Hello Catherine and all,

I wondered if anyone could help me out?

I have a BSH person on my forum asking for help with understaning methods and "is CT regarded as Natural Horsemanship" is one of the questions.

'Jo' is looking for help and I wondered if any of you would be kind enough to spare the time to help (her?) stay on track as she tries to find her way.

The forum heading is Equine Behaviour - thread heading - Natural Horsmanship

http://vfhcommunity.voicesforhorses.co.uk/index.php

I was thinking I would direct her to THF but think at this stage it may seem too advanced....what do you think?

When people start to look outside their comfort zone I just want them to be nurtured hence I have come for your help.....

Sorry I have not made any contribution to THF for ages, but I have been reading!

Wishing you all a wonderfull 2008
All the best and thanks
Emma

Hi Emma,
I'm not Catherine (well, duh!), but here's my take on it!

CT to me is NOT NH, but rather a way of training ANY animal based on the principles of positive reinforcement and classical conditioning. It's roots lie in behaviourism, not in replicating the language of the horse in its native environment.

In any case, I abhor the term Natural Horsemanship, so maybe I'm biased!!

Thanks Diane for coming back to me!

I agree with you on all counts! - would you have an opportunity to write that on my forum?

As I am trying to encourage people from all mind sets to join in with the site to encourage a cross fertilisation of information and facts (helping I hope - people realise you do not have to belong to one camp or another to be able to learn) I am trying to avoid being called biased by organisations/people who find this approach threatening. Hence I am asking peopel who know what they are talking about if they will help Jo.

Thanks again
Emma

I tried to add a reply, but it's saying my username/password is inactive or invalid. I just checked them and they are correct. Username is DiHenry. Could you check it, Emma? Ta!

Hi Emma

My own opinion is that CT is not a part of NH but generally I think it probably is regarded as NH by lots of other people. I guess it depends a bit on how you define NH. Some people think I "do NH" because I have an interest in behaviour and "natural" horse management. A lot of people seem to think of NH as "the (supposedly) good stuff which came after we became more enlightened". I tend to think of it more as prescriptive methods of horse training, based predominently in -R/+P and typically founded in some erronenous theory of herd behaviour. Having said that, I know some lovely people who "do NH" and have lovely relationships with their unspoiled horses so I'm struggling to generalise!

Confusing the issue still further is that a lot of people who use CT do combine it with some NH method - Alex Kurland seems to talk about John Lyons a lot and was pretty in favour of the combined CT/Parelli stuff at the demo I saw. There is a general reluctance to be perceived as "narrow-minded" and people like to "take a little bit of lots of methods", in varying degrees and often up to making a lovely great mess.

CT can be used as a prescriptive method too, with varying proportions of +R/-R/+P. But to me it is just a tool through which we can simplify operant conditioning and +R and refine our cross-species communication/learning. I find it is at its most valuable when restricted to a carefully-defined free-shaping session, giving the horse the opportunity to choose and be himself.

I'll post a version of this on your site as soon as I can (and reply to your email!)

Catherine

Hi Catherine,

Thanks so much for coming back to me
“Confusing the issue still further is that a lot of people who use CT do combine it with some NH method - Alex Kurland seems to talk about John Lyons a lot and was pretty in favour of the combined CT/Parelli stuff at the demo I saw. There is a general reluctance to be perceived as "narrow-minded" and people like to "take a little bit of lots of methods", in varying degrees and often up to making a lovely great mess.”

I agree - I think this is where the confusion is coming from - The Simpson’s being another example, mixing Parelli with CT. I tried to read an article of theirs the other day but gave up when they said they don’t use –R (they must be the only horse people in the world who don’t!)

I had a question sent to me a few months ago from a “equine psychology student” who lumped –R and +P together saying they should both be avoided because they were both punishment but could I define +R. A student should not have to write to a magazine to find answers…...should they? That said I am happy the magazine wanted to publish such a Q&A (although it’s not gone to print yet!!!) If an “equine psychology student” is confused - how is someone just starting out supposed to find their way. Oh for the day there are some kind of education standards.

Diane – Sorry you have had trouble with the site – I have just checked the log in and registration process and it is working fine. I cannot find you in our registered users list - have you registered with the new site or are you using your information/login from the old site? Unfortunately we were not able to transfer the details of members from the old site to the new one as it has been rebuilt from scratch.

If you want to re register it is really quick and simple – if not and your totally fed up I understand! If you want to email me my address is: Emma@voicesforhorses.co.uk
Thank you both

Emma

If an “equine psychology student” is confused - how is someone just starting out supposed to find their way

Ha ha, going by some of the "teachers" I've heard on the OC subject you're almost better off if you're just starting out than if you're already enrolled on a course. At least you might still be inadvertantly avoiding the misinformation...

Sorry, not helpful or constructive.....

Oh it's probably that I didn't transfer my details. Don't worry, I'll re-register, but it may be tomorrow!

Via email - I have been told that the Simpson’s don’t combine Parrelli with CT anymore. I was grateful to receive the email and I happily stand corrected – it is great news!

"Ha ha, going by some of the "teachers" I've heard on the OC subject you're almost better off if you're just starting out than if you're already enrolled on a course. At least you might still be inadvertantly avoiding the misinformation...

Sorry, not helpful or constructive....."

But sadly too often true hence I wanted to give Jo a fighting chance. Thanks Catherine for your great posts on the forum!

I know what it was like back 9 years ago when I went on forums looking for support and answers let alone testing theories and God forbid mentioning the science of behaviour - it was horrific. Everyone of us needs or looks for support at sometime or other (as I have just done coming to you - to help Jo) and I know how much it means when that support is received. This is a great forum for discussing subjects the majority of horse owners have never heard about at least not in any constructive or educated fashion and - it’s one of my wishes that the information shared amongst the thinkers and debaters in our world gets back to grass roots so those looking or searching feel welcome, supported and encouraged to lean. I believe we all want to do the best we can for equines and one of the quickest and most direct ways to do that is by supporting the owners and carers of these truly amazing animals. To this end I apologize in advance and say I may end up a huge pain and return for your help.

Emma

<QUOTE>Confusing the issue still further is that a lot of people who use CT do combine it with some NH method - Alex Kurland seems to talk about John Lyons a lot and was pretty in favour of the combined CT/Parelli stuff at the demo I saw.</QUOTE>

There are certainly some people close to Alex who've combined CT/Parelli - I don't find the approach a particularly well-reasoned one. Alex herself is the soul of tact and discretion and neither recommends or detracts from any other trainer. However at the clinic I attended last year, there were strong anti-Parelli vibes, and two attendees had tried and abandoned the approach - Alex was very supportive of this without being openly critical of a "competitor".

My horse actually responds to quite a few Parelli cues. I've done this because I share a field and the responsibilities for looking after 5 horses and all but mine have had a degree of Parelli training. The owners are keen "practitioners". It would be difficult for them to work with Jackson without some form of language that both understood, so I undertook to train "back up", "circle me" and "move your hind/fore quarters away from me" using the sort of cues they use with their horses. The difference is that I trained all the behaviours using CT and then added a Parelli gesture at the end (wiggle your finger means back up).

So to an outsider looking in, there's not much to call between what they ask their horses and what I ask mine. The difference is in how it was trained and the horse's motivation. I feel quite a lot of the Parelli and John Lyons tasks are desirable things to train your horse - I just disagree with how to train them