[MaggieSue]

[QUOTE]
Quote:
Why do the NH people feel the need to lay claim to all the 'good' training??
They DON'T! Have you not been listening? Ok, maybe Monty Roberts claims that he discovered it, and if he did in his own experience, that's fine, but it isn't new. Pat Parelli ALWAYS gives credit to those before him from whom he learned the basics of what he does now. Dennies Reis does the same. John Lyons does the same. Can't speak for Anderson or Cox.
[/QUOTE]
Yet you did so right here!
Originall quoted by JbAnd Rio

Quote:
Originally Posted by tbtrainer
I would love to hear the NH people give a definition of what Un-natural Horsmanship is!

Force and demand

JB, what I'm saying is because many of us haven't followed these guys, we say we don't do NH-because we feel we don't!! So then we are labeled just as you 'labeled' us here, using force and demand, tying up horses, beating them into submission. That happened decades ago! Sure there might be a few that still do it, but it's the minority.

Again, have you not been listening? Nobody has said you have to follow a labeled NH guru to be a good trainer/horseman. However, you HAVE "followed" people - your trainers - you said that yourself

Yes actual people-not dvd's
and again, I point to the above statement you made. Do I have to go back thru this thread and others to find where other NH followers have made similar statements?

you're lucky you did growing up

No I didn't...I said I had been riding for 20yrs, I said nothing about having horses while growing up-I did however say I was old

Thats what I'm saying!

Thanks Betty!!

Quote:
As I and many others have stated on here, there are only 2 types of training/trainers-good and bad-PERIOD.
And the argument is ...where?

Once again-in your statement!!!
You didn't say there was good and bad, you said there was NH and non NH and the non NH=force and demand. Which is NOT true.

Why is it a crime to pick someone you think is doing well and try to learn from them, even if it means having to watch some DVDs?

Where did I say this? I have never said that. I have said that I don't want to be labeled as NH, because frankly I don't believe I work that way. I also don't 'force and demand' as you stated ALL other training does. THAT is what bothers me. Many people state this-and after it being said over and over, it becomes 'fact'. I know of many people who don't do NH, and are great trainers and riders-shoot, many trainers I know of have never even heard of NH!! They're too busy actually riding and training!

I only learned about NH-specific folks 8 years ago when I got my first young'un. If you'd listen to me, I have never said you do NH, I merely stated that they way you purport to train is not all that different in mentality from any structured NH program.

It is different, and again since I have been at it alot longer than the dvd's have been out there-I don't feel as though I 'follow' them. I have never studied them, I have watched them, but I had already been riding and doing some training way before I had ever seen them-so why should I say I work like them???

*I* haven't labeled myself as a NH trainer

WEll then, I guess you are also a 'force and demand' type of person

[Blistering Winds]

Originally Posted by MaggieSue

[QUOTE]


JB, what I'm saying is because many of us haven't followed these guys, we say we don't do NH-because we feel we don't!! So then we are labeled just as you 'labeled' us here, using force and demand, tying up horses, beating them into submission. That happened decades ago! Sure there might be a few that still do it, but it's the minority.

Who says force and demand has to be tying up horses and beating them into submission? Cause I do use some force and demand, and have NEVER tied up and beaten them into submission.

Not saying it never crossed my mind. I've ran into a few I just wanted to snub up, drop to the ground, and just sit on them till they give in....but ......I'm not that way. But I admit, it definitly has crossed my mind! LMAO


Decades ago, those methods were STILL "BAD" methods and "Good" methods were around. Just because a method wasn't slammed into the Movies, doesn't mean it wasn't around.




and honestly, if someone refuses to consider me NH, and doesnt' want to use me, they can turn right around and leave.

But then, when they see my horse behaving while their horse throws them off in the arena....I've had one come crawling back after debating with me about my "methods" and not being called a "NH" trainer. (mostly because I was inexpensive...was why I personally got their business...but hey, if they argue with me one day, then come asking to take their horse in the next....I'll bite! LMAO)



Trust me. It isn't something you should lose sleep over. Looking around, more horses hurt people, missbehave, and overall are spoiled rotton brats that I CRINGE at even test driving.

Right now the NH fad is in high gear...but so are those of us that have to move in and FIX those issues. in a few more years, hopefully, we'll start seeing a happy medium between the "wait and wait and wait, kiss the horse's bum, wait and wait...methods of many of the NH to something that makes more sense, keeps people safe at all levels...etc.


More "smart" NH trainers are coming up in the world. CA is one that I admire the most among the current, because he DOES know a horse can kill you and doesn't teach the owners that it is all flowers and butterflies....

More are coming, that make more sense to you and me. It just takes time for the "FADS" to simmer.

But I'm seeing more and more of them. Usually cause they are like me, and have to FIX the NH wanna bes

[Launa]

I really don't see why people get so upset about NH. It has been around forever. Just read about the relationship between the Indians and their horses for example.

I know that a lot of people get offensive because so many trainers make big bucks off of their NH Package. I have read and watched a lot of them. John Lyons, Pat Parreli, Clinton Anderson, Pony Boy. They all have a different way of teaching and communicating. If they can package their method of teaching so that people who want to learn and follow their method.....than I see nothing wrong with that. That is exactly what they are doing. They are not packaging NH and claiming NH as their own....they are packaging and selling their spin on it and their way of teaching and communicating. Each one of them has tweaked it in their own way and is going to reach different consumers.

And when I can afford it I am buying Pat Parreli and starting Level One. It looks fun to me. So what if I have to spend a lot of money and buy his "Carrot stick and halter" too.

Am I a NH person? I wouldn't label me as one. I am just a person who loves her horses and wants to learn more and build a closer relationship with them. I want to use Parreli because I have seen a lot of awesome results.
I have learned a lot of different thing from different people.....some I have paid for through books and DVDs. Some things I have learned from people who have been around horses forever....some things I have learned on here. I don't limit myself to anyone.....just take a little away from everyone....whether it is free information or I have to pay for it. I hold on to what works for me and my partner....

And that all I got to say about that! LOL!

[John]

When will you youngsters quit arguing about what is NH and what is not?

[cd_horton]

First let me say there is nothing worse than a "guru" of any method beating you over the head with how great this work. Second I think people "hate" only what they dont know or fully understand. I tend to take from all methods available in training, but here is a little different spin on things (I will speak in western terms as that is what I know), I would say and I am sure most will agree reining horses are likley the best "broke" horses available, they are very responsive and highly trained. Most of your top professional reining trainers DO NOT practice many of the natural horsmanship techniques and they have success at the highest level with horses. That said, I have seen horses trained by Clinton Anderson, Chris Cox, John Lyons, Josh Lyons...ect that will perform the same manuvers, they can lope great circles, change leads, spin a blur and slide all with the most subtle of cues. So if the end result is a well trained, responsive and respectful horse, I find it hard to discount one method or the other.

[JBandRio]

Originally Posted by MaggieSue

Yet you did so right here!

Huh? You lost me here.

JB, what I'm saying is because many of us haven't followed these guys, we say we don't do NH-because we feel we don't!! So then we are labeled just as you 'labeled' us here, using force and demand, tying up horses, beating them into submission. That happened decades ago! Sure there might be a few that still do it, but it's the minority.

Maggie, pay attention here. My definition, which I have spelled out on MANY of these threads, of Natural Horsemanship is that the training takes place in a manner in which the horse understands the language, that patience and trust and respect and firmness are all part of it. I don't give a flip what you call that. The OPPOSITE of that, ie "un-natural", is forcing and demanding. There was never a question in anything *I* said about you either being labeled a NH trainer or you were an abusive trainer. You made that giant leap all on your own.

No I didn't...I said I had been riding for 20yrs, I said nothing about having horses while growing up-I did however say I was old

I never said anything about you HAVING horses either. HOWEVER, you did say, and I quote:

I had a trainer at my side for years,

That is what I was talking about. Not everyone is that lucky.

Once again-in your statement!!!

Where? Show me where I said if you are not labeled a NH trainer you are a bad trainer. You won't find it.

You didn't say there was good and bad, you said there was NH and non NH and the non NH=force and demand. Which is NOT true.

See above

Where did I say this? I have never said that.

Without going back through this huge-a$$ thread and other NH threads, I cannot point to your comments. But, many times you have clearly insinuated that the whole "remote learning" (my terminology, not yours) just gets you into trouble.

I have said that I don't want to be labeled as NH, because frankly I don't believe I work that way. I also don't 'force and demand' as you stated ALL other training does. THAT is what bothers me. Many people state this-and after it being said over and over, it becomes 'fact'. I know of many people who don't do NH, and are great trainers and riders-shoot, many trainers I know of have never even heard of NH!! They're too busy actually riding and training!

Once again, see above. I NEVER labeled anyone as abusive if they did not label themselves as a NH trainer. You, as I stated above, put those words into my mouth.

It is different, and again since I have been at it alot longer than the dvd's have been out there-I don't feel as though I 'follow' them. I have never studied them, I have watched them, but I had already been riding and doing some training way before I had ever seen them-so why should I say I work like them???

Who cares if you have or have not studied them or even know they exist? The POINT of all this is that you train in a manner which is mentally not very different from structured NH programs. Like it or not, that's the way it is. As BW stated, this type of training, whether you call it NH or not, whether you've even HEARD of NH or not, has been around forEVER. Classical dressage training, done the good ol' way, is very similar. One doesn't go around calling them NH trainers either.

[EquineJessie]

Originally Posted by cd_horton

First let me say there is nothing worse than a "guru" of any method beating you over the head with how great this work. Second I think people "hate" only what they dont know or fully understand. I tend to take from all methods available in training, but here is a little different spin on things (I will speak in western terms as that is what I know), I would say and I am sure most will agree reining horses are likley the best "broke" horses available, they are very responsive and highly trained. Most of your top professional reining trainers DO NOT practice many of the natural horsmanship techniques and they have success at the highest level with horses. That said, I have seen horses trained by Clinton Anderson, Chris Cox, John Lyons, Josh Lyons...ect that will perform the same manuvers, they can lope great circles, change leads, spin a blur and slide all with the most subtle of cues. So if the end result is a well trained, responsive and respectful horse, I find it hard to discount one method or the other.

I couldn't have said it better. All I want is a broke horse that wants to work for me. How you get there isn't too important.

Obviously the horse understands what's wanted from the 'not-NH' people just as well as from the 'NH' people.

[LilEquineLuva]

You are allowed to hate anything you want to. I understand a lot of aspects get carried away and stupid,...But saying that you hate "a very broad classification of anything" (in this case "natural horsemanship") is equivalent (in my mind) to profiling. It would be like me saying "I HATE all english riding" and saying that I don't use the methods english riders do. Besides the fact that both statements are untrue,.. you have to realize that a lot of things with horsemanship, ANY KIND OF HORSEMANSHIP usually have a LOT in common. You gave the horse a chance to back up...and when he didn't you increased the stimulus and held that for a while...still not response? So you increase it...eventually you got him to back up! Did you quit whacking/pulling on him as a reward? Or even just pause to start over? In a sense, you use natural horsemanship. Just like ANYBODY who is anyway concerned with controlling or bettering their horses movement will usually use SOME version or principle of dressage. They won't call them the same thing, and they won't execute them exactly the same but some of the same principles exist. "Dont throw the baby out with the bath water". Just because you haven't seen the good side of it doesnt mean its not there somewhere.

Your training methods work you you right? Well just because I don't use all the same training methods as you I could say "Well english riders are rediculous and I hate their methods" (thats not true, thats not what I think!) Do I use all huntseat or jumping or anything's principles? NO. But do I respect that different things work for different people? YES! If I don't completely understand something do I have a right to judge it? NOPE.

With that said, I don't think your generalized statements are fair, but you have a right to an opinion. (and so do I! )
---------------
Wanted to add that I DO use some NH methods, but I don't use the all...I use a little of whatever works and whatever gets the point across and job done in a way that the lesson will stick and the horse is happy in the end because he understands what I wanted. I always try to do as little as it takes and as much as it takes to get the job done, no more..no less. I'm sure everybody can identify with that. Also, I have a large respect for all other disciplines that I do not take part in, and I try to learn anything I can about anything I can, because you never know; You just might find something you can use where you'd least expect it!

[MaggieSue]

Where? Show me where I said if you are not labeled a NH trainer you are a bad trainer. You won't find it.

Originall quoted by JbAnd Rio

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbtrainer
I would love to hear the NH people give a definition of what Un-natural Horsmanship is!

Force and demand

Right here JB, you are saying if you are not NH, you 'force and demand'. Must I post it again????

The OPPOSITE of that, ie "un-natural", is forcing and demanding. There was never a question in anything *I* said about you either being labeled a NH trainer or you were an abusive trainer. You made that giant leap all on your own.

And yet, I see it differently! I see myself as a good common sense, one that will correct the horse, type of trainer/rider. I see myself as neither of the above-yet YOU labeled me and many others as one or the other, in the post I quoted above.

Quote:
I had a trainer at my side for years,

That is what I was talking about. Not everyone is that lucky.

No luck involved, I worked hard so I could pay her.

Once again, see above. I NEVER labeled anyone as abusive if they did not label themselves as a NH trainer. You, as I stated above, put those words into my mouth.

Yet you imply by 'force and demand' that those are the only ways to train a horse. Most people would call this a bad way to train, at least I would. I won't be labeled as such since I don't do either. That is what I'm saying.

Who cares if you have or have not studied them or even know they exist? The POINT of all this is that you train in a manner which is mentally not very different from structured NH programs.

And my argument is that the NH training is 'traditional' training with a spin! The title 'Natural Horsemanship" came long after this way was in place-it's the few 'top dogs' that put their spin on it, created their ways, and now if you don't follow one of them-you are 'labeled' as being abusive-THAT'S MY WHOLE POINT-AND YOU SEALED THE DEAL WITH DOING IT IN YOUR POST SAYING THAT IF YOU DON'T DO NH YOU DO 'FORCE AND DEMAND'. IT'S NOT THAT BLACK AND WHITE. I'M DONE ARGUING NOW.

[cd_horton]

To be very simple, natural horsemanship as presented by all clinicians is the application and release of pressure....and refining such application of pressure to the lightest amount necessary to get a positive response. This is also the basics of any form of training be it "natural" or "not". Maybe we can all agree at this point and put this one to bed.