Re: Spooking and other problems you have asked me about....

["Tracey" <tracey@tbt.co.za>]

Hello, Marv.  I'm a renouned sceptic, so please don't take anything I say
personally :-)



>Can one horse be a herd?  I'm not really sure.  I believe that nature is so
powerful and so persausive that one horse can indeed be a horse.  A herd
consists of a leader and one or more followers.  Can a horse be both?  I
think so.  The horse is leading (relying on his ability to lead such as it
is and reacting accordingly). >

I don't follow this line of reasoning at all.  Please explain it to me, as I
may be losing something in the translation, exactly who is the horse
following / leading / doing both with?  I'm having images of a horse with
dual personality having very weird discussions inside his head :


"Self, I think that plastic bag is scary, but you're the leader, you tell
me"

"Oh, is it my turn to be leader today?  Thank you, self.  Er, I don't know.
Maybe there are carrots inside. shold we investigate, self."

"Oh, Self, do you think that's a good idea?"

"Of course it is, self, I'm the leader, remember?"


>I do know that a single horse is the one who determines his level of spook.
Alone, his spook level may even be higher than it is when he is with another
horse.  Sometimes you can put a "bombproof" horse in with a highly spooked
horse and the bombproof seems to forget his bombproofing.>

I have seen this with my own horse.  When we're alone, he'll do anything :
with another horse, he prefers to follow.  Weird.  Very irritating.


>The reason my bonding procedure works so well is that it places the horse
in a position it is genetically used to - herd dynamics: following the lead
of a being who is exhibiting leadership actions.  In a herd there are ONLY
two options open to a horse, comply or capably confront.  Since we have
greater reasoning power than the horse we can place it in a situation where
it is unable to capably confront.  That then leaves only one option for the
horse - it complies - it accepts leadership.>


All horses?  I have a feeling that this is somewhat of a generalisation.
This may be the case in a herd, but not in the interaction between horse and
man.  Like it or not, there will always be horses who just don't conform to
this paradigm, horses which were born to be herd leaders and will simply not
accept your dominance.  Then you have to rethink your approach, and look for
partnership rather than the old "alpha" role.  And you have to accept that,
with horses like this, you simply won't win every debate.

>When a horse (any being for that matter) accepts leadership, it gives up
responsibilty.  One of the responsibilities of a leader is determining
threat levels.>


Is this always what we want from our horses.  In endurance, for instance, it
appears to me that it is more beneficial to have a horse who is willing to
pick out his path without rider's input - to be responsible for where he
puts his feet, to be able to pick out ground properly.  The rider does not
ALWAYS know best, and sometimes a horse who blindly follows his rider's
lead, and ignores his instincts, as he has been trained to do, is a
liability.


>Once you have obtained that position of leadership and demonstrate that you
have leadership abilities, the horse's faith increases and his fear
decreases.>

At the expense of his ability to have inependence of thought?


>Again, horses are individuals and not all horses will present the same
degree of faith according to a particular timeline.  It is not the objects
that cause the problem. It is the faith, or the connection,
the horse has in the human.>

>Considering the number of folks from here who have requested the bonder, it
seems to me that a few of them at least should have accomplished the
procedure in the next two days and will be able to report on their
experiences.>


I'd love to hear about it.


I'd also like to add that one of the aspects of Natual Horsemanship
techniques which has disappointed me over the years (and I'm hoping that you
can help restore my faith here :-)) is that too much emphasis is placed on
round pen work, on "bonding" or "join-up" or whatever you want to call it.
I have yet to see a proponent of NH claim that even more can be achieved out
there, on the trail.


I'm a big proponent of the old "take them out in hand and show them the
world" technique of bonding.  To me, this is a far more natural way to show
"herd leadership" than a round pen.  The horse goes where you lead because
he has learnt that it's fun - you find him nice places to graze, as a herd
leader would, you keep him safe from scary things, as a herd leader would,
you chase of predatory dogs, cows, ostriches, plastic dustbins, umbrellas,
etc, as a herd leader would.  A herd leader isn't just one who tells a horse
"do not be afraid, or else!" it is one who says "hey, don't worry, I'll look
after you!".


My horses go into the round pen / lunge ring / whatever to work, not to bond
with me.  My bonding takes place on the trail, or on a hill, looking at the
view together, or beside the river, with them grazing and me lying on my
back, listening to the cicadas.


And this can be done from the time a foal is old enough to walk, which means
that you have such a head start!

I'd appreciate your input on this.

>The bonder is but a small part of what I do with horses and there are other
things that influence spooking as well as a lack of place, such as cervical
subluxations.  If a horse has vertebrae out of alignment in its neck, or its
atlas and/or axis are twisted the horse is often unable to fluidly glance at
a potential spook.  In order to assess it properly with a minimum of pain it
must change its body angle to
inspect the spook.  Kind of how you move when you have a painfully stiff
neck, you turn your body rather than turning your neck.  The faster it is
moving when it does this, the more exaggerated the effects.>


I'm glad you gave credit to physical reasons for spooking - so often these
are overlooked.


>You can test for atlas/axis twisting by comparing the gap between the jaw
bone and the first bony segment of the neck.  The gap should be the same on
both sides of the horse's head.  You can often check for cervical
subluxations by bending the first joint of your fingers and forming a hook
hand and pulling it down your horse's cervicals.  You are looking for bumps,
like rocks or baseballs are sitting under the skin.  Compare each side.  If
your examination uncovers anything, your horse needs an equine chiro.  Even
if you do not uncover anything, chiro very often lessens, sometimes
eliminates spooking.>


Whoops!  See previous discussion on chiros.  I'll duck out of this one
(grin).


Hope I haven't come across as argumentative or know-it-ally - I'm working
hard on those smiley faces - I just wanted to give an alternative way of
dealing with spookiness, which personal experience has shown works.  My
"new" horse was a notorious spooker - impossible even to walk down the road
without a 360 turn or ten - and the round pen just did nothing for him.  (I
tried it because I doubted my judgement WRT the "in-hand thing").  PG was
terrified of the lunge ring (OTT TB) and would not relax in it.  I didn't
see the point in prolonging the agony, and went with my "gut feel".  Lots of
walking out in hand, talking to him, standing with him when he worried,
letting him stop to graze, look at things, etc.  That was three months ago.
On Sunday, we hacked him to a show along the motorway, and placed 4th in a
dressage test in howling winds and pouring rain, in the spookiest conditions
imaginable.


What I'm saying is, I'm sure your techniques work - your record shows that -
but (apologies to Carla) there is more than one way to skin a cat.


Oh, and welcome to Ridecamp.  Your input and insights will be invaluable to
all of us, even skeptics like me!


Tracey