will just give the reason,why, were a horse to do a 180, to the left, so facing away from where he was going, baring snakes on that left, , I would not complete that 360 to the left, thus wind up in the same place, as when making the horse do a 180 back to the right. Yes, you wind up in the same place, but by turning him back to that place he started from, to the right, you are also correcting the horse.
I assume you are using your leg. In other words, I consider it like a horse running off to the left, so I do't only want to stop him, but correct him for doing so.By just letting the horse spin in the direction he tried to take off in, you are more likely to get a horse like Mia, that just keeps spinning, JMO
Like I have mentioned afew times, the reins only control the horse from the withers forward (yes, I know, we want to mainly ride the mind, which comes with time, trust, experience), , legs control the rest of that body, purely speaking about the aids we have, not any other things like mind trust, time, ingrained habit, through repetition
When that horse tries to leave by spinning left, he is also moving against my left leg, so that is where I feel part of that correction also has to be
Of course, a snake, a bear, and you have greater concerns then training principles, and over rides them!Heck, a snake, and I would be leaving faster then the horse, as I am with Indiana Jones, when he says, 'I hate snakes'!


----------



## Smilie

Snake is on the right, or even right in front, and horse spins left, 180, I would not make him turn back either by continuing a 360 to the left or a 180 back to the right, but just thank the horse for getting us out of there! Would you make him face that snake?


----------



## bsms

Smilie said:


> ...Would you make him face that snake?


Yes. In all my years hiking, I've only met two aggressive rattlesnakes. As long as it was not one of those two, and we were far enough out of striking distance - yes.

I wouldn't try to insist he walk over the snake, but we would face it together, determine a course of action together, then carry out our plan together.

As for spinning...if the horse is already spinning hard left 180, then keeping it up for another 180 degrees of turn is both easy to accomplish and very unlikely to make him fall. 

Mia would do what I wanted to avoid with Bandit. She would spin hard, 180. Then gather to leap away. I'd turn her 180. Then she would decide it was still time to get out of Dodge City, so she'd spin 180. Then gather herself to run away, and I'd turn her 180 to stop the impending bolt. By this time, she had dropped thinking about what was scary, so she would be just as content to bolt towards as away. We would then do a series of 180 degree turns until she quit.

By that time, her emotions were so high that she KNEW the scary thing was TRULY a Terrible Beast!

Once she learned to hold her ground and not spin, she could then start learning to listen to her rider for the next step. She also began to realize the world was not as scary as she thought.

But Mia was a very unusual horse. The pro who worked with her said she had only met one other horse like her - and that horse had turned into her favorite horse. She also warned me that her favorite horse had also remained a very demanding ride until she died at 28. So maybe Mia now being a "kids horse" indicates Mia changed. That, or the kids in NE Arizona are darn tough kids! :wink: But in honesty, I need to be careful about drawing too many conclusions about horses based on Mia.

So with Bandit, I just wanted a way to end up facing the scary thing and pausing. The scariest LOOKING thing we've encountered to date was a no-shirt Dad carrying his little kid in a huge, red baby carrier with a canopy that stuck out over the dad's head. Looked like a giant lobster was attacking the man.

So Bandit spun away, and I kept him going until we were facing the Giant Man-Eating Lobster. Then I quickly - before he could volunteer - ASKED Bandit for a 180. Then with a little struggle, we WALKED away. Once a safe distance, I dismounted, switched him to a lead line, and we slowly approached the man. The man was happy to help, so we eventually 'chased' the Giant Lobster down the street. And after thanking the man, we turned away, I mounted up, and we walked away.

I don't know if that is the right answer. Maybe a more experienced and more skillful and confident rider could handle it differently. But for me and what I need...we handled it together, and it turned out not scary. That was good enough for me.


----------



## Hondo

loosie said:


> So I'd be asking ATM for only 4-5 seconds from him, reward him well, then release *before* he tries to take it. Start there & get him reliable about that, before asking for more.


Breaking.......

I just counted up to 6 seconds on each front before placing it back on the ground! No treats or rewards this time but I did stroke his P2 with each count.

I only do this about twice each day, maybe three. I'll trim him by the end of next month. First trim ever.


----------



## Smilie

That makes, sense, BSMS, as a snake has a limited striking distance, and is not going to chase you!
I just lumped it into the class of a'good spook', where you can't tell the horse it was unwarranted or, that the object was harmless, as with a deer, ect
In that case, as with a bear or cougar, the horse's sharper perception of danger, as a prey animal, can save your life. To me ,it is similar as letting a horse have input when you don't know some route is safe, when he would spin from a snake.
I guess in a case of a snake, I would then just ride a slight detour . In the case of an angry bear,though, I would just hope the horse took me with him, as he leaves Dodge!
I have taken several hikes in the desert around Las Vegas area, but they were always in the part of the year where only the lizards were out, with it being still too cold for the snakes. Even so, I always watched where I placed my feet!
Do you carry anti venom with you, when you go hiking?
We hit the time about just right, two years ago, as all the cactus were in bloom-very pretty!


----------



## Hondo

I've met two large rattlers on the trail with Hondo and he just stopped, looked, and said, yeah, lets go around. Didn't seem to bother him a bit.

On one occasion I got excited about telling Meka no and all she heard was excited. Her head swelled up like a basketball. Got her right on the nose, which is normally slender.

If you're gonna carry anti-venom around here you need also for Mohave Green as the Diamond Back anti-venom does no good. The Greens are deadly. And you need to know how to tell them apart from the Diamond Back.


----------



## bsms

I don't carry anti-venom. When I was in my teens, hiking in the Rincon Mountains east of Tucson, I heard a rattle. I stopped. Couldn't figure out where it was coming from, until I looked down at a rattlesnake looking up! I landed about 20 feet away, and have been inclined to cut rattlers some slack ever since. Just not in my yard, with grandkids around.

Jack the Slipper was bitten on the nose when young. Swelled up like Meka. The final bill ran $2000. When they did the test for the quantity of venom, Jack was literally off the scale...but I don't have many large vet bills, and a loyal dog is a special animal. Jack is one of those animals who acts like a total coward - unless someone he cares about is in trouble. Then there is nothing he wouldn't risk.

We buried one of our three dogs yesterday. The vet told us she had recently buried her horse after 31 years. I know horses don't live in the house with us - most of us, at least - but I hate to think of what it must feel like, when you have an animal you've liked and worked with and trusted and who has trusted you for over 30 years...wow! 

That is why I don't mind taking it slow with Bandit, He's 8. I'm 58. If he stays sound for a 25-30 year life, we could spend a LOT of time together. But if we do, when the end comes - that sounds scary! When a horse trusts you, he does it with an intensity and honesty that few animals match. Sometimes when Mia got scared and I was on the ground, she would run to me, put her head against my chest, and tremble while waiting for me to make the bad thing go away.

One time, I was leading her thru very heavy brush. It reached the point where I was on my knees, tugging at the lead line to keep her with me. It suddenly occurred to me that if she panicked, right over the top of me was the only way she could go. I looked back, and she was crouched down, her eyes squeezed shut, the branches grabbing at her and the saddle and stirrups. And she was inching along behind me, eyes shut tight, moving at slight pressure from the lead line.

She needed a better life than I could offer her, and I hope she has one. Bandit is turning into a much better match for me. If we spend 15-20 more years riding, and learning more and more to trust each other and support each other, and then one has to say goodbye - thinking about it frightens me!

I've told my kids I'll ride horses till I'm 90 if able. When I finish before the horse does, it will be up to them to see the horse gets a good home. I've got three good kids who love animals, so I'm sure they would do it.


----------



## Smilie

Hondo said:


> I've met two large rattlers on the trail with Hondo and he just stopped, looked, and said, yeah, lets go around. Didn't seem to bother him a bit.
> 
> On one occasion I got excited about telling Meka no and all she heard was excited. Her head swelled up like a basketball. Got her right on the nose, which is normally slender.
> 
> If you're gonna carry anti-venom around here you need also for Mohave Green as the Diamond Back anti-venom does no good. The Greens are deadly. And you need to know how to tell them apart from the Diamond Back.
> 
> View attachment 840529


Poor, puppy!
I've seen pictures of horses, in horse magazines, that were bitten by venomous snakes, some with faces all swollen, and some that got laminitis

Don't know why, but I feel quite okay riding/hiking where there are cougars, wolves and bears, but snakes are my fear, along with sharks and crocks.

Thanks for the tip on which snakes are 'really bad. When I googled snakes ,spiders,scorpions and other such creatures in those deserts, where we hiked, one seemed worse the then next!
We did a hike in Death Valley also
We do have rattlers in southern Alberta, and in the Drumheller area, which is an anomaly, and a site of a major dinosaur bone finds You go from grain fields, to landscape that that looks like you are way more south, with hoodoos and cactus
My one friend, who grew up in the Medicine Hat area, said they lost some horses to snake bits. Ever happen where you live?


----------



## Smilie

Thanks for the info, BSMS, and glad your dog was okay.
I do know what it is like to bury a horse, you raised from birth, and loved intensely.
Unfortunately, I only had 21 years with Einstein
I wrote this poem, a few years before I had to put him down, knowing that day was coming:


----------



## gottatrot

Smilie, that is beautiful.


----------



## trailhorserider

I've never had a horse spook at a snake (rattler or otherwise), or known anyone whose horse has. I think they are oblivious to the potential danger. 

We don't encounter them that often, but when we do, I'm just sort of like, "oh, there's a snake" and the horse just keeps on walking. You could certainly have a bad experience with a rattlesnake, but it's not like they are all over the place. I've lived in Arizona almost 40 years and have seen maybe a dozen rattlesnakes. They generally try not to hurt you unless you bother them. I've actually always thought they were sort of polite for rattling. Many other snakes don't give you a warning at all. Rattlesnakes at least try to let you know they are there so you can avoid them. 

I've also encountered black bears twice while riding. First time my friend took off after it on her horse and I was following behind on mine and I don't think my horse had a clue what we were chasing. Another time, a youngish black bear was hanging around a cow elk and her calf (the brave elk momma was defending her baby) and we chased the bear off. My horse didn't care. Sometimes I think if you are on the offensive, it doesn't occur to the horse to be afraid. Or maybe they just think it's a funny looking dog. I don't know. 

There WAS a time when I thought rabbits jumping out of the brush would get me killed on my green horse. But he's finally getting used to the rabbits, thank goodness! My number one fear when out riding is probably loose dogs that are brave or aggressive. Most wildlife will run, but an overly friendly or aggressive dog that won't leave my horse alone puts the fear of God into me because he's afraid of them. Expletives can be heard all over the neighborhood when a certain neighbor's dog is loose and I'm trying to get my colt down the road safely. :x (The dog thinks it's a game and bounces around barking and charging us.) 

Regarding the spinning. I might have told this story before, but I was riding the greenie's mother a couple years back during hunting season and there were hunters "hiding" in the bushes. Well, my mare took one look at them and started spinning like a whirling dervish! Multiple 360's (because I wouldn't let her bolt). So finally I get her to stop and ask the hunters if they could PLEASE say something so my horse would know they were human. They were reluctant but finally did. I was grateful I was riding the mare that day, because she is easier to control in a blind panic than the gelding. If I would have been on the gelding I would have been on the ground I'm sure. He's really athletic when he spooks.


----------



## Foxhunter

We only have one venomous snake in the UK and that is the viper which will cause swelling and discomfort. The report have been fatalities with them but very rare. 

I would have thought that majority of snakes would move away from and approaching horse when they felt the vibration from their feet. All snakes are deaf so wouldn't hear anything.


----------



## loosie

Hey different subject, but since we're talking snakes... always been fascinated by snakes. According to the experts, there are no truly 'aggressive' snakes, only cornered or surprised & defensive ones. Don't know about o/s but that's definitely my experience in Oz, and I've seen some beautiful specimens at quite close quarters... including stepping on a couple, but never been bitten(touch wood - this morn walking the dogs was close!). If my dog was bitten, wouldn't end up as lucky as that white mutt - dead or deader is the likelihood, esp if bitten on the muzzle, where dogs & horses often are - can't compression bandage there!

With your talk of carrying anti venom, Americans, how do you administer, and is it expensive? I don't think it's avail here outside hospitals, for self administering - I think it's nasty stuff itself & with the array of deadlies here, probably too easy to choose the wrong one too! But compression bandaging and keeping still are quite effective first aid for Aussie snakes. I heard recently though that it is because they all bite quite shallow, which is unlike snakes from o/s, for which bandaging is useless. Is it?? What do you reckon?


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

In Texas we have four venomous snakes (and several venomous subspecies;10 rattlesnakes, 1 cottonmouth, 3 copperheads, 1 coral snake ): Cottonmouth, Coral, Copperhead and Rattler. Carrying the right anti-venom is tricky and very expensive, so not a lot of people do it here; that is what life flight is for; Not all of the hospitals carry it either. There is no anti-venom manufactured in the US for a coral snake bite. 

We also thankfully have Roadrunners who eat a lot of them as well as raptors. When I hike, I carry a heavy juniper walking stick and pound it first on the ground ahead of me. 

The vibrations alert the snakes and they take off long before I get there (as Loosie said, knock wood) Have not yet had a problem with snakes out hacking with the horses, probably for the same reason as carrying the walking stick, they feel the vibrations of the hooves and take off. Oliver did have one very large snake slither through his feet but, it just kept going. (I didn't know about it until the rider behind me pointed it out).

An interesting statistic; 98% of all venomous snake bites are males between the ages of 18-28 and alcohol is involved....

So far in the 15 years at this property, we've killed two coral snakes right near the house (one on our front stoop) and almost stepped on a rattler sunning himself on my front sidewalk. My eldest son had a cottonmouth slither between his legs while leading a paintball group out to a field at work and stepped on another in the creek, no bites. Heard one rattler, saw two others. The ones I see most on our property are copperheads. 

My mantra is be aware and leave them be and generally they will leave you be.


----------



## gottatrot

We only have non venomous snakes where we live. They are very dangerous.
They go right through the horses' legs, or at least that's what one did to Halla awhile back and my friend drew me a picture of what happened. Apparently my pony tail was straight up in the air. I landed right back in the saddle this time.


----------



## Hondo

Not sure the stick would work with our Mojave Green Rattlers. They are known to be very aggressive in terms of holding their ground and have experienced that myself. I'm reading now that they are known not to rattle. I have killed two right where I'm staying that did not rattle but I didn't check if they were a Mojave. Almost stepped on one.

The net says Mojave's have a potency of 16 times the Diamond Back. I had thought they needed a different anti-venom but now I am reading not so.

Both the Diamond and Mojave have white and black rings on their tail but the white is larger on the Mojave where they are the same size on the Diamond. The Mohave sometimes has a green tint but not always. I did see on that was really green but another that was not.

The Mojave can kill you. When I was doing a lot of hiking here in AZ I wore hip high snake chaps. I also have a pair that comes just below the knees. Most rattle snake bites are below the knees.

I was always cautious climbing over boulders as the hands and upper body is exposed then.

Meka had to walk about a mile and barely made it. She stopped in the shade and would go no farther. I was horseback but was able to get the ATV to her.

I did not check on the type rattler that got her. If I had calmly said, "Let's go back this way Meka", she would not have got excited at my excited voice and attacked the snake. Lesson learned.


----------



## Hondo

@gottatrot Your friend is a good artist! Is she professional at it or mostly recreational?

Very funny cartoon! I take it that would be placed under Aversive Reflex??


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

That's the hard part, knowing exactly which snake bit you. Apparently most of the people who die of snakebites here in the US do so because they are unable to identify which snake bit them. 

Hondo, sounds like you need to import some roadrunners! They are so cool. It makes my heart happy when I see them running around hunting up by the house because I know they are on snake patrol!


----------



## Hondo

Reiningcatsanddogs said:


> Hondo, sounds like you need to import some roadrunners! They are so cool. It makes my heart happy when I see them running around hunting up by the house because I know they are on snake patrol!


Didn't know they got snakes. I've heard that bull snakes kill rattlers. I used to have a roadrunner come for water every few days. I'll have to check the net on ways to attract them. They are pretty cool and fun to watch.


----------



## Smilie

Thanks all, for the kind words towards my poem , written for Einstein. Don't mean to get off topic, , but while I have enjoyed close relationships with several horses, had to put some of them down also, he is the one that will always be the one that has just a little more special part of my heart
All of us that love horses,will come to that time, as horses just don't live as long as we do,and then the most unselfish thing to do, is to let them go, when that time comes,hard as that might be.
Back on topic.
I have never run into snakes, so no experience there, but would be a little apprehensive camping in the desert, shaking out my sleeping bag, ect? Any extra precautions you need to take, sleeping in a tent ?
Far as bears, yes I have run into both black bears and grizzles, but luckily never come upon them suddenly, so they were happy to avoid us , as we were them
However, there are from time to time some not so pleasant encounters with grizzlies, that hit the news
I recall one outfitter, that had a grizzly jump onto one of his pack horses, tailed to several others, with that whole pack string knocked over the edge, into a ravine, and the entire pack string killed
We had a bow hunter, killed one year, just across the highway from us, by a sow grizzly, with cubs
Horses don't really seem upset by the sight of a bear, but do get their survival instincts up, when they catch the scent. Once, a young grizzly was just digging roots beside a trail, and I was int he lead. My horse looked at the bear, who ran into the trees, but none of the hroses reacted, until they got tot he spot where that grizzly had crossed to road, and got his scent
Grizzlies have been protected for the last decade or more, so have lost a lot of their fear.If I'm riding in grizzly country, going through willows, esp, I listen to my horse!


----------



## Smilie

Very interesting read on snakes, guys! Guess one would need to get used to having them around, living in your areas, including around the house, but I just have an unusually strong aversion towards snakes, so better just put up with the winters we have here, that eliminate my needing to adapt!
Interesting video , of that Roadrunner, and thus glad ole Wiley Coyote never got him, in those cartoons!
I used to correspond with a horse person, from Florida, on horse forum long gone, She used to wonder why we did not pack hand guns, when riding in the mountains, as a rifle on a horse is kinda useless, should the two of you part company. Not legal, but we can carry bear spray
She told me about finding corral snakes in her hay, after a storm, riding where there are water moccasins and bull gators (or crock??
Anyway, then she would wonder why I would ride in grizzly bear and cougar country!!! I guess we all learn to live with whatever critters inhabit our area.


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

The one thing that has always given me solace about bears is they are noisy like boars and generally sound like elephants in the brush so you know they are there. The ones that scare me the most is mountain lions. We live just outside of a National Wildlife refuge and sometimes the cougars head down out of the refuge and onto the surrounding properties.

During the long drought a couple of years back, we had several sightings of prints and scat, not on our property but on a neighbor’s (though my neighbor girl swears she saw one when she was walking our property) . Then my neighbor two houses down saw one crawling up his ravine at the back of his house, ran in to get his gun, came out and couldn’t find it. My children were not allowed outside without the dogs for quite some time after that!


----------



## bsms

Bandit has a strong survival instinct. He isn't so much afraid as wary. If he smells something odd, he isn't exactly afraid, but he wants to observe and keep a little extra room until he feels comfortable. That is fine by me.

I've had Mia balk very hard at a prickly pear cactus she had passed without noticing a little earlier. My guess is there was a snake underneath that she smelled. So we just went around. I stopped her once, though, when the wind was in our face, because there was a big rattler sunning himself on the trail ahead and she was oblivious. There was no place to go around, so we turned back.

I had a professor who had been mauled by a grizzly. It tore him up pretty bad. He was doing research, and he picked a hillside where he could use a telescope to watch the bears below. As he was coming to the top of the hill from the opposite side, a cub raced past him - with momma in pursuit. That left him between a sow and her cub! He said he had a clear memory of her claws digging into the ground as she charged.

It is odd. If Bandit and I had to ride in Smilie's country, I think we'd both be scared. Neither of us worry about snakes. We just prefer to go around. But what gets Bandit really tense is asking him to ride here...SCARY!!! Danger on every side! And it is far worse on trash day!


----------



## Smilie

Reiningcatsanddogs said:


> The one thing that has always given me solace about bears is they are noisy like boars and generally sound like elephants in the brush so you know they are there. The ones that scare me the most is mountain lions. We live just outside of a National Wildlife refuge and sometimes the cougars head down out of the refuge and onto the surrounding properties.
> 
> During the long drought a couple of years back, we had several sightings of prints and scat, not on our property but on a neighbor’s (though my neighbor girl swears she saw one when she was walking our property) . Then my neighbor two houses down saw one crawling up his ravine at the back of his house, ran in to get his gun, came out and couldn’t find it. My children were not allowed outside without the dogs for quite some time after that!


I.m with you on being more scared of cats, as they are ambush predators, and while cougar attacks on humans are not that common, those that are, can be deadly
Every year, there are reports of cougar attacks on horses, in our area.Closest i came, was hearing one scream, one night, going out to check on the horses, plus I ran into a cougar kill, on a grazing lease, where a cow was bawling for her calf, and drag marks,complete with cat tracks, heading into the bush.
Since ranchers here are compensated for livestock predation kills, I reported that calf kill. By the time that rancher got out there on a quad, the cow was dead, with a grizzly on top of her body. That rancher thought the grizzly was trying to break the cow's ribs by jumping up and down on her, but was told by Fish and Wild life, that the bear was getting ready to charge
By the time fish and wildlife themselves got out there, there were two grizzlies on that cow.
Last year , the cougar population was way up, with sighting where I live, all over the place, and the school in Sundre, not allowing the kids out to play, as there was a cougar kill right in town. Not surprising, as Sundre has a huge herd of resident deer
I know friends that have had cougar encounters, working for the oil patch, and of course, actual cougar kills, as in a cross country skier, near Calgary
Bears might make noise going through the brush, and black bears don't concern me much, but grizzlies sure do, and you sure can come upon them with no warning, esp if they have a kill in some dense willows, beside a trail
In fact, that is what happened with that bow hunter. He was going quietly through brush, hunting deer, and came unexpectedly on a sow grizzly on a kill, with her cubs
A hunter was also killed two years ago, at the YA Ha, going back to an elk that he had shot, to pack it out, with a grizzly having claimed that elk
Black bears are no big deal, and quite common in the foot hills, but where there are grizzlies, in the mountains, there are no Black bears. There are also hunting seasons for black bears, so they have a lot more respect towards humans, while grizzlies, having been protected for at least 15 years, have lost much their fear. In fact, during hunting season, rifle shots are being associated with ringing a dinner bell! Those grizzlies have learned to associate those shots with gut piles


----------



## Smilie

We have actually a local organization, called 'bear smart'. besides conducting a yearly seminar, where biologists, a fish and wild life officer that specializes predation control, and various other experts speak.
The organization also has a web page, where local residents can report bear and cougar sightings
Hope I never need to actually apply any of the info, far as how to react with a grizzly encounter , versus that with a cougar, nor if I would have the mind to apply that advise, here it is anyways.
With bears, you can survive at times, apparently, by playing dead, trying to protect your vital areas. 
Not so with cats. Also, they are ambush predators, so you should never take your eyes off them, or lower them, unlike with a bear. You should make yourself 'big', and if there are tow of you, climb on that other person. With a bear, not fighting back, at times will have him stop chewing on you, apparently, but you are never to stop fighting a cat
Interesting info, in India, where there are tigers, those working in the forest, wear a head covering with eyes in the back.
Okay, final ending with a bear joke, before I go to feed my girls.
How do you stop a charging grizzly bear?
Answer: :you smear sh..t, in his face
Question : where do I get that 'sh.t from ?
Answer" when the time comes, it will be there!


----------



## Smilie

Well, you know BSMS, Oscar might be in those garbage cans, thus Bandit has one up on you!


----------



## bsms

Off topic, but found two articles about the professor. Seems he has continued his work and advocates for grizzlies:

Bear attack makes man a bear defender | | bozemandailychronicle.com

Gilbert's Grizzlies | Duke magazine

I never took any classes from him, but he had a reputation with the students as a genuinely good guy.


----------



## Foxhunter

Why, if the road runner eats the whole snake, doesn't the venom kill it when in the digestive system?


----------



## bsms

I don't think the roadrunner eats the whole snake. Also:

"Poisons are substances that are toxic (cause harm) if swallowed or inhaled. Venoms are generally not toxic if swallowed, and must be injected under the skin (by snakes, spiders, etc.) into the tissues that are normally protected by skin in order to be toxic. However, we do NOT recommend drinking venom!"

Venomous Snake FAQs

And:

"Texas A&M University researcher John C. Perez studied 40 mammal species that are natural prey of rattlesnakes and found 16 had chemicals in their blood that have evolved over time to block the venom effects of western diamondback rattlers. Researchers at the University of California-Davis found substances in the California ground squirrel that did the same for the venom of northern Pacific rattlesnakes. King snakes, which prey on rattlesnakes, have developed immunity to rattlesnake poison that works so well, says Dr. Sean Bush, professor of Emergency Medicine at the Loma Linda University Medical Center, that “rattlesnakes don’t bite or coil when they see a king snake.” They just try to get away."

https://www.nwf.org/News-and-Magazines/National-Wildlife/Animals/Archives/2009/Venom-Emergency.aspx

The dead rattlesnakes I see have the meat eaten. It is pretty common to see the head still there. Maybe the birds reject eating the head?


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

Good question. I had to look that one up!

Apparently, there is a difference between venom and poison. Poison is effective when ingested. Venom must be put directly into the bloodstream; Venom is a protein and gets digested like any other form of protein.

Mmmmm. Rattler fritters!


----------



## Smilie

Foxhunter said:


> Why, if the road runner eats the whole snake, doesn't the venom kill it when in the digestive system?


I think that is because the poison does not enter the blood stream, but remains in those glands a snake has
I was once corrected, calling snakes like rattlers, poisonous, as they are venomous instead. 
We have all seen those westerns, where people dine on rattle snakes
The venom must stay contained in what ever correct anatomical structure it is in


----------



## Smilie

Well, here is an interesting study, with honey Badgers, who eat venomous snakes, to explain at the molecular level, why they are able to do so. Perhaps, some adaptation exists in all animals that prey on these snakes, eating the head as well as the body

Honey badger venom resistance: biologists discover the secret


----------



## Smilie

Gotta love evolution, that allows animals to develop defensive mechanisms, over time! Also can thank Google for that ready info!

'If you lived in Africa, Asia, or Europe, you would be a bit luckier when faced with snake issues and might be able to own a mongoose. The mongoose is a remarkable creature. Not only is it easily domesticated and friendly to boot, it has a natural affinity for killing snakes. Snakes are on the menu for the mongoose, though this weasel-like animal will eat a variety of pest animals such as rodents, insects, worms, and lizards. Due to specialized acetylcholine receptors within the body, the mongoose is immune to the effects of snake venom. This ability, coupled with a thick coat of fur, makes it a formidable fighter when pitted against a deadly serpent. Due to their indiscriminate diet, however, this critter is not allowed to be imported into countries where it’s not native. Serious ecosystem damage occurred in the West Indies when the mongoose was introduced to control snakes and rodents but did irreversible damage to local wildlife instead. 

The same region of the world also has the talents of the honey badger, a carnivore that is immune to cobra venom and kills snakes by crushing their heads with its powerful jaws. This animal is fearless, and has been known to chase away young lions from their kill. Few things can penetrate the skin of the honey badger, and this helps it in the quest to find and eat snakes. Only adding to its reputation is the tendency to dig up human corpses and eat the remains.


----------



## loosie

Reiningcatsanddogs said:


> We also thankfully have Roadrunners who eat a lot of them as well as raptors.


Who posted that fake vid of the roadrunner?? As if we'd think that was real... didn't even have a purple hairdo!

And as for raptors & snakes, here's a novel one I saw on FB recently. At a park near here... have to watch those birds! :shock: 

...Unfortunately, tried to attach the vid(mp4) & it came up with invalid file type(??) It was a family having a BBQ at a lakeside park & they saw a hawk circling, so turned the camera on to it. Next thing, the hawk swooped & picked up a (bloody big tiger) snake from beside the lake. Flew around with it for a few seconds... then flew straight at the family & dropped the snake on top of them!!



> Have not yet had a problem with snakes out hacking with the horses,


I've seen many snakes when riding through the bush. Mostly keeping very still beside the trail in the hope that the big monster clomping past doesn't stand on them. Once though, when leading(or tailing, rather) a trail ride, a snake was on the trail ahead & no one saw it, until it reared up & bit the horse in front of me on the rump! He was OK thankfully. And at the same trail co, in Spring, we would sometimes nearly stand on 2 snakes wound up like a cable in the trail, mating, apparently oblivious to everything around them.



> An interesting statistic; 98% of all venomous snake bites are males between the ages of 18-28 and alcohol is involved....


Hmm, wonder what the stats are here on that sort of thing. I know most people get bitten when trying to kill or otherwise mess with them.



> My mantra is be aware and leave them be and generally they will leave you be.


Good mantra I reckon!


----------



## Hondo

Smilie said:


> Well, here is an interesting study, with honey Badgers, who eat venomous snakes, to explain at the molecular level, why they are able to do so. Perhaps, some adaptation exists in all animals that prey on these snakes, eating the head as well as the body
> 
> Honey badger venom resistance: biologists discover the secret


What a great article! I read it all. Thanks for posting. I have a love/hate relationship with technology. And I see no resolution.


----------



## Hondo

Since this topic has (happily) segued into 'anybody's blog', I have a new problem to report with kid Dragon.

I've been working on a horrendous section of a trail I want to make into a loop for the last two days. I have it good enough to now lead Hondo over.

Today I was going to ride it. I shuffled Hondo out of the gate leaving Dragon in as I've done two times before. After riding 1-200 yards I thought I heard the distinct sound of galloping hooves approaching. "Hi guys, where we goin'?"

Went back to my yard/pen, unsaddled, thought about it, decided to lead Hondo through the gate and watch Dragon.

There is a section of "barb!" wire that has been pushed down by limbs to about a 4 foot height. Dragon flat footed over it like he thought he was a deer. "Hi guys. Where we goin'?"

I put up a bunch of electrical rope as I have around the yard/pen that Dragon has been introduced to. Hopefully that'll keep him in although he won't likely try if Hondo is with him.

To ride alone I'll have to keep him in the yard/pen looks like. He has pancake feet that I don't want to take into the rocks until I can trim them. He has shown tenderness when leading him.

Is it pretty standard for a 5 YO that really wants to go to flat foot a 4 foot barb wire fence? I suppose so?

On the snakes......that is the topic.....right?

A few years ago, before horses, I was on a motorcycle riding down a narrow wash. There was a humongous rattler in the middle with it's head up at least 18 inches if not 2 feet.

I waited. It did not budge. I eased forward. It did not budge but increased the ferocity of the rattling. I had on very heavy riding gear but still kept my legs back. I continued edging forward until it struck the tire. Then it sort of reached around and nosed against the spokes. Finally it dropped to the ground and went up the bank and into a hole.

I think it must have decided, " I don't know what it is but I'm outta here".


----------



## trailhorserider

Sorry if I butted into a conversation I wasn't a part of.


----------



## Hondo

trailhorserider said:


> I've never had a horse spook at a snake (rattler or otherwise), or known anyone whose horse has. I think they are oblivious to the potential danger.
> 
> We don't encounter them that often, but when we do, I'm just sort of like, "oh, there's a snake" and the horse just keeps on walking. You could certainly have a bad experience with a rattlesnake, but it's not like they are all over the place. I've lived in Arizona almost 40 years and have seen maybe a dozen rattlesnakes. They generally try not to hurt you unless you bother them. I've actually always thought they were sort of polite for rattling. Many other snakes don't give you a warning at all. Rattlesnakes at least try to let you know they are there so you can avoid them.
> 
> I've also encountered black bears twice while riding. First time my friend took off after it on her horse and I was following behind on mine and I don't think my horse had a clue what we were chasing. Another time, a youngish black bear was hanging around a cow elk and her calf (the brave elk momma was defending her baby) and we chased the bear off. My horse didn't care. Sometimes I think if you are on the offensive, it doesn't occur to the horse to be afraid. Or maybe they just think it's a funny looking dog. I don't know.
> 
> There WAS a time when I thought rabbits jumping out of the brush would get me killed on my green horse. But he's finally getting used to the rabbits, thank goodness! My number one fear when out riding is probably loose dogs that are brave or aggressive. Most wildlife will run, but an overly friendly or aggressive dog that won't leave my horse alone puts the fear of God into me because he's afraid of them. Expletives can be heard all over the neighborhood when a certain neighbor's dog is loose and I'm trying to get my colt down the road safely. :x (The dog thinks it's a game and bounces around barking and charging us.)
> 
> Regarding the spinning. I might have told this story before, but I was riding the greenie's mother a couple years back during hunting season and there were hunters "hiding" in the bushes. Well, my mare took one look at them and started spinning like a whirling dervish! Multiple 360's (because I wouldn't let her bolt). So finally I get her to stop and ask the hunters if they could PLEASE say something so my horse would know they were human. They were reluctant but finally did. I was grateful I was riding the mare that day, because she is easier to control in a blind panic than the gelding. If I would have been on the gelding I would have been on the ground I'm sure. He's really athletic when he spooks.




Hey, you posted so that officially makes you part of the discussion. And a good informative post I'll add.

There's about two or three conversations going on back and forth at one time and people sometimes tend to look for the response to what they've just said and overlook other stuff.

I don't think anybody here would intentionally ignore you. Hang in there. You're trained so you should know how this stuff can go sometimes.

I was actually thinking of your post when I wrote the last part of my last post.


----------



## Smilie

Nope, anyone welcome in this post, which is going in so many directions, that I am no longer sure what the topic is!
Does not really matter, as lots of interesting info I never knew about, has evolved ! As someone who does not ride or esp camp in snake country, I find the info fascinating !
Hondo and BSMS, if you camp in venomous snake country, any special precautions, so they do not join you in your sleeping bag, LOL!
Far as your question, Hondo, yes, for now until Dragon is comfortable being left behind, I would put him in a safe corral, when you take Hondo out by himself.
Is Dragon by himself, when you leave with Hondo? Another solution is to have a third horse in that group, so that whoever is left behind, has a buddy


----------



## Smilie

bsms said:


> Off topic, but found two articles about the professor. Seems he has continued his work and advocates for grizzlies:
> 
> Bear attack makes man a bear defender | | bozemandailychronicle.com
> 
> Gilbert's Grizzlies | Duke magazine
> 
> I never took any classes from him, but he had a reputation with the students as a genuinely good guy.


Thanks for that interesting read, BSMS!
Last year, just sitting in the Ya Ha tinda campground, hubby was glassing a grassy slope.He noticed a hunter on that slope,with his horse tied up to a tree, probably looking for a legal elk to come down from higher up
He then noticed three other animals loping up that slope. He saw that it was grizzly bear with two cubs, They must have passed within a few yards of that hunter, with neither party aware of it
The biggest scare I had, turned out to be a false alarm, thank God !
During that day, we saw a big grizzly, riding back to camp. 

When we got back to camp, and were just unsaddling the horses, a huge buck ran right by us. Needless to say, hubby the hunter , could not resist.
We thus had a gut pile not far from camp, and a deer hung in a tree. As it was dark by then, we just picketed the horses out, and went to sleep
Annie, that mare off the track, we just left loose, as she never learned not to try and destroy herself , other wise.
Middle of the night, I hear snuffling noise, right near my head. The incident of a person having his head bitten through a tent wall, was still fresh in my mind. 
I shook hubby awake, and shouted 'BEAR'several moments later, while, he first fumbled for his glasses, and then his rifle, I realized it was just Annie
However, now, no matter what direction that tent is facing, hubby's side of the bed is always against the outer wall of the tent Last trip out this fall, it was not a bear that wreaked our tent, but a stupid squirrel that chewed one entire corner of that tent-almost $200 in repair work!
We also spotted a trail camera, on one trail, owned by Colorado State University. Hope that was not a spot I decided to have a bathroom break,or their wild life data would sure have an unexpected piece of data!


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

Deer, no problem.
Vultures, eagles, hawks, no problem.
Snakes, Lizards, Long Horn cattle, Lamas, Pigs, Dogs, Camels, Coyotes, Foxes, *****, Skunks...no problem.

This though....took Oliver some getting used to.


----------



## Smilie

Just some more reading for this blog, on some grizzly bear attacks in Alberta

Terrifying grizzly bear attack recounted by Calgary man - Calgary - CBC News


----------



## Smilie

Those are some big Jack rabbits!
Funny how different things bother horse!
Quads, dirt bikes, were all accepted by our horses. We then took them to K country
(Kananaskis ), where there are multi use trails ( nothing motorized )
Those trails are steep in many places, so that a horse can;t see what is coming at him, over or behind the crest of a hill 
Of course, mountain bikes are silent, so horses are not quite sure as to what is wheezing up on them, suddenly. Can be interesting, until horses realize they are harmless, esp if that cyclist does not slow down!


----------



## Hondo

Smilie said:


> As someone who does not ride or esp camp in snake country, I find the info fascinating !
> Hondo and BSMS, if you camp in venomous snake country, any special precautions, so they do not join you in your sleeping bag, LOL!
> Far as your question, Hondo, yes, for now until Dragon is comfortable being left behind, I would put him in a safe corral, when you take Hondo out by himself.
> Is Dragon by himself, when you leave with Hondo? Another solution is to have a third horse in that group, so that whoever is left behind, has a buddy


I have a very small very light back packing tent that is critter proof. I've heard of snakes crawling into sleeping bags to keep warm. Don't want that. Or scorpions.

Yes, Dragon would be by himself. Rimmey was in here but that was interfering with Hondo and Dragon getting to know each other as Rimmey and Dragon buddied up right away.

There is another I've thought about bringing in but I may just go ahead and pony Dragon and when I get to the section I need to lead Hondo through I'll just pull the lead off Dragon and let him follow. Worst thing would be that he'd decide to go find the herd and I'd have to go get him. No big deal. Maybe he could trim his own feet while I'm still training him to hold his feet up long enough for me to trim.

Still thinking about which way to go.........

@Reiningcatsanddogs You could almost saddle that rabbit. Rabbits are bad but a huge covey of quail are the real killers.


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

Hondo said:


> @Reiningcatsanddogs You could almost saddle that rabbit. Rabbits are bad but a huge covey of quail are the real killers.


It's kind of a tongue in cheek joke around here.










Our deer are small and our hares are big, go figure!

Worst spook Oliver ever had was when we passed within inches of a juniper bush/tree and a dozen doves flew out at his face!


----------



## Smilie

What I wish horses WERE afraid of, versus curious, is porcupines!
Quite afew years ago, when my oldest son was still living at home, he went to check the mares and foals and the yearlings, early in the morning.
I was in the barn, when I heard him yell,'mom, bring pliers'
Thinking a horse was caught in the fence, I grabbed the fencing pliers and went running. As I got closer, my son yelled, 'not those'
I was then close enough to realize why he said that. Two yearlings were sporting a pin cushion nose full of quills.
Pulling those quills is tough enough, but getting a halter on young horses that don't want their painful muzzles touched, is another chellenge !
Einstein, being Einstein, not afraid of much, came up one morning with quills all up one back leg from fetlock to hock. My big brave boy must have decided to give that porkey a kick! By that time, infection had set in, so quite a job to pull those quills and treat that leg
Worst spook I ever had, was from a plain barnyard cat! Way back when I was starting colts, and thus hauled them to an arena for winter riding, this one particular arena had a cat walk above one long wall
Now I know why they call those things cat walks!
One of the resident barn cats, decided to jump down, using my horse's rump as the half way point! Yeah, we had a brief rodeo moment!


----------



## gottatrot

This is bigger than my dog!!


----------



## Smilie

gottatrot said:


> This is bigger than my dog!!


So , are they hunted for meat?


----------



## loosie

Reiningcatsanddogs said:


> Deer, no problem.
> Vultures, eagles, hawks, no problem.
> Snakes, Lizards, Long Horn cattle, Lamas, Pigs, Dogs, Camels, Coyotes, Foxes, *****, Skunks...no problem.
> 
> This though....took Oliver some getting used to.


My 'this', for my otherwise fearless trail horses... I've had 3 that have been totally fine with everything else we've come across, but mortally afraid of echidnas! Perhaps it's the 'ground is moving' sensation.


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

Smilie said:


> So , are they hunted for meat?


Yes. One thing about Texans, if it won't kill you to do so or get you arrested, they will eat it. A neighbor of mine farms both tarantulas and scorpions to sell to local restaurants.


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

loosie said:


> My 'this', for my otherwise fearless trail horses... I've had 3 that have been totally fine with everything else we've come across, but mortally afraid of echidnas! Perhaps it's the 'ground is moving' sensation.








Oliver just hated the way we would be riding through a field and suddenly, popping out of the tall grass, there would be half a dozen scurrying every which way. Then there are wild turkeys. The first time he heard one he had to stop and stare at the copse of trees it came from. The turkey ran off but, every time we passed by after that, he had to give that copse the stink eye.


----------



## Foxhunter

I loved hare coursing before it was banned. This is when a hare is driven across a field, two greyhounds are held on slip leashes behind a hide. The slipper can see the hare coming but the dogs cannot. When the hare has gone well past the hide and is running well, he will slip the dogs. They get points for the run up and for turning the hare but nothing of they do kill it. Majority get away. 

Those hares in Texas are three or four times the size of hares her (isn't everything meant to be bigger in Texas?) it would take a heck of a greyhound to catch and kill that though I wonder if it is as fast as UK hares.


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

Here is what I found on the Jackrabbits (who are not really rabbits but, hares)

"Hares live in open areas and rely on running in a zigzag pattern to escape their predators. Hares are also precocial, meaning they are born with hair and with their eyes open...The jackrabbit can hop 5'-10' at a time, and up to 20' when panicked. They can achieve speeds of up to 40 mph (64kph). When at a moderate run, every four to five leaps are exceptionally high to see their surroundings or predators. The jackrabbit runs with its ears flat and tail between its haunches. It will leap over objects rather than run around them. The fast, erratic leaps, bounds, and sprints are effective against predators, but they have poor endurance and often end up as some animal's dinner."

That zig-zagging pattern of escape is what drove Oliver nuts...

Then on the BBC I found;"Hares are much longer-limbed and swifter than rabbits. They use their powerful hind legs to escape predation by outrunning their enemies, and have been known to reach speeds of 72kph (45mph)."

So it appears that the Texas hares are slower, but their running patterns are more erratic, perhaps because of the tall grass?


----------



## Foxhunter

I wonder if they taste the same?


----------



## bsms

Reiningcatsanddogs said:


> Yes. One thing about Texans, if it won't kill you to do so or get you arrested, they will eat it...


Except for beans in chili, which Texans consider an abomination. An 80 year old Texas lady taught me that when I was in college. She'd have my room mates & I come over for chili. And she understood what this article says:

"Chili is a local specialty with a specific history. *Please find another name for your spiced vegetable stew*."

Tarantulas, jackrabbits...but no beans in the chili! I actually asked the old Texas lady about jackrabbits. She said she had made chili with them, but she didn't like the flavor as much...but she would NEVER put beans in chili. That was to invite eternal ****ation!

Although one fellow is more open-minded about beans:

"It is just fine with me if you want to put beans in your chili, as long as they are not white beans. White beans do not belong in chili. That was written on the back of one of the stone slabs Moses brought down off the mountain."

Now, about horses: I've given up guessing what will spook a horse. A neighbor had a 6 foot tall inflatable penguin in his yard last winter. Steady Eddie Trooper wanted NOTHING to do with it. Jumpy Bandit ignored it...yet Bandit views garbage cans the way Indiana Jones views snakes.

I think there are also startles and spooks. A startle is "something's there!" and the horse scurries to get a little space and figure it out. A spook is when the horse thinks it is going to die. I can't remember Bandit's last spook. Probably last winter. He still startles sometimes, but I've noticed he only moves where it is safe to move - 50 feet if we are in the arena, and 2 feet if we're close to cactus or rocks. The 50' one in the arena a few weeks ago, he went from trotting forward to some unclassified gait backwards and to the right. Maybe habit is starting to form, though, because he then turned directly toward the spot he shied away from and stared. We then worked our way over to it, and he looked back at me as if to say, "_But Dude, there was SOMETHING! Honest!_"

Maybe I have low standards, but I guess I don't mind anymore if a horse shies away into open space and then looks. As long as they stay aware of rocks, drops, cactus, cars, fences, etc, and just create some extra buffer around us so they can think for themselves and listen to their rider...that's going to have to be enough for me.

It is the dropping shoulder spins and mindless running away that scares the tar out of me! Mia had stopped those, but she'd still spin for no known reason (including to herself) or jump sideways randomly. Bandit is getting to where he does almost nothing mindlessly, and he seems to always stay very aware of his environment. That is a huge part of what makes him safer to ride than Mia. Mia would have backed up over an 8' drop without noticing it. Bandit would still know it is there even if he is focused elsewhere, and keep that in mind in his reactions. I like the way Bandit keeps looking around as we ride. He seems to remember what is around him even when he startles.

BTW - @*Bondre* 's husband captured a very good startle on film (this, and also post 369 a little earlier):

http://www.horseforum.com/member-journals/macarena-flamenca-2015-a-536297/page19/#post9464193

Bandit would have moved sideways to get near the edge of the road.

What I expect out of Bandit is obviously different than what many need from their horse. Other than endurance, I can't imagine Bandit being able to compete in anything. It would take a LONG time to get him show ready. He'd be too busy keeping track of people selling hot dogs, and heaven help us if the show had any large trash cans nearby! But I don't think I've ever been on him where his brain stopped working! And I really like that.


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

The first time we went out with just two riders, Oliver alerted to a bunch of deer crashing through the brush to our left. I allowed him to stop, knowing that a startle would be coming if the deer ran across the road we were on. I felt him tense up underneath me, and I waited and prepared for whatever was coming.

Five deer popped out, running across the road 20 feet ahead and he startled as expected, tried to turn 180 degrees but, because I was ready for him, he got 45 on me and wanted to run off actually in the same direction as the deer were running. 

My trainer who was on his horse a distance behind me asked me why I stopped and let him spook. I told him because I wanted to see how he would spook in a situation where I had forewarning and control so that he would see that we didn’t need to run and I knew what training weak spots we had. 

Would he try to run? Rear up? Spin? How easy was it to get his mind back on me quickly? I wanted to know. May or may not have helped…I can’t say other than he has been very good since.

He has “spooked” or perhaps “startled” twice in the years following, once being “the big one” with the aforementioned doves in the Juniper, which startled me too. The other was when riding out with a horse who was spooking and startling at random things. After the first spook the other horse had, Oliver figured out that “R” was simply full of bull and didn’t react to him again. Deer haven't bothered him since, though he does still let me know they are there.


----------



## Smilie

Many things can spook a horse, depending on the horse, and there are also different kinds of spooks
The 'honest spook', and one you can't expect a prey animal to not react to, is something suddenly popping out at them. That is the one you just ignore, and keep riding, as if nothing happened, long as the horse does not try to follow that spook up, with a buck or bolt or a spin. It is also the type of spook a horse will learn to minimize, as trust, experience, combined with your body language, tells him it is no big deal
For instance, once a horse has had that first grouse or so, drum and suddenly fly up, often right under their nose, he will just give alittle start, and continue on
You know when things are going right, far as experience and trust, when that horse reacts less and les to these things
I already mentioned the true ;fake spook, and how it was proven that some hroses do indeed, learn to use spooking. heart monitors were used, and in a true fear spook, the heart rate went up, but not in a fake spook
A horse can also become a 'habitual spooker', looking for things to spook at, spooking at the same thing over and over again, or at a certain spot
I will not react to much to this, when the hrose is still green, unless he follows up with those spinning, trying to leave actions
When that horse has had some regular riding, and continues to be a habitual spooker, I will get after him, and tell him to 'quit' That horse is really not scared, just maybe feeling fresh, with his mind more on his surroundings then on me
There will always be something a horse will spook at, and some people do stupid things!
For instance, at one show, I had just gotten on Charlie, at my trailer, ready to warn her up some, outside, when a woman, walking towards us, decided to open her umbrella,as she did so
Many here can identify taking a green horse to those first shows, where they are exposed to all kinds of things, like loud music , as they go by the show office, that announcer booth above them, noisy people in the bleachers, kids running beside that arena wall, or on those bleachers, sometimes carrying balloons.
It can be quite a job to get that green horse shown, the first few times, as not only does he have to control spooking, but is expected to go as he does in his comfort zone
With time, he becomes ;show seasoned, and you can't take that aspect as not being important either, trail riding a horse. Exposure, successful trail rides, 'seasoning that trail horse, is as important as any other part.
This was Charlie's first river crossing, two years ago (note, I;m wearing a helmet). The approach was not the best, and I sure did not try to force her. I just did not allow her to try and turn around. She thought about it, then made her own way down


----------



## Smilie

nothing to do with this topic, but this is Dormer lake, where we rode to this year, not having been there for at least 10 years.
I am still on my big boy, Einstein.


----------



## Smilie

Reiningcatsanddogs said:


> Yes. One thing about Texans, if it won't kill you to do so or get you arrested, they will eat it. A neighbor of mine farms both tarantulas and scorpions to sell to local restaurants.


Must have missed that on my trip to Texas!
I went there once, just to watch the World Appaloosa show in Fort Worth, and,since I had no horse to worry about, some sight seeing!
Tried some different things , like deep fried pickles and gator, but must have missed tasting scorpions and tarantulas!
My husband, for some strange reason, tried deep fried bologna, at the old Stock yards! Yuck!
Did have one Texan look at hubby's shirt, which sported a bull moose, and exclaim, 'nice elk!
Toured the Kennedy museum, right next to the 'conspiracy museum
Nice friendly people, and the serving sizes sure are 'Texan size!


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

Very scenic! I love the mountains and would live there if I could. 

This is the best I can do as far as scenic nearby lakes. Our mountains have been worn down by time. They actually used to be real "mountains" several hundred thousand millennia ago....










I've done gator, rattlesnake, buffalo, scorpions...but I draw the line at tarantulas, though if I was starving in the woods, anything might be fair game!


----------



## Smilie

All tastes like chicken-right!
I guess we are fortunate to live where there is still true wilderness, where you can only get there on a horse, or on foot. Of course, like anything in life, there is a trade off, which I am reminded of, watching that wet white stuff come down this morning!
That particular lake is kinda tough to get to. You first have to ride into what is known as the four Corners, or JI hill, which includes crossing the Panther river several times, finding the trail on the opposite sides. This was made easier this year, by someone putting in anew wagon trail.
The trail to Dormer lake itself, is hard to find, and it was said to have been washed out, during our big flood, several years ago. Someone flagged where it started, at the edge of some trees, so we were able to make our way there once again, after many years
Yes, mountains rise and fall, over time, and some of that makes very interesting watching on documentaries along that line, on NetFlix. The Rockies are still generally 'young' , geologically speaking
Since this has become an interesting blog, which I am enjoying, I will post a picture of that new wagon trail into the four corners

this is my friend, on one of horses she bought from us (Mex) you can see as to why that hill in the area known as the 4corners, is called the JI hill, as trees grow in that formation.
That is one of the many crossings, now that can be avoided, using that wagon trail, which makes riding all the way to Dormer lake, no longer such a very long day ride



I usually take Carmen out west, as she is only 14.2 (easier for me to get on and off, but has draw backs crossing rivers-wet feet!)

However, since I believe in riding all my horses out, did take Charlie on at least two mountain rides this year
She is much more as ease crossing water. I also posted the start of that new wagon trail, which some, including my husband, have environmental concerns about, among other things

I guess only other weird thing I ate, was conche , and of course, smoked eel , a German delicacy, growing up. I wanted to try snake, but I guess we were never at a restaurant that offered it
Toured Pilot Point, just to see those spreads of famous trainers. I think we also ate at a smoke house, said to have been frequented by Gene Autry?? Know which restaurant I mean? Looks like a dump outside, on purpose, I suppose,,but very popular and nice inside, with great food. Of course,being a seafood lover, I was drawn to those that featured crabs, ect







Sounds like you have come a long way with Oliver, and he is lucky that you came into his life, seeing those pictures of him when you rescued him.


----------



## Smilie

Far as fair 'game', food wise, out in the woods, surprising how good those instant cup of soups taste, that I would never consider good eating at home!
When first hiking with my husband, and before we had horses, we hiked in one winter, to a cabin that his friend let us use, not able to get there the last few miles with hubby's volkswagen, because of snow
We had his lab with us. Hubby grabbed a bag that he though contained our food, only to find, once we got there, it contained only canned dog food
By then it was dark, and we were wet, so not about to go back and get the human food. Watching the dog eat, I was tempted, but would have needed to been without food quite a few more days to indulge!


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

Smilie said:


> Toured Pilot Point, just to see those spreads of famous trainers. I think we also ate at a smoke house, said to have been frequented by Gene Autry?? Know which restaurant I mean? Looks like a dump outside, on purpose, I suppose,,but very popular and nice inside, with great food. Of course,being a seafood lover, I was drawn to those that featured crabs, ect


Honestly, I try to stay out of cities and even towns as much as I can; especially the cities of Dallas/Ft Worth and Houston. I am a strange woman. I hate shopping and will do whatever I can to avoid it. 

I also don't do much in the way of traditional vacations and prefer to get dropped off in the middle of nowhere with, maybe a small backpack these days. Once in a while DH talks me into something a little more "fun" for the kids, which he calls vacationing in civilization. 

He calls me the female Grizzly Adams as my dream retirement is a small cabin in the wooded mountains, a wood burning stove, a fresh spring, fireplace, kerosene lanterns, my shotgun, rifle and a couple of horses. It'll never happen though...

I’m not anti-social, I just really love being in nature.


----------



## Hondo

I'm 50 miles from the nearest grocery store. I go to town about once per week and get out as soon as I can.

Decided to take Dragon with us this morning on a sort of gnarly loop I opened up. The middle picture is where I spent about 6 hours busting out rock so it'b be safe to lead Hondo through. Before the end of the loop we went through stuff that was worse than the spot I fixed, before I fixed it.

Dragon has never been in the difficulty that he was in today. He did great. He will make a great rock horse. I am so impressed with them both.

I led Hondo over the rough stuff and just pulled the lead of Dragon and let him follow. Once something must have grabbed hold of Hondo's saddle as I looked back and it was sideways. Pulled it off and reset in some really rough stuff.

Hondo had boots on the front and I watched him pull one off when he had his toe in a crack and pulled his foot up. Just pulled the boot right off. Boots are not safe in that terrain. Even with Hondo.


----------



## Smilie

Reiningcatsanddogs said:


> Honestly, I try to stay out of cities and even towns as much as I can; especially the cities of Dallas/Ft Worth and Houston. I am a strange woman. I hate shopping and will do whatever I can to avoid it.
> 
> I also don't do much in the way of traditional vacations and prefer to get dropped off in the middle of nowhere with, maybe a small backpack these days. Once in a while DH talks me into something a little more "fun" for the kids, which he calls vacationing in civilization.
> 
> He calls me the female Grizzly Adams as my dream retirement is a small cabin in the wooded mountains, a wood burning stove, a fresh spring, fireplace, kerosene lanterns, my shotgun, rifle and a couple of horses. It'll never happen though...
> 
> I’m not anti-social, I just really love being in nature.


 hey, I'm with you on that shopping and avoiding crowds.
That fact probably caused hubby and I to get together in the first place
Most guys when i moved out west, just wanted to party, while hubby was and is a nature freak. Thus, when we first met, even while living in Calgary, we would hike in wilderness, much as possible
I never forgot horses, even in those ten years I was without them, so we started to rent horses first, from a local outfitter, stationed in the Ram area (west of Rocky Mountain HOuse,) if you want to look it up
In fact, we left Calgary, and settled in the area we now are in, to get away from big city life, closer to nature, even when it meant giving up a very good and interesting job at a teaching hospital, and 'marking time, doing routine stuff at a local private lab, which helped to support my horse habit
Only went to Fort Worth, because we were actively raising Appaloosas, and I wanted to at least watch a World show
I have a friend, who has a sister in the Yukon , and that sister and her husband, now eighty, while no longer outfitting actively, that man still goes out with horses alone. The sister is ten years younger, or more??
Anyway, my friend , who I trial ride with often, says that her sister and hubby would enjoy taking us on a riding vacation in the Yukon. Hopefully that will work out for next August. It will be a bucket list trip for hubby!
I just wish I did not need to haul, in order to ride neat trails. If I just ride out from home, I have gravel roads, and when crops are off, neighbouring fields
I don't do coffee klatches, go on shopping trips with friends, and if I have a chance to go to the mountains, either on foot, now that I can hike again, or on a horse, that is where I am the most happy
It is also, why, if we go to Las Vegas, because it is cheap,need a break from snow, we only stay on the strip for a day. After that, we rent a car, and try to find a good hike
We are very much alike, far as loving wilderness, and no way better to see it, then on the back of a trusting equine friend, JMO !


----------



## Smilie

Hey, Hondo, you have a lot of ambition, clearing those trails!
I totally agree with you, that boots just don;t cut it in those places, and why I went back to having horses shod, in the mountains
We have a lot of trails like that, plus ones with deep root snarled muddy trails, where a horse has to go over those roots and through that mud. Hoof boots both come off, plus can cause a horse to loose his footing, as he really does not feel those roots, picking his way through them, but just 'wallows through', often loosing a boot, or tripping
You should come ride a neat trail with us. It is down in a place called, Junction, as it follows that river up to the head waters. The entire trail, which takes about 7 hours to ride in, goes up, and is on hard rock,with horses needing to often drop down a rock ledge, front feet first. I would never dream of riding that trail in hoof boots1 In fact, to be honest, I want the horse sharp shod, as there are places they have to walk on rocky , wet sheets, and where a hrose slips without some added traction


----------



## Smilie

Don't know if my old body could do this anymore, but long time ago, we would pack in, with nothing but a plain summer tent- no stove !
We then would also do some 'spike camp trips, just taking a tarp, enough food for one night, and sleeping under that tarp. I recall one such spike camp, where we put slickers down, then put our sleeping bags on top. Unfortunately, we were on a slight hill, so all night, I would slide out from under that tarp, with that slicker facilitating it, pull myself up, rinse and repeat !
We used to take our kids on many of those trips, so I hope that those trips will form memories my kids can remember, long after I am gone. Family holidays were not Disneyland, amusement parks, but trips into wilderness, on a good horse
My youngest son was five years old, when we took him on packing trips. I would have him on a lead line, esp crossing rivers
Really 'roughing it.



I tell hubby that he has to ride more regularly, to get ready for that Yukon trip
He did pretty good this fall, going on three long rides, but on the last day, he stayed in camp, while I took Carmen and his horse Rubix, for some exercise.
Hey, works for me, as I rather ride, while he does the main packing up!



I have a lot of shots like this, as hubby always says, we have been here before, just a different horse, so can't be bothered to take a picture


----------



## Hondo

Smilie said:


> Hey, Hondo, you have a lot of ambition, clearing those trails!


The middle picture was not a cleared trail. Should have seen it before. Solid rock. Looked almost impossible to build a trail. The old trail went down below. Leading Hondo solo, I turned around at that point. I mean it was BAD.

So, ambition or no, if I wanted to ride that loop which is out my back door, I HAD to work through that spot. It's worse than it looks but fully within both Hondo and now Dragons ability.

Brought Wisdom, a 4YO in today. So I can now ride Hondo solo without stressing Dragon. But now if I want to pony Dragon, shoot, I'll need four horses in here.

Is there no end?


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

Potato chips Hondo. Potato chips.


----------



## Hondo

Reiningcatsanddogs said:


> Potato chips Hondo. Potato chips.


I'll have to sleep on this. If I don't figure out what it means by morning I'll ask. :-?


----------



## egrogan

^^Can't have just one 

For people who like backyard chickens, we call it "chicken math." Horse math sounds a lot more expensive and time consuming!


----------



## Hondo

I was out feeding and the answer came to me out of the blue. Duh!

In my defense, I'm part English. Now do you know why you should never ever tell an Englishman a joke on Saturday afternoon?


----------



## Smilie

Good name for that third horse, Hondo, as he has given you the 'Wisdom' to add a fourth horse!
Now, if you decide to try a hand in packing and leading two horses, heck, you will need a fifth horse to keep the fourth horse company!
Good thing they are all geldings, as you know what they say about rabbits!
Seriously, sounds like you are having a lot of fun with those horses, and I do envy you just being able to find trails like that, without hauling anywhere!


----------



## Hondo

Smilie said:


> Seriously, sounds like you are having a lot of fun with those horses, and I do envy you just being able to find trails like that, without hauling anywhere!


There are unending trails all around me. And lots of dirt road if one tires of high exposure trails. I feel very fortunate.

In my family it was always said that if you tell an Englishman a joke on Saturday afternoon he's liable to laugh out loud in church on Sunday. (we need a while to think about things)


----------



## loosie

Foxhunter said:


> I wonder if they taste the same?


Does hare taste different to rabbit?


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

I have never eaten hare or rabbit, but I would imagine the difference is very much like the difference between pig and wild boar. A bit more "gamey" tasting?


----------



## Smilie

I have eaten rabbits, as my brother would hunt them in Ontario
Seeing the size of those hares, I can now understand the big thump I felt, when driving through the desert many years, ago>
,I had driven with some friends to LA, and we then spent some time in Palm Springs and Las Vegas.
We started the drive home, at night, and I hit one of those hares.


----------



## Foxhunter

loosie said:


> Does hare taste different to rabbit?


Which tastes just like chicken! 

I love hare and Reining is right it is more gamey than rabbit - especially if it has been hung for a while. 

A woman I was working g for was out riding a two year old filly. As they were headed home she saw a hare run from the field straight into the wheel of a heavy vehicle and get itself killed. She decided to pick it up as it was a big hare, to feed the dogs. The filly would not allow her to mount with it in her hand so she walked to the top of the lane home, about a mile and was going to leave the hare by the road sign and go back to pick it up. As she was about to leave it so she saw a vixen watching and knowing it wouldn't be there when she returned, she carried on walking. 

By the time she got halfway down the hill she had decided the effort of carrying her prize was to good for the dogs and we would eat it! 

It was a heavy hare and when I paunched t I found out that it was in kit and had been about to deliver four leverets. 

She still ate well with red cabbage, delicious!


----------



## Avna

Reiningcatsanddogs said:


> I have never eaten hare or rabbit, but I would imagine the difference is very much like the difference between pig and wild boar. A bit more "gamey" tasting?


Wild and domestic pigs are the exact same species, if you are talking about feral (European) pigs and not native pigs like javelinas etc. Hares and rabbits are not even that closely related although they are in the same family. Hares (which include the confusingly-named jackrabbits) are genus Lepus, rabbits are a cluster of other genera. They have very different life-ways. So I bet they taste different too.


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

Avna said:


> Wild and domestic pigs are the exact same species, if you are talking about feral (European) pigs and not native pigs like javelinas etc. Hares and rabbits are not even that closely related although they are in the same family. Hares (which include the confusingly-named jackrabbits) are genus Lepus, rabbits are a cluster of other genera. They have very different life-ways. So I bet they taste different too.


Wild and domestic pigs are indeed the same species, but taste different not unlike veal vs a good regular steak. The way an animal lives, how they move, what they eat, effects the taste.


----------



## Smilie

Yes, what animaL eat, sure affects as to how they taste, and hence, I'm not fond of moose!
Elk, on the other hand, taste great, even trophy bulls. Hubby has both a local elk tag and a moose tag. I sure hope that if he gets one of those two, it is an elk!
Even though we have bucks , both mulie and white tail, frequent our land, hubby is not allowed to shoot either species of deer .
I.m not fond of venison. Deer here are about as common as rabbits, noted by my brother, who lives in Ontario, but comes out quite often.
Vension is okay, made into sausage , ground to be used in things like spaghetti, but I don't like venison roasts, as there is always a gamey taste, which I don't find with elk
When we were first married, hubby brought me a wild duck to cook. That was a one and only time!
However, pheasants are released for hunting, and they were sure good! My father in law, smoked black bear 'hams', but I declined. Said to taste just like pig.


----------



## Smilie

Speaking of the European wild pigs, there was a period where some ranchers diversified, raising them. Many escaped, and became major problems, as often happens, when non native species are introduced, and go feral


----------



## Avna

Smilie said:


> Speaking of the European wild pigs, there was a period where some ranchers diversified, raising them. Many escaped, and became major problems, as often happens, when non native species are introduced, and go feral


Feral pigs are a real problem around here. They turn wild meadows into what looks like disked fields, eating everything. They are HUGE too. And dangerous. I'd hate to be on a horse and meet wild pigs. My horse is fine with deer -- they are as common as rabbits around here and rabbits are really common. But horses generally don't even like domestic pigs.


----------



## Smilie

Avna said:


> Feral pigs are a real problem around here. They turn wild meadows into what looks like disked fields, eating everything. They are HUGE too. And dangerous. I'd hate to be on a horse and meet wild pigs. My horse is fine with deer -- they are as common as rabbits around here and rabbits are really common. But horses generally don't even like domestic pigs.


Agree.
There was a bounty on those pigs in our county, and they never got to be as big of a problem as in Saskatchewan, although there were some that eluded capture around the river area. It is not legal to raise them here, now.

More than tasty bacon: Saskatchewan?s big problem with wild boars | National Post

I know, that my mother growing up in Germany, and being poor, had to pick mushrooms in the forest, from age 5 ,,and told me how she and those other children were always afraid of those wild boers


----------



## Avna

I was hiking not far from my house one spring day in the forest when a mother pig about the size of a refrigerator crossed the path in front of me and my Aussie. She was followed by a troupe of little striped piglets. Would have been fine except Bonnie decided to demonstrate her herding chops by cutting out the last piglet and herding it back towards me. It was squealing and hopping around but Bonnie was heading it really well, having a great time. Yes, I was screaming at her to quit. She was never my most obedient dog. 

She did let it go before the momma decided to come back and investigate.


----------



## Hondo

Pigs will eat a human right down to the last bone including the skull.


----------



## Foxhunter

Majority of horses are frightened of pigs, instinct tells them that a pig will attack them. 

I use to clip a pony that had been gored by a pig. The tush entered just above his knee and finished jutnabove the point of his shoulder. 

I like pigs, they are very intelligent but get a sow 'barking' and I am out of there! 

Several wild boars have escaped in the UK too. They do a lot of damage but the bunny huggers will try and stop them being culled. A friend was having his fields ploughed at night by a wild bunch of pigs so we went out night shooting. Had seven first night. They ate very well! Stronger flavour than farm pigs.
@Hondo

Many years ago there was a case where the wife of a newspaper editor was kidnapped. They finally found the culprits but they never found her and thought she had been fed to the pigs where she had no been held captive.


----------



## Avna

Hondo said:


> Pigs will eat a human right down to the last bone including the skull.


Thanks for sharing that.


----------



## Hondo

Foxhunter said:


> @Hondo
> 
> Many years ago there was a case where the wife of a newspaper editor was kidnapped. They finally found the culprits but they never found her and thought she had been fed to the pigs where she had no been held captive.


Less than a year ago a hog farmer went missing and they found his ring in the pig pen.

The mafia have been known to dispose of bodies that way. Gotta wonder about Hoffa.


----------



## Smilie

Hondo said:


> Pigs will eat a human right down to the last bone including the skull.


Yup, a serial killer in Alberta , that was a pig farmer, used those pigs to help get rid of the bodies of prostitutes, but pigs must have left enough evidence to convict

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1540339/Pig-farmer-killed-49-women-but-wanted-50.html


----------



## Smilie

We had pigs, home on the farm, and our work horses were used of them. None of my present horses have seen pigs, that I know of, so am quite happy that wild boars never got a chance to become as well established in Alberta and in some other places!
There is talk of re -introducing Bison, to the Ya Ha Tinda, can;t wait for that!
Might go as well as those elk that were re introduced to Suffield, after the wild horses were removed!

Rancher calls for action to reduce elk numbers at Alberta military base? - Calgary - CBC News


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

Here's a comforting stat. Texas has somewhere between 2.6-3 MILLION feral pigs. When we first moved we had one routing around just below the ledge where our house sits. I was out on the patio enjoying the night view I heard it and then saw it. Went back into the house as quickly as I could. 

Never saw/heard it again, somebody probably ate it. 

Oliver doesn't seem to mind pigs of the domesticated variety, haven't run into the feral ones on the trails as of yet...at least that I know of.


----------



## Bondre

loosie said:


> Does hare taste different to rabbit?


Quite different! I've only ever eaten one hare, out of curiosity more than anything else. It was dry, lean and gamey with VERY dark stringy meat in it's back legs. I think they're really only edible if you stew them slowly for hours. 

In fact I looked up the classic English recipe for jugged hare - slow cooked with red wine and English veg (celery, leeks, onions and so on). Is anyone familiar with the famous English catchphrase "first catch your hare"? This was the first (very literal) step for preparing jugged hare in an 18th cookbook, and has become a famous and useful phase that has long outlived its author. 

Kind of like Hondo preparing those abominable rock-strewn trails for his horses. You want to go ride the loop trail - then shift half a ton of boulders - _first catch your hare. _


----------



## Smilie

Think I'll pas on hare eating!
So, Reinin, curious as to what is being done to get the feral pigs under control in Texas. Does the government provide any incentives, far as culling them?
When they started to go feral here in Alberta, action was taken, most likely based on track record as to their success in places like Texas. Bounties were given, with ears harvested from those feral pigs being proof of a successful kill

Just a quick read, and I see that feral hogs in Texas, are mainly crossbreds with the European pigs, introduced later, thus can at times look like domestic pigs, as pigs in general, were first introduced by the Spanish, with some going feral

http://tpwd.texas.gov/huntwild/wild/nuisance/feral_hogs/


----------



## loosie

Hondo said:


> Pigs will eat a human right down to the last bone including the skull.


Well... tit for tat. We don't eat the bones, but...


----------



## loosie

Think I'll stick to bunny then, not that there are many hares around Vic... assuming these young pups of mine grow to be good bunny hunters, or my girls keep practicing with the long bow I bought them. Can't bring myself to buy vermin, so don't know what farmed rabbit tastes like, haven't eaten it since my last dogs were in bunny catching form - they were too old, half blind, half deaf for the last couple of years, so it's been a while. Kangaroo & wallaby & walleroo all taste quite different. I like the gamey kanga best. And love venison... usually, but recently a hunter shared some with us & it was so... rank we couldn't eat it.


----------



## bsms

A friend of mine has almost 3,000 sheep. I remember years ago asking about mutton.

"_Well,_," he said, "_if you are very careful, you can almost make it edible!_"

Me? I'm happy with hamburger, canned chili and hot dogs. Probably shouldn't make fun of what anyone else eats...:-?


----------



## Hondo

Bondre said:


> I think they're really only edible if you stew them slowly for hours.


Pressure cooker. Makes almost anything tough very tender. Fast too. Saves fuel. And kills some stuff that boiling water won't kill. I've been cooking with a pressure cooker for years.

No hare or rabbit though.

Here is a picture I took in 2004 of a mamma rabbit trying to protect her young from a Bull Snake. Bull snake got one. I took several pictures. The one posted is with the rabbit clear up in the air.

Did you know that Cotton Tails hide there youth in secret little lined holes and uncover them daily to nurse, then cover them back up.

After reading about that I put two sticks in a cross daily and every day they would be moved. Finally one day the hole was left open. Don't know if it got big enough to go to the main den or if the Bull Snake got it.


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

Smilie said:


> Think I'll pas on hare eating!
> So, Reinin, curious as to what is being done to get the feral pigs under control in Texas. Does the government provide any incentives, far as culling them?
> When they started to go feral here in Alberta, action was taken, most likely based on track record as to their success in places like Texas. Bounties were given, with ears harvested from those feral pigs being proof of a successful kill
> 
> Just a quick read, and I see that feral hogs in Texas, are mainly crossbreds with the European pigs, introduced later, thus can at times look like domestic pigs, as pigs in general, were first introduced by the Spanish, with some going feral
> 
> TPWD: Feral Hogs


First, obviously, there is open hunting on them. Some people have made a career out of trapping, hunting, eliminating. You can hire them to come out and get the varmints off the property. Some people kill them and donate the meat to homeless shelters when their freezers are full. Problem is you have to eliminate 60% of the population each year in order to just hold the numbers neutral. 

To the best of my knowledge there are no bounties offered by the government...


----------



## Smilie

We are way off topic now, but 'in for a penny, in for a pound" Luckily< i have never had to eat mountain sheep, as hubby has yet to get a trophy ram !
I did eat mutton, on year, when I had an English room mate, and she thought mutton with mint, was a great Easter dinner. Bring on the turkey, even though I'm not a great fan of that Thanksgiving traditional meal !
Ostrich farming was abig enterprise here, for a short while. Those that got in and out quick, made money . A breeding pair would sell for $50,000, but the commercial end never took off, thus those birds were going for $50 or less, in the end. Never got to try an Ostrich steak
When my son visited Peru last year, and stayed with a local family, while on a hike, their 'dinner' ran around the floor. G pigs are not just lab animals there!
Apparently, lama steak is good. When I asked my son if he would then be raising lama ,when he returned to Canada, his answer was, "nope, I rather be kicked then spat at" !
Buffalo, or , rather Bison ranching is popular here, and with them being re introduced in southern Alberta , to the wild, we should soon have buffalo hunts here, as in northern Alberta. I figure we are all set, as we have Appaloosas, the horses the Nez Perce used for buffalo hunting !
I'll have to remind our horses or that heritage!

These guys were in our hay field one morning, but gone the next day, of course, when resident elk opened


----------



## Smilie

Here is one for you, Foxhunter. Found this den, around the corner from us


----------



## Foxhunter

Kwhen 9,000 feet up in the Rockies in Co. I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw a red fox chasing a butterfly! They get everywhere.

Wildlife photographers were out in Alaska to film the arctic fox and all they found for weeks were red foxes and this was mid winter.


----------



## loosie

Oh & camel meat is sold in some places around here - we have a huge feral camel population in Oz. Tried some camel steaks... at gormet prices. Tough as old boots & I imagine a similar flavour! And possum(I'll try anything once)... slow cooked a possum stew for about 5 hrs. Poss was too tough still after that. Had the vegies for tea & put the meat in a slow oven over night. Twas tender by next day, when I added more veg to the stew... but tasted like bits of string in a nice sauce! Oh & crocodile is nice, but(perhaps being farmed - wild ones are protected) tastes like chicken. At about 4 times the price.


----------



## Foxhunter

I watched the videos of CA when he went to Oz to break in a feral stallion. 

I enjoyed the programmes as a lot was about the wildlife and one thing they did was to catch feral camels, it was hysterical easpecially when one of the team got on a feral camel and they set it loose. 

Never eaten camel, have tried alligator, moose, ostrich, squirrel, hedgehog, horse like Loosie, will try anything once!

When in Texas way back in the last century, in a bar they had a rattler in a big jar. You paid a dollar to hold your hand against the jar and to see if you could hold it there whilst it struck. 

I couldn't.


----------



## Bondre

Foxhunter said:


> Never eaten camel, have tried alligator, moose, ostrich, squirrel, hedgehog, horse like Loosie, will try anything once!


Me too! (as in I'll try almost anything once). I've never has the opportunity to eat moose, ostrich or alligator but I've eaten squirrel here in Spain, and forest rats (don't ask) and guinea pigs in South America. Oh dear, I seem to try all the vermin  

Foxhunter, how was the hedgehog prepared? Don't tell me you've tried hedgehog baked in clay? Now that's a real ancient English recipe. 



Foxhunter said:


> When in Texas way back in the last century, in a bar they had a rattler in a big jar. You paid a dollar to hold your hand against the jar and to see if you could hold it there whilst it struck.
> 
> I couldn't.


What's with way back in the last century?! You suddenly made me feel very old. Lol.


----------



## Foxhunter

Bondre said:


> Me too! (as in I'll try almost anything once). I've never has the opportunity to eat moose, ostrich or alligator but I've eaten squirrel here in Spain, and forest rats (don't ask) and guinea pigs in South America. Oh dear, I seem to try all the vermin
> 
> Foxhunter, how was the hedgehog prepared? Don't tell me you've tried hedgehog baked in clay? Now that's a real ancient English recipe.
> 
> 
> 
> What's with way back in the last century?! You suddenly made me feel very old. Lol.


Yes, the hedgehog was prepared with clay around it over an open fire by an ancient old gypsey woman. It tasted like pheasant. The spines were left on though it had been paunched out and the cavity stuffed with herbs. I will say I enjoyed it.

Now hedgehogs are getting very uncommon because since badgers are protected and have exploded in numbers, they kill a lot of the hedgehogs. Of course farmers get blamed for them dying off. I would love to get a couple and keep them in my vegetable garden as they are great slug and snail killers.


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

Foxhunter said:


> I would love to get a couple and keep them in my vegetable garden as they are great slug and snail killers.


You can buy them here as pets.


----------



## Smilie

When I visited my cousin in Germany, about 10 years ago (God, time flies)she had several hedgehogs in her basement/ Seems there was a government program, where she was paid to take care of orphan hedgehogs, until they were a certain age. I think they were hibernating?
Well, for those that ate hedgehogs, next step up must be a porcupine 
My aunt, who homesteaded in Saskatchewan , during the dirty thirties, used to re call as to how they ate pickled gopfers
I guess I ate some horse meat, without knowing about it, as I was very young. People were starving after the war, so when a Russian solider left his horse tied outside of a hospital, residents of one apartment building, where my mother and I lived, stole that horse, butchered it, and divided up the meat
Are there any wild camels left in the USA? I know they were introduced at one point
Never ate dog, but friend's, whose son got married in Korea did.Don't know if I could so that
Ate duck feet once, as the pediatric oncologist that I worked with, was Chinese, and took some of us out for some \real chinese food, in the Chinese section of Calgary
Oh, and lets not forget 'prairie oysters', collected at branding time, when the young calves are also castrated. They are actually very good, breaded and fried


----------



## loosie

Reiningcatsanddogs said:


> You can buy them here as pets.


You can buy anything as a 'pet' in Texas, can't you??


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

Lions, Tigers and Bears! Oh My!


----------



## Hondo

Here is an article that was interesting to me that is even somewhat on topic :eek_color: 

It's an interview of an equine behaviorist. Just thought I'd share.

Q&A with Equine Behaviorist, Beth Gibbons | The Naturally Healthy Horse


----------



## Smilie

Good article Hondo, and more or less supports all the lectures that I have attended, given by Dr Gustavson, who is a vet, that specializes in equine welfare and behavior, besides having a native background
He stresses the actual NEED, for a horse to be able to move almost constantly, both for their physical, mental, hoof and digestive health
We do stall horses at times, regulate feeding to timed periods, and horses are able to adapt to a great degree, BUT, we must be careful never to exceed their ability to do so
Steriotypi behavior, hoof problems, training issues, GI problems are all intimately linked, for failure to provide a horse, with an environment that allows him to be, much as possible, the creature he evolved to be
Dr Gustaveson also in involved in the welfare of race horses.
Many horses in North America are run on lasix.declared to be bleeders However, in countries , like Japan, where they can't run on lasix, those race horses are managed differently, given time just riding out, putting on some miles, versus stalled with just short bursts of intense exercise/ Lung integrity is thus increased
lot of people are very tuned into abusive horse training methods, as they should be, but in many cases, just turn a blind eye to horse management, and the effect that prolonged confinement and feeding practices have on our horses
Of course, horses being creatures of habit, can seem to enjoy spending long periods stalled, seem to do okay with two feedings a day, but to completely ignore as to what research shows those effect to be, is just as bad as using poor training techniques
Of , course, we have to ask the horse to accept some degree of compromise, far as how they are designed to live, and horses are well able to doso, to a point.
Pass that point of ability to adapt, and there are fallouts

About Dr Sid Gustavson:

Understanding and Appreciating Horses. Equine Behavior, Equitation Science, Horse Culture. Dr Gustafson is a practicing behavior veterinarian. He provides behavioral consultations to enhance horse prosperity and resolve unwelcome horse behaviors. Sid gives educational presentations with horses regarding their nature and behaviour.

Here is alink:

A Veterinarian's Take: Equine Welfare Statement


----------



## Smilie

Here is food for thought, from Dr Sid Gustavson, plus the entire link:

;Equine welfare is measured by the amount of medication and veterinary care horses require in their given situation. The more medication and veterinary services required for a stable or discipline, the poorer the welfare situation is for the horses. Inadequate husbandry creates the need for medication. The more medication required, the poorer the equine welfare.
A Veterinarian's Take: Measuring Equine Welfare


There is an on line study course, on equine behavior, university of Guelph, Dr Sid Gustavson

www.equinestudiesonline.ca/make-a-connection/


----------



## gottatrot

Smilie said:


> Inadequate husbandry creates the need for medication. The more medication required, the poorer the equine welfare.


It's a tricky subject for me since I don't believe it is just all black and white. What I've come to believe is we should have an ideal for a completely natural lifestyle, horses turned out 24/7 to roam, no blankets or hard feed. But this ideal must be adjusted for so many reasons and it is not best for horses if we hold onto these ideals inflexibly. 

These ideals might work if we all had a number of things:

-The ideal pasture environment for horses which would be many acres of native grasses in a semi-arid environment. In reality, many have lush, improved pastures, limited land or no grazing at all.

-Our horses were all free of disease. Not all diseases are caused by poor management. Some are caused by genetic issues such as PSSM, some are caused by organ dysfunction of unknown origin such as the Pituitary enlargement seen in Cushing's or parasite damage. These horses may need medication for their health, regardless of ideal living conditions.

-Our horses were all adapted to living in their current environment. Example: horses that live in extremely rainy or cold environments may need blankets, especially when old or if they have a genetic problem or disease.

-Horses were not bred for specific things without regard for their hooves, health or thriftiness of feed. 

-If we never neglected or abused horses, ruining their ability to absorb feed and vitamins. Some horses coming from these states cannot live on roughage and need concentrated feed to get enough calories to survive.


----------



## bsms

"_Horses require several hours of afternoon activities each day to promote and sustain health of limb and wind including hand walking and grazing, lungeing, hill and dale conditioning, measured turnout, pasturing, massage, passive flexion, swimming, play, and variety of other activities that keep them moving._"

Guess my horses have lives that suck. Three horses living in a dry lot corral. No grazing, except for on trails, and very little even then. No massage. No passive flexion or swimming. Bandit wants to play, but no one wants to play with him. Maybe that is why he follows his humans around when it is time to scoop poop...

FWIW, I'd almost as soon be dead as live in an apartment in a city. Edinburgh and Oxford MIGHT be exceptions to that rule. Phoenix is not. Spent too much time deployed to Saudi Arabia, living in tents and sharing 'facilities' with 5000 of my closest friends. But uncounted millions and even billions do it.


----------



## jaydee

We remove horses from the places they 'evolved' in to become the man made breeds we have today and then expect them to live a 'natural' life there - look at one of the oldest 'breeds' - the Exmoor pony, evolved over thousands of years to survive on poor moorland grasses in the UK where temperatures have a very small range of difference between summer and winter and then expect them to live some place really hot or be left out 24/7 on lush grazing
At the other end of the ladder you've got the TB that's a designer horse bred originally in Europe to be fine coated and thin skinned so it cools down faster and then expect it to survive happily in sub zero temperatures without a shelter or blanket - mostly they just don't cope with it. Even in the UK mild winters I've seen TB's that have wintered out 'naked' with no adequate shelters look like bags of bones in the spring, covered in 'rain rot' and mud fever.


----------



## Foxhunter

These people should come and see the youngsters we bred. Housed in the loose barn at night in the winter and in the day if it was hot and the flies were bad, they couldn't wait to come in. 

In the morning I would open the big gate to let them out, if it was wet and windy they would go to the top of the track turn and walk back inside. Their decision, not mine. They never minded the cold at all. 

The fit horses were stabled most days apart from exercise. Again if I turned them out when it was wet, they would go out, roll in the wettest and muddiest place, have abuck and charge around the field a couple of times and want back inside.

There was nothing on drugs apart from the odd Bute if a horse had been injured.


----------



## loosie

I do think 'experts'(like the rest of us) can have their objectivity clouded by their experiences, and if for eg. Dr Gustavson is in the 'circle' of micromanaged, highly medicated racehorses(who cares about the horse, so long as he runs fast, earns his oats for his owner's amusement...), he may be rather more pedantic about his judgements on those factors. Fact is, there are many degrees of 'good' & 'bad', in managing horses, along with the rest, and there are many necessary compromises people may have to make. And horses do adapt, too.

BUT so saying that, I don't for a second think that diminishes the warnings about common management(over stabling for eg) or recommendations for 'good' management(many hrs a day of exercise for eg). And I think the last few arguments about that are missing the point. 



Smilie said:


> He stresses the actual NEED, for a horse to be able to move almost constantly, both for their physical, mental, hoof and digestive health ... horses are able to adapt to a great degree, BUT, we must be careful never to exceed their ability to do so


IMO this means we need to appreciate that our management choices do indeed impact on our horse's health & wellbeing. We need to be very aware of that, and minimise the unhealthy effects.



> Many horses in North America are run on lasix.declared to be bleeders However, in countries , like Japan, where they can't run on lasix, those race horses are managed differently, given time just riding out, putting on some miles, versus stalled with just short bursts of intense exercise/ Lung integrity is thus increased


Interesting. It was Melbourne Cup yesterday, Australia's biggest horse race. I'm not sure about lasix over here, but I know most top racehorses are housed & exercised conventionally. And a recent large study done by the University of Melbourne showed 90% of horses, after a race, had blood on their lungs! Previous studies done on Australian racehorses also showed that virtually every(forget number but well over 90%) horse with a 'windsucking/cribbing' vice had stomach ulcers, and a very large percentage of Aus race horses have stomach ulcers and are not fed free choice hay.



> lot of people are very tuned into abusive horse training methods, as they should be, but in many cases, just turn a blind eye to horse management, and the effect that prolonged confinement and feeding practices have on our horses


Absolutely!! And while we need to understand what 'compromises' may be necessary & what degree are acceptable, we need to recognise they ARE compromises, and there are negative effects. People need to realise that the way horses are conventionally managed is a very common(if unrecognised, unintended) form of abuse.


----------



## gottatrot

loosie said:


> Absolutely!! And while we need to understand what 'compromises' may be necessary & what degree are acceptable, _we need to recognise they ARE compromises, and there are negative effects_. People need to realise that the way horses are conventionally managed is a very common(if unrecognised, unintended) form of abuse.


Yes, I agree. I understand it is very common (probably more common) for horses to be kept in extremely unnatural environments without any consideration for what is ideal. I am against medicating with Lasix and the other practices used in racing such as injecting very young horses in the joints. A young horse with a joint issue is injured, overused, started too young, etc. and does not need a quick fix to get rid of inflammation. 

But I am sensitive too about those who are taking things to the other extreme. They are so much into their ideal for horses that they don't consider what @jaydee points out about how a thin-skinned TB may suffer without a blanket or may have been bred for a metabolism that cannot get enough calories from a diet only of hay.

As you say, we must recognize where we are compromising from the ideal, but then we need to do what is ideal for the horses we have and with the environment we have. And we need to choose what is best for that situation, rather than choosing something less than the best just because others tell us this is what horses need. 

My mare that was starved needs to have some hours separated from other horses so she can eat hay and 9 lbs of grain. Those who know what is most natural for horses have advised me to do a variety of things. If you feed less grain, the horse will eat more hay. Yes, she does eat slightly more hay, but pound for pound the calories in hay don't match the hard feed so she quickly drops weight and begins to starve. 

She should be turned out 24/7. We tried several varieties of this since I wanted to do what was ideal for her. We tried separating her to eat, but the other horses drifted out to graze so she would not finish all her grain or eat enough hay. 

We tried penning the other horses close by for several hours while she ate, but there was too much going on with the herd dynamics and she wanted to be involved, not separated so wouldn't eat. I gave her a month to adapt and then had to give up, bring her back down to her stall with runout pen at night and it was difficult to get all the weight back on that she'd lost. 

It is not ideal, but my horses have the space of about three normal stalls each, can go inside and out and have enough room to move quite a bit at night. My thin one eats better and relaxes more when my other one comes down into the pen next to her at night, and this compromise is the only way I can keep weight on my formerly starved horse.

Meanwhile, a horse I know suffers because the owner believes the horse needs to eat 24/7. Unfortunately, the horse has IR and has foundered badly in the past. The owner puts the horse out with a grazing muzzle for a couple of hours daily, but the rest of the time the horse must be in a sand corral with hay. 

The hay goes into a small hole hay net. The horse manages to eat enough hay to stay obese all the time. The horse gimps around on these tiny, rotated hooves and has about 100 or so extra pounds to carry on them as well. 

The owner does not believe in limiting the hay, so the horse remains obese. She's read that horses will limit themselves if they have access to food all the time. The horse has been obese for many months now. Unfortunately, it is my belief that most hay is too high in calories for some horses to eat constantly. 

That horse will never be on medications and the vet is avoided like the plague, because it is not natural. My mare with Cushing's takes Prascend daily and it has helped with her symptoms quite a bit. Other horses at my barn never wear blankets and do not get vaccines because their owners don't believe in them. Shivering is natural, you know. Apparently rain rot is too.

I believe in balance. We don't need to deprive ourselves of horses because we don't have the perfect way to keep them. We just need to give them the best life we can. It's probably a lot better than the life they would have had without us.


----------



## bsms

Most of the horses I know live in less than ideal conditions. Ideal conditions would probably exclude southern Arizona as a home for horses, with rare exceptions. The key is to understand one IS making compromises, and to try to compensate where possible. I could let Bandit eat freely from a huge pile of hay. He wouldn't get obese. He eats enough, then stops. But to do so, I'd have to separate him from my other two horses, who would overeat and get obese. I rate interaction with other horses, frequent movement and limited play higher than unrestricted access to food, so that is what I do.

I don't know who started it, but yesterday they spent 5 minutes running around in circles, kicking up so much dust that I could barely see them. No idea what it was about. But I'm glad they have that option, even if the corral doesn't extend more than 100 feet in any one direction. I worry about Trooper's feet, but our farrier says he has clients who would kill to have a horse with feet like Trooper - and he is the worst of the three.

Not ideal. Not by a long shot. But we'd kill a lot of horses if we wanted all surviving horses to live an "ideal" life...


----------



## Smilie

As I said, we all compromise to some extent as the what is 'deal' for horses, because of what we do with them, ect, and Horses do adapt to many of these modifications
Nether I, or Dr Gustavson advocate just letting horses live like wild or feral horses
His point is not to exceed their ability to adapt
There have been enough studies by vets, tops in their field, that show allowing young hroses to grow up, with lots of movement, versus 'confining them, because they are 'too valuable., has a negative impact
Just like shoing, we can ask a horse to adapt to some life style changes, and, since we don't follow natural 'culling', do use therapeutic shoing, do blanket older horses, ect But, you use these modifications,, with the idea never to exceed ability to adapt, and keeping in mind, the animal a horse is, based on thousands of years of evolution
Dr Gustavson\s background, is growing up on a ranch, usng horses, as North American Native
His point about horses needing slow exercise, not just burst of speed, was in direct reference to his Racehorse topic, not for your pleasure horse in a corral
It is a fact, that horses in Japan, where running on lasix is not legal, use a different exercise program/management then for race horses in North America, allowing them to be able to race without lasix. Besides race training, those race horses in Japan are also walked, lunged and given other less stressful, but longer exercise, in addition to their race training
You have to read his articles in context
I have Smilie dry lotted, as in the wild, she would have been culled, since she is very IR Of course, we use management, as it applies to what we do with our horses, and management, at times, keeps horses that would have been culled in the wild, going
I used to stall my show horses all the time. At night during the winter, and in the day time, during the summer. I used to also have them shod, as young as two year olds, if nothing more, then to 'look professional', when showing
I now still do many of those things, but, I stall horses little as possible, I shoe them only when it is needed, short term, I quite showing weanlings,long time ago, allowing them, to grow more slowly, because all these things do affect horses.
You can't debunk any of these studies, any more then those on training methods.
Does not mean you just throw hroses out in the pasture and be feral, but it does mean, you realize what confinement, done to a max, where horses are stalled almost constantly, where they are just fed two or three meals of concentrated feed a day, approaches the point where their ability to adapt is close, You thus use this knowledge, to help you manage that horse, much as possible, to fit both what you do with that horse, and what he is designed to function like


----------



## Smilie

There is no argument by either myself or Dr Gustavson, that it is practical and okay to modify as to what is ideal for a horse, based on what we do with him The point being, not to exceed their ability to adapt to these modifications
Back to back shoing, year round, for me,exceeds that ability to adapt. Keeping a horse stalled almost constantly, except short term, when he is in a regular training program, exceeds his ability to adapt-thus steriotypi behavior associated with this practice
Feeding lots of grain, esp sweetfeed, and long periods with an empty gut, does predispose a horse to ulcers. Does not mean he has to sit in front of a bale of hay , and chow down 24/7
A lone horse, is a times sleep deprived. This does not mean we don't teach hroses to accept being by themselves, as we need for them to learn to accept that, when asked to so so.Same with being stalled, but it does not mean a horse should live alone, 24/7


----------



## Smilie

Absolutely to what Trottin qouted from Loosie''s post.' While we need to understand what 'compromises' may be necessary & what degree are acceptable, we need to recognise they ARE 

compromises, and there are negative effects. People need to realise that the way horses are conventionally managed is a very common(if unrecognised, unintended) form of abuse.'



Absolutely, and nothing I posted, or what Dr Gustavson has ever said, in any of his lectures, indicates otherwise, You use this knowledge to help mold your management and feeding program. He is a vet afterall, and certainly would never recommend over feeding any hrose,esp an IR horse !
His one main point, that he has always given in any of his lectures is:

"Horses have a great ability to adapt, but we must never exceed the level where they can adapt'
That does not mean you throw training, shoing, stabling, health management, veterinary intervention, out the window, but use this knowledge of how a horse is designed, same as you use their flight , herd/prey species mentality, to formulate an entire management program that keeps these facts in mind, thus avoiding the point where their ability to adapt, without negative fallout, is exceeded


----------



## Foxhunter

When I designed the new barn there were many factors I wanted. The Boss asked for several people to come and look and give quotes. I think there were at leat five or six. Of these only one came and first thing he said was,"What exactly do you want?" The others having been told over the phone came with rough plans drawn out that would not have worked. 

My main thing was air circulation, second was large stables and third light. 

As the hay and straw was being stored at one end he worked out the room a tractor would need to bring in the big bales, how many bales on a load and what room they would need. I ended up with four stables 18' x 12' there was plenty of light from clear panels in part of the roof, and at the back I had windows that were the size of a stable door so the horses could look out but could be shut if adverse wether. Stables had walls Tom about 3'6" with vertical metal bars so the horses could not get at each other but could see what was going on in the whole barn. There was also a big loose area for the youngsters
The barn that was already there had four nice big stables but was dark as there were in clear panels in the roof and tiny windows. I had the top part of the walls (wood) removed and replaced with vertical bars and big windows put in the back. 

I had stand in horses with leg injuries from the vets treating them (racehorses) these were stood in 24/7 for months yet none showed stereotypical behaviour of cribbing/box walking or weaving. At least two horse that did we've or box walk stopped doing so a couple of weeks after arriving.


----------



## jaydee

Management is always going to be key in whether or not horse's will cope with how they're kept - though 'natural' for a horse that was born in a stable and around humans from that day isn't the same as 'natural' for a horse that was born out in the wild and never sees people or an enclosed space until it gets rounded up and taken into 'captivity'
Stress caused by the way a horse is kept is all relative to expecting the horse to suddenly adapt to living in a way that it isn't used
We were looking at the horses in the barn at Old Salem Farm the last time we were there - most of those horses are stabled all of the time other than when being exercised or turned out for a short period in a small paddock but they were all eating hay and perfectly relaxed and happy
The mare my one time boss had was about 8 when he bought her, typical of many Irish horses she'd had a foal before being broke at 5 and then used for hunting on a yard that kept 'hirelings' for hunting. 
In the hunting season she was stabled from the end of September through to March with a few hours out on days when the weather was dry, she was ridden 6 days a week for a minimum of 2 hours a day, quite often hunting two full days a week, a lot of that being roadwork. In the summer she was out 24/7 with a field shelter and ridden lightly to accompany green youngsters. She was shod her entire working life. She had no stable vices, was only ever ill once when she had a virus, she was never unsound. She died of old age in her late 30's and the last time I saw her a few months before that she was still remarkably agile considering how hard she'd always worked - she hunted regularly until she was in her mid 20's. Never on bute or any other meds.


----------



## Smilie

As said, horses are very adaptable, and it was never implied that they can't adapt to reasonable compromised lifestyle.
It is also true, that some confined horses do not develop stereotypic behavior, just like you have people that smoke, and never develop lung cancer
That does not change the fact, that the link to stereotypic behavior in hroses, has been closely linked to an increased risk of developing these behaviors, through confinement
I have no doubt that there are examples of horses , that never developed stereotypic behavior, that were confined, and who stayed sound long term, but that still does not change statistics
if your hroses are able to adapt to the lifestyle modifications you make, both because of the job you ask them to do, and for what works best, with no ill effects, then you have not exceeded their ability to adapt.
However, there are many horses who have been pushed beyond their ability to adapt, and suffer consequences as a result-the stats are out there.


----------



## Hondo

I kept Hondo in the 60 acre field with no pasture mates for about three months last winter. He was always at the fence when he spotted or heard (or smelled) the herd.

He developed some horrible rings on his hooves that I now believe were from the stress of being alone. His hoof rings are all gone now.

When out on a solo trail ride, he never seems to be in a hurry to get back to his pasture mates until we get within 2-300 yards and then he begins to look for them and is glad to see them, and they him.


----------



## Smilie

Yes, I agree that horses can adapt, to a certain lifestyle to a great degree
There is also a big difference in a horse being stalled, and worked very regularly, maybe also given some turn out, and a horse kept stalled, perhaps ridden only once a week, if at all
Those PMU mares, adapted to standing on line, hooked up to urine collection harnesses. By law those PMU farmers had to turn those mares out, at least twice a month. Those mares would be standing back at that gate, waiting to go back in

I certainly modify the lifestyle of my hroses, even now. All learn to accept being stalled, as they are stalled at shows, over night, before a show, after being washed, or if they require stall rest
I certainly can't let Smilie out to graze, so she lives in a large dry lot, most of the time, except in winter. Right now the grass is pretty brown, but green enough in places, that I learned from past experience, can't just turn her out 'cold turkey' I thus am turning her out now, for a few hours each day, but with a grazing muzzle
Charlie is not IR, but an easy keeper. I certainly can't turn her out full time, in the grass growing months. She thus goes out for part of the day only, and with a grazing muzzle, and length of time, depending on time of year. I also ride her most days, if even for just an hour
Carmen, also an easy keeper, spends the day time in the corral,going out only at night. I had to modify that even, as she now gets rid of any grazing muzzle. I thus have to also limit her grazing area, using portable electric tape
The other horses are fine, out on grass full time
You obviously don't try to emulate how horses live in the wild, but you do take his basic nature into account, when you impose those modifications, so they have minimal negative impact.


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

I think a lot of things come down to genetics. We tend to assume that all horses are going to escape the mental illnesses that plague people and even dogs. When was the last time you heard of a horse on Prozac? Yet, plenty of dogs are these days. We live in such close proximity to our dogs that eventually it becomes obvious that something isn't quite right with Fido. Few people live as closely with their horses.

With humans, just because your parents or grandparents suffered from a mental issues (clinical depression, neurosis, paranoia), does not necessitate that you will. It DOES however make you predisposed to it, meaning that depending upon the environment that you are surrounded (tragedies, life changing events, deprivations etc..) you may have a very high chance of developing an issue over a person who has no history of mental dysfunction in their family medical history. 

That is not to say that if a person experiences a life changing event, without a history, that they will not also develop issues, only that it is less likely. 

There is no reason to believe that horses cannot suffer from both genetic and environmentally influenced mental issues (including intelligence issues), we just tend to call them “behavioral issues” instead.


----------



## Smilie

There is a lot of info like that below, concerning stereotypic behavior in hroses

'Abstract
There are strong suggestions that equine stereotypies are connected to poor welfare and a suboptimal management and/or stabling environment. Different forms of equine stereotypic behaviors have been described. Crib biting, weaving, and box walking are considered the most prevalent. Several studies have been conducted to establish links between the underlying causes and potential function of such behaviors. Both experimental and epidemiological studies have indicated management factors specifically feeding practices, housing conditions, and weaning method as crucial in the development of stereotypies in stabled horses. Some neurological studies on equine stereotypy demonstrated some forms of central nervous system dysfunction as being associated with the performance of stereotypic behaviors. Different researchers hypothesized that the functional significance of stereotypies is that they reduce stress in captive environments and should thus be considered as a coping mechanism. In contrast, the owner's perspective is often that a stereotypic horse has a “stable vice” that needs to be stopped, and different kinds of methods have been developed to control or regulate stereotypic behaviors. However, if the stress-reducing hypothesis is correct, controlling stereotypic behaviors particularly by physical and surgical approaches without addressing the underlying causes is of great concern to the horse's welfare. Although there is ongoing uncertainty about the exact function, the growing knowledge about causation should be applied: under all circumstances prevention is better than cure.'


----------



## Smilie

Reiningcatsanddogs said:


> I think a lot of things come down to genetics. We tend to assume that all horses are going to escape the mental illnesses that plague people and even dogs. When was the last time you heard of a horse on Prozac? Yet, plenty of dogs are these days. We live in such close proximity to our dogs that eventually it becomes obvious that something isn't quite right with Fido. Few people live as closely with their horses.
> 
> With humans, just because your parents or grandparents suffered from a mental issues (clinical depression, neurosis, paranoia), does not necessitate that you will. It DOES however make you predisposed to it, meaning that depending upon the environment that you are surrounded (tragedies, life changing events, deprivations etc..) you may have a very high chance of developing an issue over a person who has no history of mental dysfunction in their family medical history.
> 
> That is not to say that if a person experiences a life changing event, without a history, that they will not also develop issues, only that it is less likely.
> 
> There is no reason to believe that horses cannot suffer from both genetic and environmentally influenced mental issues (including intelligence issues), we just tend to call them “behavioral issues” instead.


Agree that these variables exist, far as behavior in general, but stereotypic behavior is considered to be a coping method, and then can become a learned behavior onto themselves, even when the stress that caused it , has been removed


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

OCD also often begins as a coping strategy but, it does not mean that it is not a mental dysfunction as well.


----------



## Smilie

Definition of stereotypic behavior, from the Horsecom


Definition

These are learned behaviors. Carolyn Stull, PhD, University of California, Davis, defined them as "stereotypic behaviors that are repeated without any apparent or obvious purpose or function. Such behaviors involve a need-related drive that develops in an environment with inadequate opportunities for satisfying the need. Once established, a stereotypic behavior may become a need in itself."

They are NOt mental illnesses


----------



## Smilie

Reiningcatsanddogs said:


> OCD also often begins as a coping strategy but, it does not mean that it is not a mental dysfunction as well.


I think that is a part justification, as these behaviors are almost always associated with confinement. Yes, we have domesticated the horse, taught him to accept some modifications, like being stalled, for a reasonable length of time, learn to accept being separated from herd members, when we ride or work with them, ect, ect, but none of that changes the fact that he is a prey animal, where the ability to move is a very strong need
How long do you think, the average human, used to exercise/movement, would accept being confined to a room, before he started to pace, or develope some other coping mechanism?
Why is colic more common in stalled horses? Digestion in a horse, is facilitated by movement, and one of the reasons a horse with colic is often walked


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

OCD Includes:

*Obsessions:* a repeated thought that won’t go away
In the case of a horse it might be something like “Danger and I am stuck. Danger and I am stuck. Danger. Danger.”

*Compulsions: *a behavior that is used to try to make that thought go away. Thus a learned behavior; a coping mechanism.

Treating the compulsion with behavioral modification without treating the obsession that is causing it doesn't really solve the problem and is a game of whack a mole. 

In the case of a horse, compulsions might be something that you relate to as stereotypes. By providing certain environments for the horse, you may lessen the obsessions that occur and thus eliminate or mitigate the compulsions. Like a human who may be predisposed to OCD over another, you might see some horses respond with compulsions and others not depending upon their perceptions of the situation. 

Some horses may see a stall as a safe place where they can relax and others may focus on being confined and develop compulsions.


----------



## Smilie

Reiningcatsanddogs said:


> OCD Includes:
> 
> *Obsessions:* a repeated thought that won’t go away
> In the case of a horse it might be something like “Danger and I am stuck. Danger and I am stuck. Danger. Danger.”
> 
> *Compulsions: *a behavior that is used to try to make that thought go away. Thus a learned behavior; a coping mechanism.
> 
> Treating the compulsion with behavioral modification without treating the obsession that is causing it doesn't really solve the problem and is a game of whack a mole.
> 
> In the case of a horse, compulsions might be something that you relate to as stereotypes. By providing certain environments for the horse, you may lessen the obsessions that occur and thus eliminate or mitigate the compulsions. Like a human who may be predisposed to OCD over another, you might see some horses respond with compulsions and others not depending upon their perceptions of the situation.
> 
> Some horses may see a stall as a safe place where they can relax and others may focus on being confined and develop compulsions.


True, all things in moderation, and there are horses less able to cope/adapt than others.
Many horses do see a stall as a secure place,esp when they are fed there, thus have no food competition.Heck, for those PMU mares, standing in tie stalls, hooked up to urine collecting devise, with food always in front of them, made them actually seek to come back into that barn.Did not then also necessarily equal best management practice for them, far as over all health

There is nothing wrong with a horse seeing a stall as a 'safe' place, nor with 'thoughtful stalling', where that horse also gets turn out, regular exercise, ect
There is also a difference in a person having their own special space, like a room, versus being confined to one, for long periods of time, whether they want to be there, or not
I am all for having hroses learning to adapt to conditions, that help them to do the job we wish to do with them, including stall time, learning to accept being away from buddies,w hen worked or ridden, blanketed, shod as needed,clipped, bathed, hauled, ect
When a horse seems happy with the degree of this adaption imposed on them, we have not exceeded their ability to adapt.
On the other hand, when horses are confined to a stall, almost with no exercise, no ability to interact with other horses, thus exhibiting coping method acting out behaviors, having no other option, then there is something wrong, and you can't just mark it down as them being too mentally 'fragile' to adapt, but need to change something
When a given population of racehorses, are all run on lasix,declared to be bleeders, and another population of horses, that are conditioned in such a way, besides just race trained, that allows them to run without lasix, there is a management problem
When the majority of horses in a barn, need to be on ulcer medication, all need hocks injected, several are cribbers some are stall kickers, then there is a management problem
On the other hand, if your stalled horses are happy, sound, then you have not exceeded their ability to adapt


----------



## Foxhunter

Smilie said:


> Definition of stereotypic behavior, from the Horsecom
> 
> 
> Definition
> 
> These are learned behaviors. Carolyn Stull, PhD, University of California, Davis, defined them as "stereotypic behaviors that are repeated without any apparent or obvious purpose or function. Such behaviors involve a need-related drive that develops in an environment with inadequate opportunities for satisfying the need. Once established, a stereotypic behavior may become a need in itself."
> 
> They are NOt mental illnesses


Cannot fully agree with this. 

One youngsters we bred was a yearling when he started to crib. I thought I saw him 'glunk' on a post as I went to check them. I watched for quite some time and never saw him do it again, next day he was at it full time. 

He lived out in large pasture with his peers. 

Little has been done in research of mental illness in horses yet anyone who has been around them for any length of time will know they can suffer from stress and that in turn can lead to a breakdown. 

When I was taking dressage lessons from a top dressage trainer one horse, a bold and brash animal. This horse changed after about four lessons (twice a week) he stopped eating, became near impossible to load and when travelling sweated until he looked like he had just been bathed. I swear he had a breakdown, I don't know why as I would have bet the other horse would have shown stress being a neurotic character. 

One racehorse was a weaver. He was a big strong animal with the earned reputation of running away with even the most experienced jockeys. I had the reputation of Boeing able to settle most horses and rode this horse all the time on his earliest fitness work and when he started cantwrk on the all weather track. He wasn't strong cantering but nothing terrible as I was usually in front of the string. 
On the grass gallops it was something totally different! The only way I had to hold him was to keep swinging him off balance, he would lock his jaw and set his neck and do his best to go faster than wanted! The first two weeks on the grass gallops were a battle. Three days a week we fought, my arms and legs felt like they were jelly, he stopped eating, was weaving like crazy a lot of the time, he lost weight and so did I. Then the third week the moment we started to canter it was like I was riding another horse. Although he still took a good hold, he wasn't fighting and, I too, could relax. He started to clear his manger and very rarely weaved. 

So many of these learned people who study horses have very little real interaction with them to get to know their character, to listen to what they are saying and adjust things around them so there are not the mental stresses.


----------



## Smilie

I'm not disputing what you saw,Foxhunter, there will always be exceptions
There is the person that gets lung cancer, and never smoked in his life. Then there is the person that smoked a pack a day, and never gets lung cancer
However, taht does not change the strong risk of developing lung cancer, in direct proportion to the amount you smoke, and where the majority of statistics fall
Thus, you have horses that are never stalled/confined, perhaps stressed another way, or perhaps , 'just because', that learns to crib, horses that spend the majority of their life stalled, maybe just briefly lunged once or twice a day, taht never develop a stereotypic behavior, like cribbing, BUT that does not change the fact, that the largest part of that Bell curve statistics, show a strong relationship of developing stereotypic behavior, due to confinement beyond what the horse can adapt to
There are a minority number of people, that were exposed to equal amount of 
radiation at chernobyl , and never developed cancer, but does not change the fact that there is a strong link to that exposure, for many more people, and cancer

Statistics aren't formed on exceptions, as there will always be those, but rather on significant association , based on a large population sampling, before a definite link is defined/recognized


----------



## Smilie

Just another example, far as exceptions.
Most of us know, that a high fat diet, esp of saturated animal fats, predispose people to cardiovascular disease, yet you will find individuals who ate bacon for breakfast every morning, and never developed heart disease.
Red flags go up, only when there is a significant number of a population , exposed tot he same factors, develop a syndrome/issue/disease, above what is found in the average population, not exposed to those same conditions
Heck, I just watched a documentary, where there is town where asbestos was mined, and the playground was actually 
augmented' with asbestos, before the association with a particular type of lung cancer and asbestos was made. That town is now condemned, and many of the former residents, developed that type of lung cancer, but a few did not
Thus, while maybe the odd horse just has a 'screw' loose, and still develops a stereotypic behavior, does not change the fact that most horses that develop them, have been stressed by confinement, beyond what they can adapt to


----------



## bsms

Not sure high fat diets are quite the problem folks claim. I've lost weight, dropped my cholesterol and dropped my blood sugar levels on a high fat diet. But...

Border Collies have been bred to herd. They are now genetically predisposed to do so. Horses have been bred for hundreds of years as well - for temperament, as well as other things.

People want to look to wild herds to see what is "normal". Suppose they did that with humans. "Normal" would be spending the entire day hoping to find enough to eat. Normal would be dying in childbirth before 30. A normal old man might be 35. A feral human, so to speak, might well spend all their time looking for food and sleeping under leaves. I'll pass, thank you!

Life in the wild includes incredible stress. And hunger. And fear.

It is like when people tell me I shouldn't rub my horse's shoulder, because wild horses don't. But Bandit isn't an idiot, any more than Mia was. They understand the intent. People tell me I shouldn't drop some feed and walk away while the horse is approaching, because my horse will think he's dominant. In a pig's eye! They tell me a horse putting his head next to me is invading my space, without giving either of us credit for being able to know the context and respond accordingly.

Do my horses really mind having three meals a day delivered, versus looking for it? Do they really mind knowing each of them will get enough food, and that they don't need to compete for it?

After a thousand years of breeding, might they be better adapted for living domestically than wild?


----------



## Hondo

bsms said:


> Life in the wild includes incredible stress. And hunger. And fear.


When looking at pictures of people in third world countries there is often an incredible amount of stress in their faces.

Same for some of the old pioneer pictures in the USA.

Just hard living.

And speaking of incredible, there has been an incredible amount of really good valuable information and opinions posted on this thread. 

Interesting about horse's stresses being referred to as behavioral issues or stable vices.

Weren't humans with mental problems once considered as having behavioral issues, or worse?


----------



## loosie

jaydee said:


> Stress caused by the way a horse is kept is all relative to expecting the horse to suddenly adapt to living in a way that it isn't used


Yes, agreed, to a large degree. Where mental 'stress' is concerned. But many horses, despite a lifetime of being stabled, are still stressed or depressed about it. Where I am, people rarely stable horses full time, but on many 'equestrian' properties I work on, there are rows & rows of small paddocks, with one expensive horse in each. These horses have been kept separated by fencing from other horses since they were very young - in many cases, too young to have learned how to relate properly to other horses & if put out with another, they're often 'antisocial' which confirms the owner's view that they horses should be kept separate & it's too dangerous to allow them to live together. Mostly the paddocks have stand off electric on either side, so the horses can't even reach eachother over the fence. These horses I see are almost invariably standing at their gate, or pacing the fence, especially when anyone arrives, looking either stressed, hopeful(of something going to happen, finally) or just plain depressed. Usually it's depressed. Their owners often report that they're 'perfectly happy' to just stand in one corner all day, day after day.:-(

But 'stress' is also physical, and regardless of how accustomed they are to being locked up, health, digestion and hoof function are all still effected by living a sedentary life. Be that in a stall or a 'boring' paddock. And just because (many) DO 'cope' in far from optimal situations doesn't mean to say it's good for them, or they SHOULD be kept like that.


----------



## loosie

Reiningcatsanddogs said:


> assume that all horses are going to escape the mental illnesses that plague people and even dogs. When was the last time you heard of a horse on Prozac?


But what are 'stable vices' & 'stereotypic' behaviours then? And while not prozac, how many times do you hear of horses on or 'needing' a 'calming supplement' or sedatives??



> Yet, plenty of dogs are these days.


In Australia, very rarely. Although as far as 'close proximity', a lot of dogs are delegated to solitary lives in 'big enough' backyards & often not allowed inside even. And often do have obvious neurotic behaviours. I learned recently that many Americans go a lot further than that, and keep their dogs in crates for long periods of each day(!!:-(). Just like keeping a horse in a box, or any other animal, that's going to 'breed' many more dogs that need 'help' coping with life.



> With humans, just because your parents or grandparents suffered from a mental issues (clinical depression, neurosis, paranoia), does not necessitate that you will. It DOES however make you predisposed to it,


This is getting into yet another different realm of discussion(we've been nearly everywhere now!  ). I don't doubt that there are some genetic tendencies to 'personalities', but I think that the above is VASTLY more about those 'environmental' factors(very much including diet/nutrition) than genetics, if genetics are a part of it at all, which with so many environmental factors(& similarities among families), I can't see how that can be anything more than a theory.


----------



## Hondo

loosie said:


> This is getting into yet another different realm of discussion(we've been nearly everywhere now! ).


Well! I strongly disagree with you loosie! I think the recent discussion is part and parcel to the original topic. Very much in fact!

Ha ha. I knew on second thought you'd agree. 

I mean, this stuff is exactly what I was thinking about with posting the thread.


----------



## gottatrot

loosie said:


> But what are 'stable vices' & 'stereotypic' behaviours then? And while not prozac, how many times do you hear of horses on or 'needing' a 'calming supplement' or sedatives??
> 
> I don't doubt that there are some genetic tendencies to 'personalities', but I think that the above is VASTLY more about those 'environmental' factors(very much including diet/nutrition) than genetics, if genetics are a part of it at all, which with so many environmental factors(& similarities among families), I can't see how that can be anything more than a theory.


Studies are showing that many mental illnesses can be traced to gene variations that are passed on. Bipolar, depression, schizophrenia, and OCD are some that show strong evidence of being genetically passed on.

But what is personality other than tendency to think and behave in a certain way? What is the difference between those tendencies and the edges of that spectrum which we call mental illness?

It's very complicated, because thoughts themselves change the chemistry of your brain and this in turn changes its structure or neurological map. So you might have the genetic variation that predisposes you to OCD. But somehow you had a bright and varied life and never got locked into thought patterns that created those pathways in your brain, so never developed OCD. 
Others begin to think in the patterns and create the pathways. Where does the environmental begin and the genetics end? It can be different for each individual.

So I would agree that most likely some horses are more predisposed to develop a mental problem, but stressors beyond what they can handle will in most cases make the problems appear. Even with a genetic predisposition, each individual will tolerate the stressors less or more.

But the way brains are, almost anyone can develop pathology under terrible circumstances. Just as in the experiments where they showed how putting too many rats together made their social structure deteriorate. 

I knew a horse that had Tourette's.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/dog-days/201609/equine-tourette-s-syndrome
He was a very kind and mellow horse. He double barrel kicked me one day in the pasture. A second before he was sleeping, and he dozed off soon after. This was how we realized the problem, because we just thought he was a stall kicker. His water bucket kept getting cracked in the stall from him suddenly kicking it. The other horses avoided standing near him because he would swing his head or kick with no warning. He would also have tics associated with eating. He meant no harm, this was all uncontrollable. He was perfectly safe as long as you gave his hind end lots of room.


----------



## Smilie

Not talking about ,'normal, or natural, or we would not be riding horses in the first place.We are talking about level of adaption, before there are negative fallouts
Find one vet who has studied equine behavior, and who does not consider that data shows there is a definite co relation between steriotypi behavior and confinement.
After all, the common layman term, is stable vise. Does not mean that other causes of stress can't result in them

Far as that high animal fat diet, my mother used to eat typical pheasant German food, like sandwiches spread with grease, rendered form bacon. She has serious angina in her forties
Yes, now high sugar diet seems to be the culprit.
, at least as much as not more so, in some cases
All that does not matter. Different individuals also have different thresholds, genetic, cellular, ect, before they are tipped over the edge
some horses eating lots of NSC just get fat, while others become IR and laminitic.
I rather feed all horses as if they could become laminitic, as an oz of prevention, is worth a pound of cure
I never had a horse that I stalled part time, become a stall kicker, a weaver, a cribber, but then I never stalled them tot he extent , co related to the formation of those behaviors
Since there is enough research data, that you just can't poo hoo and sweep under the carpet, showing a definite relationship to steriotypi behavior , to me, it then just makes sense to practice some prevention, if possible, by not confining ahrose more then needed, by not letting any horse consume lots of lush grass, or feeding then high grain diets, by not injecting young healthy hocks, in order to think you can then push a young hrose to the max, etc, ect.


----------



## Smilie

For those that like studies, some papers.
Other factors, that influence stereotypical behavior, besides confinement, are also mentioned

Factors influencing the development of stereotypic and redirected behaviours in young horses: findings of a four year prospective epidemiological study - WATERS - 2002 - Equine Veterinary Journal - Wiley Online Library

Stereotypic Behaviour in the Stabled Horse: Causes, Effects and Prevention without Compromising Horse Welfare - Springer

http://www.appliedanimalbehaviour.com/article/S0168-1591(00)00115-5/abstract

'Abstract
Stereotypies are repetitive, invariant behaviour patterns with no obvious goal or function. They seem to be restricted to captive animals, mentally ill or handicapped humans, and subjects given stimulant drugs. In this respect they are abnormal, although possibly the product of normal behavioural processes. Stereotypies are often associated with past or present sub-optimal aspects of the environment, and have been used as a welfare indicator. I


----------



## Smilie

Finally, if you don't wish to wade through the entire paper, the conclusion is note worthy

https://www.paardenwelzijnscheck.nl...pt & McDonnell (1993) Equine stereotypies.pdf


----------



## Smilie

Finally, if you don't wish to wade through the entire paper, the conclusion is note worthy

https://www.paardenwelzijnscheck.nl...pt & McDonnell (1993) Equine stereotypies.pdf


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

Smilie, for every article you find claiming stereotypic behaviors are entirely learned, there are others that claim a gentetic component as well. Gottatrot is right, there is no definitive proof one way or the other only people who lean one way or the other. My point is that given the lack of definitive proof one way or the other all possibilities need consideration. 

I tend to lean towards this view given the recent discoveries that in humans, much more about us is genetically predisposed than we ever suspected before. 

"It's a genetic predisposition to show stereotypic behavior," said Katherine Houpt, VMD, PhD, Diplomate ACVB, Cornell University. "To see whether a horse is likely to crib, see whether his sire or dam or half-siblings do it. Most horses that show one kind of stall vice will have relatives that show another." 

My horses are out on pasture pretty much 24/7, 365 because of our mild winters. Only the oldest and the youngest are stabled in bad weather, which amounts to maybe 7 days a year. The rest are allowed to decide if they would rather stand in the shelter or out in the elements. They also are not shod. 

Obviously I do believe in staying as close to their natural habits as possible though not because of trying to avoid stereotypic behaviors.


----------



## Foxhunter

Looking at _how_ many horses are stabled should be very important. A lot of stables I have been around are very enclosed, little light and often very small stables with hard floors and little bedding. 

Lack of natural light can cause depression and other mental illnesses in humans so why not in horses? 

horses like comfort, they will choose to lie down where the ground is softer. When, one summer, the ground was like concrete and I was show jump course building, I used the old bark peelings from the outdoor arena around each jump so the horses were landing on something soft. This was at least 9" deep. It made a big difference to how the horses were jumping, but what was interesting was how, when they were turned out in the filed and cattle too, they all chose to lay and roll on the peelings

Horses will lay down on hard surfaces when they have no other choice but if they have plenty of bedding they will do so more readily and for far longer. A horse lying down is a relaxed horse. 

When I brought the horses in if the weather was hot and flies bad, they would come in and within minutes be lying down flat out. They would get up and eat some hay then go back to bed. All stables had rubber but it was different in that it was 9" deep rubber chips with a membrane over the top. I then went back to deep bedding over this as I got fed up with them getting so dirty laying in their droppings and pee with only a 'splash' area of bedding. In the loose barn, half was deep littered, I only removed the droppings the rest was hard standing. They always lay on the bedding never the hard. 

I did read an article on feral horses not laying down much in long grass where it was softer and this was given as a reason for not needing much bedding, I say the reason was that predators can get to close stalking prey in long grass.


----------



## loosie

Hondo said:


> Well! I strongly disagree with you loosie! I think the recent discussion is part and parcel to the original topic. Very much in fact!.


What, even the lions & tigers & bears... oh my!


----------



## loosie

gottatrot said:


> Studies are showing that many mental illnesses can be traced to gene variations that are passed on. Bipolar, depression, schizophrenia, and OCD are some that show strong evidence of being genetically passed on.


Yes, I appreciate there are genetic factors(trying to deny it to myself, with a bipolar mother...:-|), but I think that 'environmental factors' are far & away more important & relevant to the issues of most 'mental illness', including the horse's coping behaviours/stress/illness. 



> So I would agree that most likely some horses are more predisposed to develop a mental problem, but stressors beyond what they can handle will in most cases make the problems appear. Even with a genetic predisposition, each individual will tolerate the stressors less or more.
> 
> But the way brains are, almost anyone can develop pathology under terrible circumstances.


Yep, exactly my point.


----------



## Foxhunter

Much research on equines - most of it at that, is all graded on the physical and rarely ever takes in the mental. 

A person who is of a hyper nature will generally have hyper dogs and horses, it rubs off on them. The anxiety passes from one to the other.


----------



## Hondo

loosie said:


> What, even the lions & tigers & bears... oh my!


Hee. No, I meant more recent than that. But the bears and lions were ok too. 

Thank you @Foxhunter for providing me with my mornings Google research project. 

This was my first article........

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blo...ers-and-their-dogs-have-similar-personalities


----------



## gottatrot

Foxhunter said:


> A person who is of a hyper nature will generally have hyper dogs and horses, it rubs off on them. The anxiety passes from one to the other.


Hmm....
Would this supposedly apply to all relationships with animals, people, etc or only dogs and horses?

I do not subscribe to this theory. I believe that anxiety _can_ create anxiety in another creature. But not necessarily. It all depends on the susceptibility of the creature. As someone little affected by anxiety or hyperactivity in others (my dad and brother are similar...genetic trait?), I am often surrounded by anxious or hyper humans and animals and it does not pass to me. 

It is my belief that people with personalities similar to myself are especially well suited to caring for hyper dogs and horses, because it does not affect us. Because of this, you may see people surrounded by hyper animals that are not themselves hyper. But those who believe that emotional states of owners always affect the emotional states of animals will be puzzled seeing how calm the owner is handling the hyper animal, and then conclude the owner has hidden anxiety or tension. So I've heard from more than a few who wanted to understand my hyper animals. In reality, I am drawn to these anxious creatures (even my husband is this way) because I feel I can help them.

I've also seen that people who are anxious and hyper may choose for themselves unflappable and calm animals. Otherwise it can be disastrous. So you may see hyper humans with especially mellow animals.


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

loosie said:


> Yes, I appreciate there are genetic factors(trying to deny it to myself, with a bipolar mother...:-|), but I think that 'environmental factors' are far & away more important & relevant to the issues of most 'mental illness', including the horse's coping behaviours/stress/illness.


Nature vs. Nurture is one of the oldest debates in psychology. There are those who were all about genetics (nature) and those who were all about environment (nurture). 

Those who were all about environment were called behaviorists and those who were all about genetics evolutionary psychology.

Both have a sordid past. Behaviorism taken to an extreme, had a tendency to fall into de-humanization (treating people and animals as inanimate objects) and Evolutionism in its extreme, tended toward sexism and racism. 

I always find irony in the fact that the study of what humans have done with their psychological “theories” as a school of thought, in and of itself can be a study in the psychology of human nature! Most psychologist these days are not purists.

I have used the term predisposed and I suspect you might be misunderstanding what I mean by that. From your statements, we actually agree on the premise though might disagree on the exact percentages of influence. 

A pre disposition as I am using it (and I believe as gottatrot is using it) only means that the possibilities for developing a condition are heightened and not a foregone certainty.

My husband’s grandfather died of prostate cancer, my FIL recently was diagnosed early with a prostate tumor and now my husband is being much more cautious about his vigilance of eating at least two large servings of leafy greens once a day. Will he too develop prostate cancer? His chances are significantly increased and thus he is making lifestyle changes that science currently believes will help avoid triggering the predisposition he has most likely inherited. 

Biologically, the brain is nothing more than another organ of the body made up of its own specialized cells. It is subject to the influences of things like diet and toxins; additionally, it is influenced by perception which is generally hard wired and the most difficult aspect of the thought process to change because it is so engrained. 

Perception is not at all unlike the processing unit inside of a computer. This is not to say that it cannot be rewired, that is why I am a Cognitivist and not an Evolutionist. I had a knack for being able to re-wire that part of the brain in people who needed it. 

Being adopted, the genetic influences upon the brain always fascinated me. 
My brother is my parent’s biological child. As a child he had my mother’s demure shyness and my father’s way of moving. I had neither. In every respect, I was the opposite of my parents and my brother. 

I was not told I was adopted until I was nearly 18 and yet, I had figured it out long before then; I just was so very different from everyone in my family, in every way that was observable (still am). I figured someone messed up at the hospital!

The concept that genetics plays a major role in perception is very evident when someone comments that Arabians or TB are more prone to nervousness than a Quarter Horse. The environments the horses are raised in can be similar but, still the Arabians and TB are more fundamentally sensitive over Quarter Horses (generally speaking) even when given the same environments.


----------



## Foxhunter

gottatrot said:


> Hmm....
> Would this supposedly apply to all relationships with animals, people, etc or only dogs and horses?
> 
> I do not subscribe to this theory. I believe that anxiety _can_ create anxiety in another creature. But not necessarily. It all depends on the susceptibility of the creature. As someone little affected by anxiety or hyperactivity in others (my dad and brother are similar...genetic trait?), I am often surrounded by anxious or hyper humans and animals and it does not pass to me.
> 
> 
> I've also seen that people who are anxious and hyper may choose for themselves unflappable and calm animals. Otherwise it can be disastrous. So you may see hyper humans with especially mellow animals.


It can work either way. An example of this would be my mother who was terrified of spiders. (To the point of standing on the loo seat for two hours because there was a large spider on the floor) As we spent a lot of time with her I could easily have become afraid of spiders but I saw Dad dealing with them and followed his example. 

I am basically lazy and, as being anxious, takes more energy than being laid back I choose being laid back!  I do know that it is not possible for all to be this way, it is a matter of nature and nurture. 

I have several people I help with their dogs. Most of these are Staffordshire Bull Terriers and known for fighting. They all pull on the leash, all the owners are worriers and expect the dogs to pull and fight. I prove that they will walk nicely on and off leash and that they can walk with the pack without fighting. Owner seemamd believe, they relax, learn to signals/body language and gain confidence so they are able to walk their dogs with confidence. 

I have seen people with horses that were totally the wrong mix and it can lead to disaster. I do agree that some people can be worriers and have a very laid back horse and I am sure that because the horse doesn't do anything untoward the owner learns to relax.


----------



## Smilie

Of course there is a genetic component, just like there is a genetic/cellular component, far as when a person's cells will mutate, under the exposure to carcinogen 
All things being equal, that dose not change the environmental factor that is a commonality, associated with either stereotypic behavior or the development of a cancer

There is a definite link to the formation of stereotypi behavior and confinement, with other factors, as in anything else, coming into play, including the individual tolerance of an animal, which can be hugely genetic

No one is advocating that we throw all stabling out the window, that the effects can't be mitigated both by individual tolerance of any particular horse, based on their genetics, by also providing regular turnout and exercise, by stable design itself by also considering feeding plans, ect, and thus AVOID asking a horse to adapt beyond the level he is capable of.
Again/horses have a high degree of ability to adapt, but we must not exceed their ability to do so.
Horses don't nee \toys' hung in stalls, but rather regular exercise and turn out, and then you avoid creating stereotypic behavior in most horses, except a very few, that genetically have a low threshold on being able to adapt
Using confinement correctly, is just as important of using R- correctly
Just like knowledge, enlightenment has evolved in training horses, so has management concerning feeding and housing
It is why we now have slow feeder hay nets, use a source of cool calories, versus hot calories, realize, not what shoing, but bad shoing does to hoof health, and why there is a growing knowledge that confinement, done incorrectly, too much, does indeed impact hoof health and development (dr Robert Bowker ) does affect digestive function and can impact the mental health of a horse
Having a genetic component, means nothing more the that particular horse is going to be stressed to the point of forming stereotypic behavior, where a horse with more adaptability/resilience will not, at that level, and can adapt, even be happy with stall time he is given.
Feeding programs, and other variables, as in anything, also come into play, but still does not change the fact that confinement, imposed beyond what ahore can adapt to, can cause him to form stereotypic behaviors, then then become perpetuated onto themselves, in many cases, when that original stress is removed
No one is trying to say not to have horse adapt to some conditions, like confinement, but to use it wisely, understanding the physical and mental impact possible
I know many situations, training facilities, operate on horses being stalled most of the time, for practical reasons, and in most cases, those horses that are high end competition horses, exercised regularly, are in a strict training program, have very good stable management, mostly avoid any negative fallout, but that is not true of many other horses stalled, who don't get any interaction with other horses, who mainly sit in that stall 24/7, maybe ridden once a week or so
I mean, I would be surprised, not in that horse developing a stable vise, but just accepting it as a fact in his life-completely contrary to the animal he evolved to be


----------



## Smilie

To summarize, esp since we now have temperament and genetics,involved, to disprove any connection of confinement < BEYOND ability to adapt, linked to the formation of STereotypi behavior

Of course, in any living being, there are other factors involved, esp genetics, and also, when talking of things like cancer, ability to withstand cell mutation, in presence of a carcinogen trigger.
In the case of predisposing genetic conditions, like depression, in my case,,which runs in my family, I am much more likely to suffer depression, subjected to something that would not induce it in someone like my husband, who has a more optimistic genetic background
All that genetic predispositions mean, is that when that individual is exposed to a stress, be it a carcinogen or something that affects his mental state, that individual who is through genetic inheritance, less able to withstand that challenge, will manifest symptoms
It does not negate the 'triggers. '


----------



## bsms

This is how I described Bandit's behavior a couple of days ago:

"_And I think Bandit will always be like that. Later, I went out to feed them, clean the corral, water, etc. After I gave them food, Bandit left his food and went to the north side of the corral to stare at something. I have no idea what. He was still staring, full alert, when I left 30 minutes later. A horse who leaves his food to others and stares for 30+ minutes straight isn't likely to turn into Mr Steady Eddie. Not soon.

Oh well. If I wanted Mr Steady Eddie, I guess I own the wrong horse."
_
I didn't make Bandit nervous. I was scooping poop, feeding, watering, etc. The other horses didn't make Bandit nervous. They never flicked an ear or raised their heads from their food. BANDIT was nervous. Enough so that he left his food, not caring if the others ate it, and was still watching intently when I left 30 minutes later. I even walked out in the direction he was staring - at nothing, that I could see. We were upwind of whatever he was looking for, so it wasn't smell and I doubt it was sound.

That is who he is. My riding won't remove his strong instinct for self-preservation, nor his alertness nor his will. At least, I hope not. Once in a while, I'd like to ride a horse who strolls. I rode Trooper on the trail a few weeks ago, and he strolls. Bandit looks. And listens. And smells.

It isn't how he is kept. His two corral mates are both much less intense. Cowboy has spunk, but he doesn't worry like Bandit. Trooper is laid-back, even though he is 3/4 Arabian. I'm told his dam was a very relaxed Arabian mare...they do exist.

If I want willing compliance, and even eagerness, then I need to work with who Bandit is and not try to make him be something he cannot be. He's become more willing to listen to me, but he won't stop thinking independently. If he did, it would mean I had failed, and failed badly.


----------



## Smilie

We , I think all know hroses have to be handled as individuals, based on their temperament, breeding, past history, and as re lated even to our own factors, in that regard.
Back to confinement, ans stereotypi behavior, , not excluding genetic predisposition to accept/tolerate confinement, without adverse effects

If only genetics were responsible, then in that given population, you would see an equal number of hroses developing stereotypic behavior, whether confined or not, and this is simply not so
There are horses, through genetic traits, less able to adapt to certain stressors
There is also management, that nullifies effects of confinement, where that horse has daily turnout, and even even ridden fairly hard, and also regularly, where he is also to'forage'' more naturally, given slow feeder hay nets, with same amount of hay, but taking longer to consume
There is also the fact of making a choice in the best interest of the horse. For instance, I have to weigh keeping Smilie drylotted for much of the year, against laminitis risk, turned out, and thus dry lott her. I do try and minimize that confinement, by exercising her regularly, using slow feeder hay nets, and , as now, when I just can't turn her out ;cold turkey', yet, do turn her out now , in afield where the grass is mostly brown, with a grazing muzzle, several hours each day
I know i tend to use cAncer as an example of genetics versus environment, having worked in that field.
If everyone had the same cellular susceptibility to a certain cancer trigger, be it a virus, a pesticide known to be carcinogenic , then every person exposed to that virus or that pesticide, at the same level, would develop cancer. This also is not so, but still indicates that one should perhaps avoid exposure, or a certain level of exposure
The studies on Stereotypic behavior development and confinement is no different.Of course genetics play a part, as does feeding programs, as to whether an individual horse can adapt to that confinement, and not be pushed into developing stereotypic behavior
This does not mean one then takes the message that horses should never be stalled/confined, but rather gives knowledge as how best to ensure stereotypic behavior does not result.
Stable management , turn out and exercise are huge in being able to confine horses, when needed, without any negative repercussions


----------



## Smilie

BSMS, I in the least, would ever say just management would then result in all horses being the same. Of course their is inheritance, and why many breeders put a great deal of empathizes on breeding horses whose parents have shown to have great minds, athletic ability, willingness, are either more reactive /sensitive or less, depending on what is desired of that horse
I call Charlie my 'watch horse', as when anything is going on around our place, she will be the first to notice and stare.. 
She will be that way, whether she has been stalled, or in turn out, BUT, if she was confined for an extended period of time, as when I am away, since I don't have my horse sitter handle her, she will be way more reactive then when she has been turned out regularly
You can't change genetics, but you can manage environment, much as possible, while still following doing with that horse what needs to be done, for him to work for you, in intended job, and also trying to minimize environmental stress that his genetic makeup has hard time coping with, beyond that certain level or 'adaptability


----------



## bsms

I can't imagine what Bandit would be like if he was stalled all the time. Maybe the same as he is. But I'm glad I don't have to find out!

I'd love to be able to turn my horses out on 5-10 acres of pasture. I think Bandit would love it. When we fed them last night, he was wet with sweat, and his chest was still quite warm. Not the other two, so I gather Bandit had been entertaining himself. He is capable of turning the corral into a sand storm. By himself.

As much as I would like to see him racing around freely, I just don't see it happening. Not on my budget. Not in Arizona. And my wife doesn't want to move to Utah.

But I understand the compromise. And when he is extra "aware" during the first 30-45 minutes of the ride, that is OK. He's giving me his best. If that means I ride with the stirrups a little longer than I'd otherwise choose, and maybe keep my free hand resting on the horn...it is OK.

What gets me upset is when people ignore the compromises being made, and blame the horse for their own management.


----------



## loosie

Reiningcatsanddogs said:


> I have used the term predisposed and I suspect you might be misunderstanding what I mean by that. From your statements, we actually agree on the premise though might disagree on the exact percentages of influence.


Yes, I get what you mean & agree thoroughly. Just there's no discounting the huge environmental 'side', was my point. Without being able to extricate that, just as you can't extricate genetics from the equation either, I don't see there's a way to be objective about percentages of influence between 'nature vs nurture'. That was my point. Yes, I don't get how anyone(who considers it all objectively, like science *should*) can be exclusionary/extreme about it.


----------



## Smilie

Nothing wrong with compromise, BSMS, as we all do that to some extent, with our horses, to do what do with them
I think most people that are informed with hoof dynamics, as per work by Dr Robert Bowker and others, agree that barefoot is best, IF POSSIBLE, but shoes as needed.\
We ask our horses to work on ground they are not adapted to, where they need added traction, where they don;t have the ability to adapt to ground they don't live on, where wear exceeds growth, or where therapeutic shoing can offer help where barefoot alone can'/t
A similar ideology exists with everything else we do with horses, far as knowing what is optimum, versus what is practical, and when you can, through knowledge of any demand of adaptation, to weigh the benefit, versus the negative, and also how to minimize any negativity/impact.
A large dry lott, for instance, to me is way better over stall confinement, and certainly better then turning a horse out on un limited grazing
Shoing a horse, short term, after acorrect trim, is better then insisting that horse work on ground where he is gimping along, because the owner is being barefoot Nazi
Horses evolved to being able to move, being a flight/prey species, They also evolved, unlike us, to be eating almost constantly, but not parked in front of a round bale of hay, or on lush pasture, but covering miles, feeding on medium quality forage ( nutritionally wise, not condition )
The development of the back of that foot, is closely related to movement, with many chronic conditions, like navicular syndrome, intimately linked to that movement, which developes the back of the foot
Horses secrete HCL constantly, not just at meal times, like us. Therefore, unlike us, they are not designed to eat several large meals only twice a day or so
The design of their GI track, makes movement closely related to efficient gut function
Their very nature as a flight/herd animal, makes the ability to interact with their own kind,, and the ability to move, very key
At the same time, because of domestication, we have taught horses to adapt a great deal from from they are 'naturally\
This works okay, for both us and the horse, done correctly, keeping in mind as to what he is designed to be, and how he is designed to function,, and with this knowledge, we simply try to not exceed his ability to adapt, beyond the level he is able to
Genetics play a huge role, far as how well a horse can adapt to anything, from confinement, to less then ideal hoof care, to training stress, ect. There will always be horses that easily adapt, horses that cannot adapt, esp beyond a certain level
The way they are asked to adapt, and to what level, is also critical.
Good stalling practice, combined with regular exercise, compensates for any negativity, just like good shoing, good thoughtful training, but it does not negate that optimum, while not practical, is wrong, if possible, nor that horses unable to adapt at a certain level, are somewhat mentally deficient
It is quite clear that confinement alone is linked to stereotypic behavior, as the same population of horses, with that genetic variability, do not show those stereotypic behaviors, when not confined, at least, no where near the same rate
That susceptibility, of course, in regulated by other variables, such as genetic predisposition, how that confinement is managed, far as exercise and turnout, isolation, interaction with other horses, ect
Does not change the fact that horses, ideally, do best, if allowed free turnout, but can adapt to restrictions from that ideal, both by habituation, genetic ability, feeding practices, exercise,ect
At times, obviously, stall rest is required , as for an injury. If you are going to show a horse, sure don;'t want to take one to a show, where he has to be stalled, and has never been taught to accept that!
For a horse, with no winter protection, or an aged horse, a stall can be a lifesaver
The bottom line, is much like that in regards to shoing, where it is stated that barefoot is best, but shoes if needed
Thus, turnout is best, if possible,but horses can adapt to confinement, if needed, and if done right, thus to never exceed their ability to adapt, has no negative impact
JUst like shoing, at times it is the better option/choice, over 'ideal, but that does not change as to what is ideal, if possible, based on the creature that the horse is
The threshold level, where horses can adapt, depends on both genetics , and how that demand for adaptation is done
'


----------



## Smilie

Nothing wrong with compromise, BSMS, as we all do that to some extent, with our horses, to do what do with them
I think most people that are informed with hoof dynamics, as per work by Dr Robert Bowker and others, agree that barefoot is best, IF POSSIBLE, but shoes as needed.\
We ask our horses to work on ground they are not adapted to, where they need added traction, where they don;t have the ability to adapt to ground they don't live on, where wear exceeds growth, or where therapeutic shoing can offer help where barefoot alone can'/t
A similar ideology exists with everything else we do with horses, far as knowing what is optimum, versus what is practical, and when you can, through knowledge of any demand of adaptation, to weigh the benefit, versus the negative, and also how to minimize any negativity/impact.
A large dry lott, for instance, to me is way better over stall confinement, and certainly better then turning a horse out on un limited grazing
Shoing a horse, short term, after acorrect trim, is better then insisting that horse work on ground where he is gimping along, because the owner is being barefoot Nazi
Horses evolved to being able to move, being a flight/prey species, They also evolved, unlike us, to be eating almost constantly, but not parked in front of a round bale of hay, or on lush pasture, but covering miles, feeding on medium quality forage ( nutritionally wise, not condition )
The development of the back of that foot, is closely related to movement, with many chronic conditions, like navicular syndrome, intimately linked to that movement, which developes the back of the foot
Horses secrete HCL constantly, not just at meal times, like us. Therefore, unlike us, they are not designed to eat several large meals only twice a day or so
The design of their GI track, makes movement closely related to efficient gut function
Their very nature as a flight/herd animal, makes the ability to interact with their own kind,, and the ability to move, very key
At the same time, because of domestication, we have taught horses to adapt a great deal from from they are 'naturally\
This works okay, for both us and the horse, done correctly, keeping in mind as to what he is designed to be, and how he is designed to function,, and with this knowledge, we simply try to not exceed his ability to adapt, beyond the level he is able to
Genetics play a huge role, far as how well a horse can adapt to anything, from confinement, to less then ideal hoof care, to training stress, ect. There will always be horses that easily adapt, horses that cannot adapt, esp beyond a certain level
The way they are asked to adapt, and to what level, is also critical.
Good stalling practice, combined with regular exercise, compensates for any negativity, just like good shoing, good thoughtful training, but it does not negate that optimum, while not practical, is wrong, if possible, nor that horses unable to adapt at a certain level, are somewhat mentally deficient
It is quite clear that confinement alone is linked to stereotypic behavior, as the same population of horses, with that genetic variability, do not show those stereotypic behaviors, when not confined, at least, no where near the same rate
That susceptibility, of course, in regulated by other variables, such as genetic predisposition, how that confinement is managed, far as exercise and turnout, isolation, interaction with other horses, ect
Does not change the fact that horses, ideally, do best, if allowed free turnout, but can adapt to restrictions from that ideal, both by habituation, genetic ability, feeding practices, exercise,ect
At times, obviously, stall rest is required , as for an injury. If you are going to show a horse, sure don;'t want to take one to a show, where he has to be stalled, and has never been taught to accept that!
For a horse, with no winter protection, or an aged horse, a stall can be a lifesaver
The bottom line, is much like that in regards to shoing, where it is stated that barefoot is best, but shoes if needed
Thus, turnout is best, if possible,but horses can adapt to confinement, if needed, and if done right, thus to never exceed their ability to adapt, has no negative impact
JUst like shoing, at times it is the better option/choice, over 'ideal, but that does not change as to what is ideal, if possible, based on the creature that the horse is
The threshold level, where horses can adapt, depends on both genetics , and how that demand for adaptation is done
'


----------



## Smilie

Sorry about the double posts, as something weird was going on!


----------



## gottatrot

Great stuff, Smilie.


----------



## Hondo

@Smilie Your post got me to thinking, particularly your belief about a dry lot being better than unlimited grazing.

My first thoughts were, "What about wild horses?", but you did cover that well later.

Then I thought about Thunder. Thunder is a wild stallion that has been running on the back side of the 28,000 acre ranch since I've been here. I saw and photographed him four times. 

He was in beautiful shape. About a month ago when a fence was down he found the herd and Molly who was in season.

He is now penned near the main ranch house after being lured into the pen with Molly.

His body is excellent as are his feet from the top. (not quite ready to pick them up)

The rest of the herd that wonders up and down 600 acres of river bottom with large areas of bermuda grass are fat. Hondo is also fat.

Thunder's forage was as described for wild horses. The times I saw him were in very scattered locations, 4-5 miles apart.

I have been thinking about a grazing muzzle for Hondo and your post is starting to seal that deal.

The 60 acre field he is in doesn't have much brush, is mostly cleared with bermuda grass.

I'll just leave it on during the day time with a breakaway halter, and I see him several times each day. And he's not shod at the moment so no danger of getting his foot hung in it.

He was thin when I got him but after clearing what the vet said was a very heavy worm load, I think he may have just been used to eating extra and has never slowed down.

Any opinions out there on grazing muzzles?


----------



## Foxhunter

I have nothing against grazing muzzles - better than letting them get laminitis.

The thing with wild/feral horses is that they will get overweight in the summer, then in a hard winter, be on the point of starvation.


----------



## Hondo

This seems like a good article with good fitting recommendations?

http://www.equisearch.com/content/content/8366/EQMay09Muzzles.pdf


----------



## Foxhunter

Very good article and I like the way the throatlash is keeping the sides from the cheekbone.

Out walking with the dogs this morning, I often walk over the Downs where we grazed the riding school ponies and as I look out to where the stables were, I get many good flashback memories. 

One thing I am sure of is that, even taking into consideration the way medicine, including diagnostics, has come along in leaps and bounds, there seem to be far, far more problems health wise and behavioural problems than there ever were back then. 

The riding school had about forty - fifty animals, quite a few private liveries, they all worked on average three hours a day six days a week. Most were cheapies bought with problems which were sorted out. Some had suffered laminitis but once sound they never had another attack. 

All were shod all the year round, a couple did have navicular but even with this they made it into their twenties. (Both of these were gift horses!) several of the ponies were well into their late twenties and fit and sound. 

As the area is very hilly they were fit working up and down the hills. In the summer when we had a lot of tourists, majority of them novices, we were busy but even so, no animal did more than four hours a day. 

All coming in for work had hay waiting for them and once they were brushed off and had their feet picked, received a hard feed, again they had more hard food at lunch time. With the small ponies it was mostly chaff with a few oats, bigger animals that usually did faster work, received more. The heavy horses had three feeds a day when they were working with the tourists even though they were mostly walking with a little trotting. 

The vet was only ever called if anything had had an accident and needed stitching or antibiotics. 

How things have changed! Mostly I think because back then there were true horsemen around, not so much nowadays.


----------



## Hondo

Sounds like the horses may have been exercised more back then. Too much sitting around is bad for any animal.

Just ordered a grazing muzzle. Also a pair of soak boots as neither horse likes the Easysoakers on the hinds. They are stiff and upright and push too hard on the back of the leg.

I have a light saddle in order to reduce the weight Hondo carries but he's carrying much more than the heaviest roping saddle with saddle bags due to being over weight. I'm at the point of abusing him.


----------



## Reiningcatsanddogs

One of the things that struck me when I moved from the upper mid-west, then to Florida and then to Central Texas hill country is the difference in the forage. Gone are the lush wet summer grasses of the north or even East Texas! Even the leaves on the native trees have very low moisture.

Usually round about June the grass begins to look like hay. Perhaps it is an adaptation to our semi-arid-desert climate that even when they are green and at their peak, there is very little in the way of moisture in the grasses here. 

The best way I can describe the difference is the grass here is not juicy. When you mow, it is almost dry. 

So while unlimited grazing in say Kentucky, Wisconsin or even Michigan might be a bad thing. Here, with our different, lower sugar and protein grasses, I don't see it is as big of an issue unless you have pastures that have been artificially cultivated with non-native species.


----------



## Foxhunter

On the Downlands which are mainly flint and chalk, the grasses, manly different fescues, do not grow more than a few inches in height. Also, as much has never seen a plough there are lots of wild flowers and herbs. The ponies thrived on it all. 

One area was ploughed some years ago and planted with wheat but crop yields were very low, partly because it is well drained, only a couple of inches of top soil so, when ploughed there was nothing to see bar flint! 

Back now to grass and although I can see some rye it has reverted to the fescues. The cows and calves that have been up there since April/May, are round and the calves have doubled in size. Apart from a magnesium lick they get nothing else. They are taken off for the winter and weaning. 

Majority of horse owners haven't a clue about what type of grasses and the sugar content of them, is.


----------



## bsms

In the early 80s, I worked some deer check stations for Utah. In the mountains, we had deer coming thru over 200 lbs. In the desert lowlands, some were dressing out at 60 lbs. And of course, the hunting season was timed for when the deer were their fattest! Many would die during the winter, and most were skin and bones by spring. 

Notice the lush green grass Bandit is gulping down (not!) shortly after coming down from northeastern Arizona:










Doesn't exactly look like "good eats" to me! Both Bandit and Cowboy will eat tumbleweeds and dried thistles. I suspect they both have been hungry enough in their lives to learn to eat what is available even if it isn't what most horses would consider acceptable feed...

I wonder if horse health problems are more common now because of how they are bred. We used to have "Quarter Horses". Now we have barrel racing horses, cutting-bred horses, reining horses, WP horses, etc. Race horses in the US seem to have been bred for racing at 3 years old.

**** Francis, a jockey before he became a writer, wrote a book about racing in the 50s. He described some of what they did based on the idea the horse wouldn't race forever, but become a hunter or a field horse. He believed a certain style fence was better for racing because it wold prepare the horse for real hedges after the horse retired from racing. Now, in the US, they race at 3 and then start breeding if successful - and are dumped if they are not. It is hard to imagine a breeder of thoroughbreds in the US worrying about how their legs will hold up at 15 or 20!

We also overdo vets, IMHO. When Trooper had an eye infection, we called out the vet. He's lucky I wasn't there, because I would have refused to pay the $%*^[email protected]#. The three horses got a look over, got their shots, but he refused to discuss Trooper's eye. Said we'd need to haul him in to an eye specialist to see if he was going to go blind or not. Wouldn't talk to my wife beyond that. I'd have told him to go to H E double L. My wife paid him.

So we kept his eye clean, used bacitracin from the store and the eye cleared up about a week later. If he loses sight in that eye, we'll still keep him. The eye specialist was going to charge $500 to tell me if Troop was likely to lose his eyesight - and if he does, it will be due to a condition that is not curable! So why tell me? Why charge me to tell me? We'll do our best by Trooper, and if he loses sight in that eye...he'll probably still be a decent riding horse.

Trooper's sire lost sight in one eye before dying from cancer. But if I cannot change it, then I might as well wait and see what happens. And if he loses one eye but still can live OK, then he will. He's earned his place here, even if he has never liked me.

I know people who have the vet out 4-6 times a year, treat their horses to massages (I've had one in my life), chiro. I had a massage lady come out once. She jabbed Mia with her thumb next to Mia's spine. Mia jumped sideways and looked startled at the "attack". The woman told me Mia obviously had bad back problems. I suggested I jab HER with my thumb, hard, next to the spine, and see if SHE would jump! Then I told her to leave. Immediately. I gather I offended her!

As she left, Mia stared at her, bewildered by the weird human - but glad to see her go, I think. We gave Mia a day off, then went back to riding. I guess I'm not a very good owner...

I guess I do the same with saddle fit, too. Good enough is good enough - for someone who rides 1-2 hours, doesn't work cattle, doesn't rope, doesn't race. I believe saddle fit is important, but I believe most horses can use one of 6-8 different saddle trees and be close enough, even for ranch work. And at the low level of riding (and low demand riding) I do...well, let's just say my horses may go a long time without me ever hiring a saddle fitter from Phoenix to drive a few hours to come see my horses!


----------



## Smilie

A vet, who is married to a well known reining trainer, and who specializes in equine lameness issues, does shock wave therapy, colic surgery , gave a talk once, on horses and longevity of soundness
One of his main point was that 'we' often no longer breed for longevity of soundness. Many hroses, be it race horses, cutting horses, reining horses, ect, are pushed towards major wins at an early age, and then retired for breeding, thus never tested for longevity of soundness
"we; also have more veterinary intervention available now, using new treatment methods to keep horses going, that would have been culled in the past, not being bale to stand up to a full day's work, day in and day out, in a time period that hroses were used beyond just in recreational pursuits
Horses form a strong skeletal system, by having the right amount of stress applied to that skeletal system, esp in the early growing years. 
It is a known fact, that when you select for just one or two traits, then some other traits are left behind over time
An example would be some top halter hroses in various breeds, where halter became so specialized, with those champions never tested under saddle, that the mind was not tested and traits were bred in that were contrary to soundness
This occurred not just in stock horses, with small feet, over muscled bunchy muscles, but also in breeds like Arabians, with that tea cup muzzle, extreme dish, and extreme level topline
Far as grass, we unfortunately live where grass is very rich, even in native pastures. Great for putting weight on cattle (yea, Alberta beef), but not so good for horses
When I have taken trips down to Arizona and Nevada, I always wondered at times, how cattle could even be raised there, and also visualize Smilie being able to enjoy turn out
Are our horses as healthy now, as in the past? Well, we can go back to a statement by Dr Sid Gustavson, and judge for ourselves
"the more veterinary intervention , needed in a given population of horses, the less healthy those horses" 
If alarge number of horses, in a population, needs to be on ulcer medication, needs therapeutic shoeing, needs ulcer medication, needs to work with anti inflammatories, etc, ect,the you are not practicing preventative medicine, but treating symptoms


----------



## Smilie

PHP:







Foxhunter said:


> I have nothing against grazing muzzles - better than letting them get laminitis.
> 
> The thing with wild/feral horses is that they will get overweight in the summer, then in a hard winter, be on the point of starvation.


Yes, this is a key point, far as wild horses avoiding esp spring laminitis
They loose weight during the winter, plus come into spring thin
We keep our horses in the same body score year around, so they have a lot less weight to gain in the spring, before being pushed over the edge
Many places where there are desert feral horses, those horses have to cover a lot of ground, for that daily forage and to get to water
I wish someone would do a laminitis study on our feral hroses.While they at times can have a tough winter, with deep crusty snow, difficult to paw through, they also have lots of rich grazing in the foothills area, that they share with cattle, who are on grazing leases and other wild animals
As I watch them run, when riding out there, I wonder if they all escape laminitis, or, if any horses that did develop laminitis, thus fell prey to the wolves, bears and cougars, thus did not pass on those genetics
Far as grazing muzzles, they are a great tool, on horses that don't learn to remove them!. They are not the only management tool I use, but allow me to give some grazing to different hroses, for different periods, versus locking them all up during certain times of the year, feeding them just hay, while we have abundant grass going to waste
I also use corral time, and portable electric fencing, to cut down pastures into smaller areas
Smilie is much happier, going out now for about five hours, with a grazing muzzle, then sitting in that corral , with a full feeder of hay available
(I only hang slow feeder hay nets, overnight, or if I am gone all day )


----------



## Hondo

You'd be surprised at the amount of natural grasses in the desert mountains of Arizona. And small springs galore. Desert mountain grasses are extremely nutritious.

I remember hiking in a So. Cal mountain desert region many many years ago and watching some burros grazing on distant hillside.

I was watching through binoculars and the animals were beautiful. Nothing at all like the pot bellied donkeys often seen as yard pets.

I could not see any forage on the ground and wondered what they were eating. As I approached closer they of course left.

When I got to where they were grazing I concluded they were eating rocks. That's all I saw except some tiny little things sticking out of the rocks.

One of the allures of the desert, to me, are the hidden canyons and springs and green grassy grazing areas that one would never expect to exist while driving down the macadam.


----------



## Smilie

Definitely agree that when you venture into any terrain, versus zooming down the highway, you get to see those places as they really are. 
Even on the few desert hikes I have been on, i came across fairly lush areas, but I do believe animals have to travel more to assess those, while here, they are virtually at their feet
For instance, many of our feral horses, descended from logging horses, that were set free, end of the century, and interbred with escaped ranch horses. Their draft heritage is often very easy to see
Many areas where they graze, were logged, then re seeded with a rick hay mix (alfalfa, clover, plus grass species. In the summer, those places are knee high in rich grass, with the hroses not needing to travel much
The fact that we have hard winters, is probably a good thing, as I am sure many more would founder, not loosing weight in the winter, due to both very cold conditions, and deep snow, where even if that grass is there, it takes major effort to reach it
Unfortunately, I can't watch and allow my horses that same 'natural process', of loosing weight in the winter, and will feed them hay , even when I know there is lots of forage under that snow.
Elk habitat has also been created, in the mountains, known as 'cut blocks' Since wild fires are now controlled, a lot of grazing land gets taken over by trees. Thus, some are logged, in strips, bottom of mountain slopes, then re seeded with rich grass.
I know my horses don't get used enough, but that is just reality of life. I have three personal hroses left, un willing to give up any one of them. Only I ride them, as they are not lesson or school horses. I can't even ride one of them, enough every day, let alone all three
Since I no longer show seriously at all, I also no longer 'need' to ride, when the weather is very cold, rainy, ect
Thus, best I can do, is ride each one,,not on the same day, except for rare occasions, but several times during the week.None get used as a horse should be,e except when we take them to the mountains for a few days
Thus, turnout for me, helps with that missing movement, if nothing else. When Smilie racec back and forth in that pasture, with Charlie, with that grazing muzzle on, it is better then just being in that drylott, on a day I have no time to exercise her
It is all on judgement, what you do with your horses, where you live, thus no absolutes
Right now, I just turned Smilie and Charlie out with grazing muzzles, cleaned their dry lott (anyone want a pile of good well rotted horse manure-free?? )
I have Carmen tied up in the barn, as she was out all night, and spends the day in the corral, except on nice days like today, and very unusual for NOv, in Alberta, I am going to ride her first.
Hopefully, , by around three or 4 PM, when I bring Charlie back in, I will hav etime to ride her briefly also. yes, not really enough to ahve horses in top condition, but one does what is possible
Smilie, I might put hoofboots on tormorrow, and take on ashort ride


----------



## Hondo

Smilie said:


> Thus, best I can do, is ride each one,,not on the same day, except for rare occasions, but several times during the week.


Ride one pony two? I enjoy having another horse along. Packing or not.


----------



## Smilie

Hondo said:


> Ride one pony two? I enjoy having another horse along. Packing or not.


Yes, I thought of that, and is a solution on some days, but I also like to ride them all out by themselves
I used to pony horses a lot, both conditioning young horses, and also on pack trips
Only time I have done it lately, is on that fall camping trip this year. Hubby is pretty much done riding now, after two long days, so both when we get there, and he sets up camp, and on the day we leave, while he takes that camp down, I ride Carmen and pony his horse, on a short ride, for exercise
Works for both of us, as hubby relaxes in camp, packs things up, after I help him take the tent down, and I get to ride in stillness, with just the two horses, before heading home
Somehow I just don't feel like ponying horses down the gravel road at home, or across the crop fields, where I can ride now.
I do wish I did not need to haul, to get to nice trails like you.!

Some of our feral horses, enjoying grass





you can see the draft influence in this stud



Taking the two horses for a ride, last morning. Rubix had not really been ponied, thus I ran the lead shank over his pole, and he learned to come along , without pulling on my arm , LOl


----------



## Smilie

oh, and Smilie with her grazing muzzle. It is the type that goes on a break away halter
It does take horses alittle time to get used to them, as at first they give you the 'I, can't eat, please take it off!'


----------



## gottatrot

This guy's back looks hard to saddle. I don't think ease of saddling is something feral horses naturally select for.


----------



## Smilie

gottatrot said:


> This guy's back looks hard to saddle. I don't think ease of saddling is something feral horses naturally select for.


You are right on that point, as carrying a rider is not something that has been in their family tradition, nor needed. Note the bone and feet size
Ranchers that do capture some of these Wildies and use them as ranch horses, find that they cross muskeg better then domestic raised horses
Some have also been caught and used as bucking stock, where not making it easy for a rider to sit on them, a plus!
Bet he could still pull,. like some of the logging horses that he descended from!


----------

