The Art of Natural Dressage

Hi Leah,

Regarding the gut feeling of not riding your horse... that was exactly what I was trying to explain to Jo

That makes you an excellent friend for one, an excellent caretaker for two, and could very well make your horse decide (amongst other things) that you could be that excellent guide and leader, where she needs one

@ Brenda, thanks for the info

_________________
www.equusuniversalis.com

After all these posts what I understand is that most of us see a difference between the "role" of leader, which is temporary and the "position" of leader, which is permanent. Most of us would recognize the importance of switching roles of who is leader and who is follower depending on the situation. I liked Josepha's example of visiting a foreign country and having a friend show us around. It might be the closest analogy to the human world vs. horse world situation we can find.
Depending on the definition of the word "dominance" one could make the same kind of distinction.

I think this is very perfect advice....... and added together with this seems to provide a recipe for cooking up the perfect brew! Sue

_________________

I have not sought the horse of bits, bridles, saddles and shackles,
But the horse of the wind, the horse of freedom, the horse of the dream. [Robert Vavra]

I appreciate this thread.

My conclusions are around 'seeking guidance when in the foreign land of horses' in order to better understand their social values and social rules.

I am trying not to be a rude visitor!!!!!

Taking clues from what others have discovered and seeking clues from the horses themselves I am taking care of my own projection; clearly that has been one of the biggest sleights upon the horse - that of fitting the horse into the method or pattern that the human has decided upon and then using their responses/reactions to explain away the effectiveness of the method.

I am still finding our feet in the social rules that I work around with my 2 horses specifically within the training and appreciate hugely this discussion.

x

_________________
To put down everything I think I know about horses and to listen!

wow, there are so many interesting points (and views). I feel I must take a few minutes and add my 2 cents worth.
In my opinion, there are two ways to see this: either we wait until the horse decides (if he decides) we are worthy of their leadership or (2) we try to move things faster but never forgetting to respect the horse.
I see this like educating a child. A child has to have a leader (or parent).

when training, I never use pressure, I ask the horse to mimick me. But, when dealing with day to day things:some horses are obedient all the time. They don't need pressure to ask to turn their hind, or back up because you need to pick up something underneath them. While others, are a little more stubborn and will test you. And yes, Magik does test me in a playful way though.

I used to do Parelli and hated doing phase 4. But phase 1-2 is not at all painful. To me, it's like holding a person by the hand and saying come over here. I will never use phase 3-4 in a physical way. But... if my horse tries to bite me because he's playful, I will show him (body language) that I don't approve and will shout "no". Then I leave stomping my feet. this is my phase 4. It works for me because they both will follow me as I'm leaving as if to say "are you ok??

So to me, especially since I haven't been around horses very long, I don't have all the knowledge necessary so that the horses only have to look at me to understand what I want. They have learnt to mimick me but when it's play time, Corado understands he shouldn't bite or kick me (even though he does that with Magik since he's the dominant one) but Magik bit my boyfriend yesterday cuz we were putting our attention on Corado and I guess he wasn't happy about that. I only found out an hour later. So I have to see how he reacts in the next few days and teach him not to bite. He doesn't bite me but one day he may bite a child. So tonight we'll do the same and if Magik "tries" to bite, I'll ask René to do as I do : show an angry face, point at him and "shout no" and leave agressively. I hope it works. If not, well, we'll try something else.

Anyways, enough about my story, bottom line, to me pressure has to be used but it shouldn't be physical.
Jocelyne

_________________
Jocelyne
[Hug your animals everyday. You never know!

Jocelyn, this sentence made me think a lot this morning.
I have brought the analogy to child raising myself in another post saying that my animals are more like junior members of my family than like my friends to me. Both analogies of course don't fit 100 % but for me family was closer than friend. When I read your post I realized that the word "obedience" doesn't quite fit for me. Even in raising our daughter obedience is very rarely an issue, not because she is naturally obedient, but because I very rarelyfeel the need to expect it. I see obedience as an act of submitting to my decision, even when she disagrees and my explanations why she needs to do somthing don't make sense to her. This is usually when I need to protect her from something (don't ride without a helmet, don't give your cell phone number to strangers etc.). With horses and dogs the term "obedience" seems to fit less. For instance I teach what many in this country call "dog obedience" but never use that term, because only about 2% of it is about obedience, the rest is about teaching owners to be able to read their animals, learn to teach their animals their own language in positive ways and learn to condition, feed and exercise their animals in a natural way that will result in physically and emotionally healthy animals. Even when I do aggressive dog consultations the word obedience is never used, because the word obedience implies an action on the part of the animal that is not a result of instinct, a conscious choice. Obedience is to me the opposite of defiance.
Defiance is the conscious choice not to do what is asked. With animals that just does not apply very often, and when it does it is not always relevant. So I'm wondering if horses that are "obedient all the time" as opposed to being laid back and easygoing by nature, have been trained with a lot of force and did not have the choice to communicate when they could or would not be comfortable doing something. Just my opinion.

I have found over time, that in forums there is always some question of semantics...especially across varying language bases and varying translations from one language to another. So I rarely take issue with the use of a single word and look instead at all the text surrounding it. A word that means one thing to me, may mean something slightly different to another.

So I understand (I think) what Jocelyn means...not obedience in terms of anything strict - boundaries that one dare not cross, strict rules and you obey or else, or even proof that it was arrived at by previous abuse...but more in terms of natural biddability...compliance. Some horses are naturally more biddable and compliant than others. Some naturally have more trust built in...which has indeed never been taken for granted, and so that trust and quietness remains a big part of their nature.

They say that wild animals living in the Galapagos Islands, that have never been hunted by humans (or any other large predator), are really very approachable and trusting.

I can of course be totally wrong!

_________________
"Ride reverently, as if each step is the axis on which the earth revolves"

Karen, I agree.. I think! It's so hard to be EXACT enough in language that everyone is going to take the same meaning that you have in mind, and recreate for themselves the picture that you are seeing. It's so wonderful to share all our ideas here, and for me, bottom line is, that I want to trust that NOBODY is wrong.. or doing something that I would find ethically less desirable in this context.

So, when someone here says something, or uses a word that brings up certain more negative connotations for me, I try to leave a lot of space in my interpretation, and look for the most positive way of understanding it.

(I've had a lot of practice at this, being in a cross-cultural marriage, where we both have major deficits in the other's language... We have learnt that we MUST always take for granted the other's positive intentions, even when the words sound all wrong. ...if we want to stay married )

I wholeheartedly agree with what you are saying regards obedience and training Birgit! What I intuit from Jocelyn's writing, is that she is applying this request for "obedience" to things regarding her personal rights.. not to requests that she wants to make to the horse for self-centred purposes. For me, there is a big difference between the expectation that A: The horse MUST NOT run over me when she gets a fright and needs to gallop, and B: The horse MUST NOT refuse to trot when I ask for a walk to trot transition for example.

I think a similar distinction occurs within our family, between family members. It's about boundaries, understanding " is this my problem, is this my right, am I impinging on another's rights in my request?".

I've been thinking about this a bit lately. If we have been around horses for a long time, or are natural leaders, or project personal boundaries clearly etc etc, then changing over to or beginning with more passive and empathetic styles of horsemanship can present few problems, in terms of our own safety and protection of rights. We can forgo ALL insistence, and have little risk of being put in danger by our horses actions, as they begin to experiment with their freedom of choice.

It can be easy to forget that others may have much more trouble with this, as we take it for granted that the kind and mutually respectful, considerate, safe way that our horses apparently naturally behave with us is the same as what everyone experiences.

Lately I've had a few examples of the kinds of troubles people have with perfectly nice and "well mannered" horses, when they DON"T already have that innate knowledge of how to handle THEMSELVES around horses.. when they don't have good personal boundaries, when they don't know WHEN to say "stop".. and then don't know HOW to say "stop" in a way that fits in with their commitment to do no harm and not impinge on their horses rights..... when they don't naturally handle THEMSELVES in a way that the horses recognize and respect as being confident, assertive, high status, impartial or friendly....when they are not aware of what's going on from a horses perspective, and are taken by surprise by events, so that they are not prepared and not able to convey a personal projection that will keep themselves out of harm.

What constitutes leadership, what actions bestow high status upon individuals, what are our own needs in terms of personal boundaries, how do we project our expectations about boundaries clearly, what is the distinction between assertiveness and aggressiveness.. What ARE our rights, and how do we get more clear about drawing the line between protecting our rights, and allowing our horses their rights as well, what can we do to protect ourselves if we ARE at risk - these are all issues that I feel I need to be aware of, and be able to discuss with my students, and coach them in, EVEN WHEN THEY ARE CHOOSING TO INTERACT WITH THEIR HORSES IN A COMPLETELY POSITIVE WAY.. as most of my students are now..

To make sure that they are safe in their initial interactions with horses, EVEN BEFORE they build up the common repertoire of language and understanding that will enable them to allow almost complete freedom of will from the horse they are working with.. they need to be able to stay safe. (Unless they are going to do it the CT way and simply stay behind a barrier until the neccessary training has occured.

They need some basics just to BE with the horse. They need, possibly, "Don't steal the food off me!" "Don't bite me or aggress me in any way for food" "STOP! Don't come any closer at this moment!" "Take a step back" "Stand away from my feet." "Move away from me" "Turn your hindquarters away from me" as fairly absolutes I think. Perhaps you could call it "obedience".

I've watched the bruises occur to people when they DON"T project themselves as having the right to make these demands, don't know HOW to make the demands, or actually INVITE the transgressions, through inappropriate boundaries, or inawareness of body language.

There are ways of doing this (or avoiding potential risk situations altogether) that are effective but impinge on the horses' rights to self-determination in the least possible measure, and I think that many of us who've had more experience can take these skills for granted, and forget that for others they are skills, or personal qualities, that may need to be learnt, discussed and practiced, just as much as the skills of applying R+ training. It's not all about experience- it's about personal qualities too. I've had students who have a certain quality of self assurance about them, and clear boundaries, who have never been around horses before, but who can safely come inside our small paddock with eight horses milling around, and not be at any risk of being run over, stood on, pushed. Then others, who already have a horse of their own, which they've trained through r+ or traditional methods to be safely handled, interact with our horses, and have been in danger of being trampled, pushed over, bitten, run into or stood on... some of them leave with bruises.

Sounds like my horses are AWFUL when I put it like this! But they're not.. in almost all cases, they aren't intending harm.. It's miscommunication. For example.. Person doesn't have strong boundary in place about proximity, and doesn't signal to the horse when he or she is beginning to feel uncomfortable about the horse's nearness.. feels overawed,frightened.. takes a step backwards, which invites the horse to move closer.. horse ends up standing on a foot etc etc.

So for me, having an understanding of 1: leadership in a horse herd, how it is attained, how it is demonstrated, how it is maintained, without aggression 2: high status in a horse herd... what is it, how is it attained, etc 3: Personal boundaries - what feels okay for me, and how and when will I signal that my boundaries are being approached. 4: Body language. What kind of body language portrays confidence, assertiveness,combined with lack of aggressive intention. 5: Natural cues. What are the natural cues that a horse will understand to have certain meaning, with relation to proximity and direction, so that they can understand what I expect, when I need to address boundary issues, and make polite requests.... is very important.

I know, everything can be trained with CT.. but sometimes, we just don't want to take the time it takes standing behind a barrier while we learn it.. we WANT to interact with our horses, scratch butts, stroke necks, wander round and spend time together. Or, we're in a situation where we work with untrained horses, in a professional way, as a hooftrimmer, masseuse etc. .. For me, there are situations where CT does not provide the all, or the only, answers, but is best used in tandem with an understanding of horse behaviour, psychology, and personal leadership qualities.

There are also times when I want to know that a horse IS going to respond without question.. "DON"T RUN ME DOWN>> STOP OR GO AROUND ME!............ This could be called "obedience" perhaps.. but really, it's more about MY behaviour, than what I expect from the horses behaviour.

Does that make any sense.. possible getting a little off track here....

Cheers,
Sue

_________________


I have not sought the horse of bits, bridles, saddles and shackles,

But the horse of the wind, the horse of freedom, the horse of the dream. [Robert Vavra]

Oh.. just to clarify.. I didn't mean to imply that I think these things couldn't or shouldn't be trained with CT.. .. just that however they are trained, they need to be really reliable behaviours for someone who doesn't yet have this innate quality around horses.. reliable enough that it could be bordering on "obedience". And personally, I don't feel comfortable with teaching people to use food as a reinforcer until they do have their own boundaries and understanding clear.

Sue

_________________


I have not sought the horse of bits, bridles, saddles and shackles,

But the horse of the wind, the horse of freedom, the horse of the dream. [Robert Vavra]

We have the same here. I have many children on my winter pastures and some of them just don´t have the feeling or experience to communicate with horses in a productive way so that the horse will want to cooperate and accept boundaries. Still I need them to be safe and not to be run over by Summy or Pia.

I myself prefer to use positive reinforcement to work on those behaviours (like not running people over etc.), BUT the thing is that I CAN. I know how to positively motivate a horse to stay safe. I can not expect the same of a five year old child, though. I know exactly how to give treats to Summy, how long to wait, in what situation to reinforce and all this, so we can fairly well sort it out without pressure and negative reinforcement. But when I imagine some of the kids come to the pasture with a bag full of treats (or even a piece of cake for themselves without any intention to interact with Summy as I don´t let the kids train with the horses alone as long as they can´t handle treats safely) and no possibility to MAKE Summy go away, I am sure that it would not take long until something happens.

So for me it is of vital importance that the kids can protect themselves even though they can´t handle treats yet. I do allow them to carry a stick or a rope and swing it to make the horses go away. They can also throw snowballs or whatever it takes to get the horses out of their personal space. They can not follow the horses and chase them or do any training in a pressury way though and the amount of things they can do (alone) with the horses is very limited as long as they can´t properly communicate with the horses yet. They can also not invite the horses for training as long as it is not totally clear that they won´t give contradicting signals (like running away when the horse comes eventually), but those general safety things just HAVE TO work, no matter how good the child is expressing himself.

I don´t see this as leadership though, but as basic rules that apply for everyone (the children are also not allowed to push the horses around or move into their personal space when the horses don´t want it) and that are just mandatory, even if the child can´t effectively work with treats yet.

I was just having a discussion with our farrier this morning about this issue.
I told him about having used a lot of positive reinforcement lately to encourage my horse to be a little more active and creative than she naturally is. His response was that he thought I could get away with doing that because I have good enough timing, but that 90% or more of the horse owners that he trims for would be mugged, and eventually, seriously bullied by their horses. We then talked about using negative reinforcement or pressure and realized that it takes good timing to be effective and safe to use as well. He gave a wonderful example of watching Tom Dorrance handle a very aggressive gelding at the age of 83 years old. Tom Dorrance was not at all a big guy, but had been around hundreds of horses all his life. He was so good at reading this horse's body language that when the gelding went into an all-out attack on him, he only needed to take two small steps sideways and let the horse get hit by his lariat once for getting in his personal space very aggressively. Several hours later this horse that nobody could even halter was ridden by him and was relaxed. I'm telling this story because to me it was a perfect example of how leadership (or dominance, or boundary setting, whichever you would call it) can be so simple for someone who is kind and who has watched horse body language all their life. The important question for me is how to teach horsemanship to the huge majority of people like me, who are either not naturally gifted, or have simply not learned early in life to read horses. For me personally part of the answer was to get an easygoing horse as a first horse that is not too sensitive, very forgiving, relaxed and without preexisting pain issues or behavior problems. Dominant or very active horses (or dogs ) are just too challenging for beginners.
Unfortunately in our area almost everyone ends up getting very young, untrained horses because they are cheap and then does not even bother to get riding or training lessons. You can guess what happens to the horses involved when those people get hurt.

Yes, yes yes!! Regardless of whether you use negative or positive reinforcement, you are still going to need to read the horse, and then apply leadership/high status/ boundary setting.. whatever you're going to call it.. And this is the question that really interests me too: how to teach to those who are not naturally gifted, or who have not learnt already how to read horses.

Sounds like your horse really is the gem she looks! We have one like that too.. Footprint..and Footprint helps me out teaching the skills to others.

Nice story of Tom Dorrance. I think that it IS possible to develop these skills and qualities later in life, and being conciously aware of ourselves, our communication, and how it is perceived by the horse, is a big part of it.

I totally see this kind of bottom line clarity with boundary setting, personal safety and rights without aggression, as being very tied in with leadership issues. I was in the business of training people for leadership of PEOPLE for many years. I know that qualities and skills (either innate or learned) such as clear boundaries, effective communication, ability to motivate others through R+ and personal example, self esteem, self-assurance, assertiveness without aggression, honesty/integrity/transparency, recognition of others rights, listening skills, ability to read others behavior, are the things that cause a person to be perceived as a natural leader, someone who others choose to follow.

My observation is that this applies in a very similar way with horses. People who I observe to have these skills and qualities, with or without experience with horses, can for example, take a loose hold on Footprints halter rope and invite her to go for walk with them, and she will (in a normal situation) happily and trustingly follow. (Someone who is just "strong" can also get her to walk with them.. but she will not be happy about it.. her blue eye will be hard and round, compared to the way is is soft and almond shaped when she agrees willingly.)

Others who do not yet demonstrate these skills and qualities, can invite in exactly the same way, and Footprint will politely say "no thanks" with a turn of her head, and planting of her feet.

Something as simple as the way that we breathe can have a huge influence over others perception of us as a leader, or the way that we stand, or how we look at them as we talk, or the inflections we use in our speech. These things can all be learnt and practiced. And I think that although there are some obvious differences between humans and horses, there are more similarities than disparities.

If I take that second person, and help them to be more concious of the way that their behaviours are perceived, within a few minutes, Footprint's trust in them as a person to be potentially followed can be increased dramatically.. regardless of CT.

And even if that person uses CT, unless they change the way they project themselves, Footprint will STILL say, "No thanks, I'd rather not go for a walk with you" ..although she'll happily back up, or lift her foot, or walk sideways for carrot pieces!

Cheers,
Sue

_________________


I have not sought the horse of bits, bridles, saddles and shackles,

But the horse of the wind, the horse of freedom, the horse of the dream. [Robert Vavra]

I think so, too, because, as you said, there are so many similarities between leadership among people and people-horse relationships. I've done some reading about leadership development in people, too, and have found it similar enough to animals. It depends more if someone truly wants to invest in learning this, it takes time, and it takes the willingness to deeply care about and invest in another (person or animal).

Hi Birgit,

oh, I completely agree with you about the importance of those skills. There is one thing that I feel like I don´t quite understand and that is the role of the leadership concept in there. To me it sounds like a high level of skill in communicating or interacting in general, involving clarity, precision and self-confidence, among other things. Personally I am also drawn to people who act like that, but still I don´t necessarily feel that they are my leaders.

I do believe that those communication skills are the basis of good leadership, if you wish to see it as a part of the game, but in those situations where a horse becomes less aggressive, decides to go with the human and others, do you see leadership as a necessary part of the explanation for that? Or if not necessary, then maybe helpful? In what way? Just curious.

Warm Regards,
Romy

Hi Romy,
I'm sick at the moment so will just answer briefly before going back to bed. Hopefully I will get to think about this a little more and come up with a better answer (or maybe someone else will) because I do think this is important somehow, at a deeper level than I might have been aware of.
Usually when I use the word leader I mean something very simple and practical, for instance I might say something like: I went on a trail ride with 3 people and we took turns being the leader. In this case it would simply describe who is in front and who is behind if we have to ride single-file. In this case being a leader and following a leader is a choice that is made for a short period of time. There is a game that is called, "follow the leader" which is great for groups of children who need to learn to become more self-confident. They have the chance to lead an activitiy for a few moments and all the other children follow. All the children get a chance to be the leader.
I just thought about how much of this might be a language thing, too. The English word "leader" to me has mostly positive or at least neutral associations. When a negative style of leadership is implied in many situations I would often use other words, maybe guru, head, boss,
In German I remember that there are 2 words that I remember, the one is "Fuehrer", the other is "Leiter". There are probably more that are not in my active vocabulary any more. When I hear the word "Fuehrer" Hitler comes to mind, so this word carries a very negative meaning for me although it can also be used positively as in "Reisefuehrer" (travel guide).
I just got curious and gave my father in Germany a call and he agreed roughly with my perception of the words. He also told me that the English word "coach" is very commonly used in German in a sense that is not limited to sports but includes emotional well-being. I guess I see myself as my horse's coach in some areas, like developing her physically and encouraging her creative side. I use the word leader in a very similar way: to come alongside and help and encourage. The word leader implies for me in a stronger way the change of roles, like someone mentioned earlier, the horse leads when we are on her territory that she knows more about, I lead when we are on my territory where I know more and are more comfortable.
Another analogy that comes to mind: I pick leaders for myself on this forum and among the horse community for different areas of learning. I submit myself (expose myself and try out) to the ideas and examples of different people that I want to learn from. I might see one person a leader in the area of jumping, another in their use of body language, another in their ability to read horses, another on issues of saddle fit, another in the area of teaching riding, another on issues of horse health etc.
Well, that was quite a brainstorming session for me, , I love exploring these concepts here, because this is such an international group with so many different perspectives.