The Art of Natural Dressage

Hey everyone!

Kate -- first, you totally cracked me up with:


I argue with myself all the time!!! I'm with you!

I think this is a fabulous conversation and I see the differences in our approaches, if/when they arise, as subtle colorings and shadings based on our personalities, our horses' personalities, our goals, our life experiences coming into the process shaping how we make meaning, etc. I think there is a lot of both/and here -- multiple ways of making things work that flow not only session by session, but moment by moment in our time with our horses.

I think these are nuances and points of entry -- I agree with everything that's been said (I think I can say that unilaterally!) -- I just find it really fascinating about how we come at this differently, and how beautifully it can work with these different approaches.

So, for example, Brenda uses the clarity and discipline of a behavioral approach to reach this extraordinary communication and relationship with Lucy and Jack.

Romy, as someone who works in the psychological field, is committed to being in the moment with her guys, and as a result of that work has these amazing psychological insights and connections that come through doing and experiencing.

And I get, often, to the doing and experiencing from the psychology -- not unilaterally, but we definitely work from "feel" -- emotional feel, energetic feel, etc. as I try to suss out what we're going to do and how we're connecting with each other. (For me, this is balanced by a big "in the body" connection, too -- pretty much pure physicality -- so this is A way I come at it, not THE way...it just is, I think, my default approach, if that makes sense...)

Kate wrote:


This makes total sense to me! (And I can far too easily get to the cranky bits still, too. ) I just come at it a little differently -- for me, the why's are really important for me to figure out as a starting place -- for both me and my horses. But I absolutely get the strength of being exceedingly disciplined about working behaviorally -- it is so clear about this stuff!

What's coming through for me as a commonalty in all of this is a commitment to working from a truly horse-centered perspective. I think that's at the heart of what everyone is doing and/or working towards, and the slightly different approaches just reflect both our strengths and what we're learning and/or getting past about ourselves...

And Karen, loved your post, too! I think horses have rich, complicated emotional lives. And I think they think all the time -- I don't think their worlds are only instinct.

And I love what you wrote that Kate pulled out:



That's the balance I'm always trying to dance as well! Beautifully said!

Thanks everybody!

_________________
"Ours is the portal of hope. Come as you are." -- Rumi
www.imaginalinstitute.com

I agree, and I can't help but think about how this discussion would be different if there were more guys involved. OK, OK, yes I'm stereotyping, and I should know better, but I'm having fun with this at the moment. Someone, wish I could remember the name, put this thing on youtube describing men's brains as a bunch of little boxes next to each other that don't touch at all, women's brains as a ball of wire where everything is connected with everything else. Of course my own mind seems to go back and forth a lot. In my mind I keep engaging and disengaging from this discussion because I find it fascinating at one moment (not messy enough) and frustrating at another to speculate about all this stuff instead of just staying with behavior modification which keeps things so simple by comparison.
Right now the question that fascinates me the most is what motivates humans to be with horses or other animals, try to control horses, ride horses, play with horses, invest in the well-being of horses. It would seem more logical that humans prefer their own kind, when given the choice, just like most animals do.

Kate, I think you explained yourself really well.. This is something I think too.. If we want to define animals actions simply in terms of behavioural theory, we can do the same for human behavior. Human ethics and morals can also be seen as what works and what has been reinforced over the millenia. But what a richness we would lose!

For me, anthropomorphism is no worse than anthropocentrism. But.. I strongly agree with Leigh's (?) point that it's crucial when looking at animals feelings and thoughts, that we do so from the ANIMAL's perspective.. that we try as much as possible to not apply our own frame of reference to what the animal may be experiencing.



oh yes, Leigh, me too me too! The messier and mashier the better! I find that it's thinking in this way that helps me to decide WHAT to teach.. when, why.. This has implications in moral issues.

Kate, I thought yu made a really good point with your separation anxiety example. If we looked at that from only a behaviour and training perspective, we could decide to use R+ to modify the behaviour.. to teach the horse to accept his new solo living situation. But that would be overriding the horses real needs.

Another example is a horse who is not picking up his feet well for trimming. If we look at this only from a behavioral aspect, we may train the horse to accept having his hooves lifted and trimmed more willingly, but miss the fact that the actual trimming is giving him ongoing discomfort. I've found this over and over again with horses who don't like to pick up their feet.. sometimes the reason is just poor training, or past negative experiences, but often there's a REAL reason in the NOW.

Who was it that said " When your best tool is a hammer, it can seem that every problem can be best solved with a nail"?

So for me, having an understanding of the basis of normal horse behaviour and psycholgy, and understanding the horse as a being with his own rich life of feelings, thoughts, desires, helps us to make decisions about in WHICH WAYS we choose to modify behaviour.

The question "what is for the best of my horse" is always part of the training decision, So then to the formula:

, we can also ask, "can I see this from the horses perspective, so that I may make a good decision about whether to change the enviroment or conditions, or change the horses behviour. Brenda, I know that this is what you do for your guys, probably without even needing to think about it. And this is what PREVENT your horses from behaving like robots i think.. even though your training is sooooo skilful that I'm sure you could get robot impersonations out of them if you wanted!

For me, that forumula can often be a great place to start..I've been training myself to apply it better wtih Brenda's help ( ) ...I've also had problems in the past with my emotional in the moment reactions Kate.. so using this kind of simple analysis really helps me to do the right thing without so much room for emotional confusion and (my) misbehaviour.

Something that I'm noticing more and more though, as i develop my skills, and learn to better separate out non-useful emotinoal responses, is that using the different models to think about the same problem, more often brings me to the same result.



As an example, Sunrise has kicked me a couple of times recently. What happened before it, what happened after it? Before it, she was trotting towards the ball and got in front of me. After it, I stopped our play and walked away. She immediately became less happy looking and didn't offer to trt after the ball any more. So.. The behaviour kicked me. Because i was in a position to be kicked. I can reinforce the opposite behaviour of NoT kicking me when I'm in that position behind her. okay.. simple, and I don't need to understand her motives or feelings.. just concentrate on the behaviour, and I will solve the immediate problem.

But if I look at it more globally, and try to understand the underlying reasons for the behaviour, FRoM HER PERSPECTIVE, I can also reach the same conclusion about how to solve the behaviour, and learn somethings that might help me to improve her quality of life as well... and maybe even make me a better person.

So, in that example, I can ask myself to look at the patterns, see what I can pick up from Sunrise's feelings, and discover what might be her reason for kicking me. From that empathetic starting point, I would also decide my first action; Sunrise sometimes feels uncomfortable when I am behind her in this position. I will make this behaviour more pleasant for her. I can provide more positive reinforcement for her at this particular point, but I can also figure out what in particular is causing her to experience discomfort.

Am I carrying a stick, and is it the stick that is causing her to feel fear or discomfort. Am I using uncomfortable levels of pressure that should be removed, or should i use R+ to modify her perceptions of the stick?
Is she over excited, and kicking out in fun, in which case should I lower the excitement level in the meantime, or concentrate on teaching her alternative ways to express excitement?
Is she frustrated, and trying to take a shortcut to being rewarded; "GIve me the treat NOW!".. in which case I might want to go back a few steps in our training and review her understanding of how getting food reinforcement works, or I might want to look at my own skill at reinforcing, and ask myself what it is that I am doing that is keeping her confused about this.

This is a real life example, and the observations that I have made so far have led me to the conclusion that this behaviour is a defensive action, that occurs when she is moving away from "someone" else, and is designed to prevent that "someone" biting her on the rump as she goes away. When I look at her situation wholistically, not just in the parts that relate to me, I see this is something that she is having a problem with, in her daily life, with the other horses, and she is suffering some stress as a result, that is manifesting itself in her instinctual reactions when I indadvertantly provide a trigger.

Soo, in addition to modifying HER behaviour with ME through R+ of the behaviour I want, I'm also thinking about how I can improve her living situation when we're NOT training, to lower the stress level for her, and being more aware of how I present myself to her when we ARE training, so that I am not unconciously behaving in a similar way to the other horses when she perceives them as being threatening to her.

I am conciusly thinking about how I can create the same PHYSICAL scenario (me, behind her, as she moves away) without the same physcological aspect.

Another example of the different ways of arriving at the same solution that was really fascinating for me, was my struggles with getting Sunrise to be truly motivated and engaged in training.

I'd been reading STACKS about the theories and methods of R+ training, (and no doubt absorbed a lot that I hadn't been able to assimilate into action at that time), but I still was "missing" something... It was only after I came up with the correct emotional position, (invoked by my "unconditional love spell") that I actually "got it". Then I was able to go back to Brendas explanations and say "Aaaaaah! Yes! Now I understand what you mean by these terms! This is what I'm doing now and that's exactly how it's working!! " But I'd arrived at those correct actions, by letting go of "trying" actually, basically, I just gave up, because it seemed that no matter how hard I worked at applying all the rules, nothing clicked. I was a failure! So, I stopped trying, just decided to love everything SUnrise did.. and VOILA!!! What I actually DID in showing Sunrise that I loved everything she did, was classical R+.. and done really well!!!

So for me, coming to an emotional understanding was essential to being able to act in a rationally effective way!

Isn't it funny and wonderful how we all learn and think differently, but somehow, if we honestly and openly follow our own paths, we can reach somewhere in Rome!

_________________

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]

Leigh, another fantastic post!

Hi Sue,





Yes yes yes!! And I love that term - the horses real needs. I read a reactive dog list (it is beautiful, much like AND for dogs, but mainly focused on helping those with anxiety/aggression) and there is a LOT of talk about "meeting a dog's real needs" - I feel that is the most important thing to do, with any animal, BEFORE you think of the behavioural/training side.

And with dogs (and horses I guess, to an extent, if you didn't want to "do" much with them) if you TRULY meet all their needs, there doesn't seem the need for purposeful "training", to me. Ours (okay, apart from being told to go out of the horse's paddocks when they put themselves in dangerous situations - but then we could always manage that better by keeping them inside, too) are really quite brilliantly 'untrained' dogs. That's not to say they run wild or that we haven't made sure there are some safety behaviours there, for example they ALWAYS come when they're called (and get loads of positive reinforcement of course - but often treats are handed out for nothing but just 'being there' looking cute, too - horses get the same!), but they are not what I would call anywhere near "obedience trained". Not even "clicker trained." Yet they're wonderful dogs, the only time we have a problem with them is when their Real Needs are in some way not being met. (This is of course more than just food, water, play - it's things like NOT being plunged into the middle of situations they cannot cope with.) Anyway, I'm going off track once again...


A-ha! Good point. Just before I saw your post I was writing about holding up hooves being one of the things I really like to look at more than just the behaviour aspect of. Even if the trimming is fine, if it is not done frequently or the horse's legs are not picked up and held often, or if they are just not fit, surely it must make it harder to then suddenly hold them up for whole minutes at a time?? I know it is a bit different/maybe more difficult for us as it would be balancing on one leg rather than three, but even so... if you tried to hold your leg up for even two minutes and you had not practiced or were not very fit, it would be sooo uncomfortable after a little while... but if you held it up for a little bit longer each day.... so in that case it would not just be behavioural but to do with physical discomfort... but on the other hand it would still be okay to look at it from a behaviour perspective, cos if you are training it you only hold them up for a short time at first, so would hsve the same effect...) That's what I always try to think if a horse suddenly yanks their leg away - very possibly he did that because he CANNOT hold it up any longer. (It MIGHT be that he got bored and "just doesn't want to", but thinking that doesn't really help the situation, that's where it might be a good idea NOT to go past the behaviour.) But from a behavioural point of view, you probably wouldn't take him for a walk as that might reinforce pulling the leg away, but as I see it, and I have found, if he needs to stretch his legs, all it will do is make him happier and more able to stand and be trimmed afterwards - often for a longer time! (That said, I prefer, if possible, to notice and reinforce - by putting the leg down - when they start to fidget or lean away, - or better yet - BEFORE they feel the the need to start - rather than letting them think the only way I'll listen is by slamming the foot down suddenly. )

I won't quote any more, but I loved your post, Sue. The more I think about this, the more I realise I DO use quite a lot of "why", and try to find what they are feeling/thinking. I think many of the same things you do. But then I somehow still stand by what I said about completely agreeing with Brenda. And what Romy said, about acknowledging and thinking about all these things, but when *training* or getting a horse used to a scary situation, just be doing THAT, not trying to modify what the horse is thinking about me (unless I am the problem, but that means MY behaviour or thinking must change, not the horse's). I think maybe that is the important thing - find out why, yes, if you can, but even once you know why, the solution is very often still the same. Sometimes not - but often. But then when it isn't because something in their environment or physical health needs to change.... But then, that's not "TRAINING", so I still say that in actual *training*, I am going to focus on the behaviour and not trying to manipulate what the hrose is feeling or thinking - that will change too, but I'm not focusing on it.

But on the other hand when I (once I am as as sure as I possibly can be that it is not pain) stuff a horse with carrots - no clicker at first, that comes later, and the carrots are there no matter what they are doing - when I am working towards doing something they don't like, such as touching/grooming in a certain place (and the best thing is not to go past what they are comfortable with at any time, but if they DO turn around to bite they will be presented with a carrot. This has never reinforced biting - quite the opposite), that's more about changing a horse's feelings about something, isn't it? What I care about in that situation is that the horse feels okay about (whatever) and then will have no reason to display the aggression/avoidance behaviour... but my focus IS on them feeling fine... not on "stopping" the behaviour, but taking away the reason for that behaviour. But that IS still behavioural, isn't it, even if I think of it as more 'feelings' stuff.

Hmmm... I feel like I have just gone back and forth contradicting myself and not getting anywhere. I think this, this topic, might be a situation where I need to focus just on behaviour... MY behaviour, instead of trying to work out exactly how my mind works cos that's impossible... but if what I am doing/thinking - whatever that is - is working and my horses are happy... welll, that's what matters, right? But it's very interesting to discuss with you all, this is a wonderful conversation.

Hey Kate, I think you just switched a big light on in my head.

This is because after I had posted yesterday, I started thinking if this was not all nonsense what I had said, because OF COURSE I don´t only want the horse to behave nicely somehow but also be confident and happy (which I did not mean to neglect in my post, but I think it might have come across like that for some). But then I did not know how to express it in any other way.

So to be a bit more precise: maybe replace or mix my use of "behavioural" with "situational". What I think I meant to say was that I am not trying to change emotions about ME on such a global level, but I am focusing on the horse in the situation, with all its aspects.

That is, like I said before, I don´t consciously try to make them trust me but focus on the thing we are doing... and as a consequence of all those situations they might trust me then, but my focus is still on the things we do and how the horse is getting along with them.

Maybe that makes a bit more sense?

Oh Romy, I'm sorry! I didn't think, and wasn't trying to imply, that you meant you only wanted the horse to behave nicely, it was obvious from your words (and even if it hadn't been, it's blatantly obvious from all your other words, and videos) that you want your horses to be confident and happy!!! What you have now explained (and it really was clear enough before) -- I was thinking you meant exactly that, and completely agreeing with you... I think I just wasn't clear about that, because I'm struggling with how to explain my own thoughts on this.


That's what I thought you meant!

My, you girls have been busy!

Anyway, your resident scientist back again... it seems most of us are on the same page here, just coming at it from different angles and experiences.

A few thoughts on the 'messiness' <G> of learning...

Operant Conditioning (Skinnerian//Instrumental) (A-B-C) is about CHOICE. The behavior is said to be EMITTED, and is VOLUNTARY. As most living creatures, human and animal, seek pleasure and avoid aversives thru these choices, it's the main ingredient in survival. But is it NOT robotic!!

We live it every day, and are bombarded with stimuli/antecedents/cues which we choose to respond to (behavior) which then come in contact with consequences! Now it is the contingency or connection that we make or do not make between our behavior and the consequence.

Classical Conditioning (Pavlovian, Respondent, Associative) is NOT about choice. It is INVOLUNTARY, and includes reflexes, emotions, instincts and such. Eye blink, fear, shivering, startling, salivation, etc, are NOT our choice, it is stimulus-response (S-R). The contingency between the two is not up for discussion. The response is ELICITED by the stimuli, a HUGE distinction between OC and CC!!

Now comes the messy part...

These two procedures are ALWAYS happening ALL the time to us and our animals, with or without our training. Unless you are dead <G>, OC and CC are working together whether you are aware of them or not! Being aware of the emotions floating along in the background of OC, that for me is key in my training and my life.

For example , the cold (stimulus/trigger) can elicit shivering (CC), but then we 'do' something, some behavior (unless we are dead!) and may or may not experience relief, or if we have been hot, then pleasure.. Those behavioral choices and how I connect them with the cold will determine what we do the next time we are exposed to the cold and/or shiver. I may seek cold, or avoid cold, my choice (OC). But the shivering is NOT a choice (CC). So both CC and OC are very tightly entwined!

Even with instincts and such, they are often just the antecedent in an A-B-C situation. The hunting instinct in wolves is a lot of trial and error, with consequences determinging how they will hunt in the future.

Sue's example with Sunrise and kicking is a good mix. The first few times it happened, a long time ago?, it may have just been CC/S-R. But then inevitably consequences happened and Sunrise noticed that she got a favorable response from the others around her, i.e was reinforcing for her (she took space, got more food, felt relief, etc.) so she repeated kicking in the future, hence we have moved into the realm of OC now.

So that doesn't mean we ignore Sunrise's emotions! Instead, and I think this is what Sue do, we want to counter condition the trigger (stimulus/antecedent) that cues kicking. So Sue noticed the details, what came before the behavior?? i.e movement behind/ proximity to her butt, Sunrise, etc. and can then change her perception of that trigger thru a combination of CC and OC. The trigger (the CC part) IS the antecedent for the now operant behavior of kicking. Sue can change that cue to mean something else!! Beautiful!

Same goes for things like separation anxiety and other fear related situations. The initial S-R is fear based (a STRONG survival value), and there are MANY involuntary responses like sweating, shaking, stress, etc. But then there is behavior too, like pacing, running, jumping fences, pawing, etc. All the horse wants at that point is relief. Often these behaviors get negatively reinforced (relief) by the horse being reunited with other horses.

Sometimes we can change the fear trigger from fear to calm, thru desensitization and active counter conditioning, say with treats. I work with Jack on this ALL the time, as it it deep and has a HUGE negative reinforcement history will probably never completely go away. And with Lucy I work on preventing it form happening in the first place, tho it IS there cuz it is such a strong instinct for horses.

So very messy indeed, as CC and OC cannot often be separated easily so we need to be aware of how both affect our training! And in many ways, IMO the CC/emotional part IS the most important! And the beneficial CC side effects of OC when using +R is key as well. As EVERYTHING in the environment, including ME, can become associated with the pleasure of the food, scratches, play, etc. just making life better for our animals. Romy eluded to this a few posts back!

Contrast this to aversive training and it is not wonder why the horse often tries to avoid the human, or worst defends himself from the human! And the horse gets 'blamed' due to human error!!!!

Check out Karen's diary where she has been working with Tam's fear of the back arena door! I think that it is a good example of how OC and CC mesh!

Whew...out to get some sunshine today! Analyze that!!

Brenda

_________________
http://www.youtube.com/user/Lucy04574
http://www.youtube.com/user/Jack04574

I realized after reading Brenda's description that I haven't taken the time to think about how I shape behavior consciously very often. Even when I explain it to others I try to make it as simple as possible and leave out most of the terminology. I can usually get done what I want to get done because I've done it so many times, my mind automatically screens for a solution to a communication problem, both with animals and with people. The disadvantage of course is that I sometimes get stuck in a pattern, because it's worked so well before. There is an example of positive reinforcement at work.
So it's my laziness or preoccupation with so many different things in life that keeps me from focusing on teaching my animals creatively. As a result 4 out of 8 dogs in our house don't even know how to sit reliably for more than 2 seconds when asked. It just never became important enough. But they all come back to me when I take them running off leash in the fields.

I just love this topic! It let's me explore why I'm having so much fun with animals. And frankly, having a good time, having fun, is a big part of it, although sometimes it's initially the satisfaction of getting an animal out of a bad situation. When I was more active in dog rescue I was almost addicted to the moment when I took a dog out of an animal shelter where it was scheduled for euthanasia the next day and where it was exposed to very high levels of stress and then just take it to the next big park on a long Flexi-Leash and see that dog relax within a couple of minutes and enjoy himself (with dogs this can happen so much faster then with horses because they are not prey animals). Every day that dog spent with me I saw him get closer to a normal, fulfilling life, while being part of our family, until I could find a home that would be forever. To me there is no greater satisfaction than seeing an animal doing what it was created to do, move and live in the most natural manner possible, exercise, play, relate, eat, sleep comfortably.
I'm struggling to understand, never having been competitive by nature, why many people get more satisfaction out of competing with horses, if this has been conditioning (positive and negative reinforcement) or if it's more due to temperament (genetics). I wonder if those people experienced how fulfilling it is to help animals would they WANT to change. I'm thinking for instance of Madeleine Pickens, who is planning to start a 1 million acre mustang sanctuary, but who also owns race horses that are presumably trained in the traditional way.
The AND website is so encouraging for me because I can see how many people are devoted to improving our relationship with horses. I did notice, that a large number of people sign up and never post, and I'm curious, are they just reading? Probably many are, but there are probably also some that are just not that interested. I would love to know what motivates them and what we could do, maybe outside this forum, to motivate them. I think youtube is a great place for people to see what AND is all about. I was thinking about this a while back if there is a way to sow a seed at horse expos. We have one coming up in Spokane, WA in our area in May. Have any of you had experience with this and is it worth having an info booth or something like this? Or is it better to advertise by word of mouth only?
Ok, Leigh, I thought I needed to make your life a little harder by posting something that may not fit the topic?