This is bound to be a mistake--it's only natural!

Quite a few years ago I came across this crazy person named Alexander Nevzorov of the Nevzorov Haute Ecole.  Chances are if you're a horse person you've heard of him.  If not, allow me to post this incredibly over dramatic video for you.






I'm warning you though, you've got to take all this stuff with a grain of salt--both sides of it.

I mostly wanted to post this not to say (by ANY means) "Look at this guy!  Bits are unnecessary!  Riding horses is cruel!" (which, of course, if you've been reading the blog you'll know I don't agree with), but it does a pretty good job of showing clips of horseback riding at it's absolute worst.

I mean, there are a lot of people out there riding who just don't know better.  They're riding in Tom Thumb "snaffles" or whathaveyou, in tack that doesn't remotely fit the horse or them, not releasing, cuing wrong, and a whole myriad of other issues.  These are not the people I'm talking about today.  There is still hope for those people.  Many of us even started out that way.

I know I just said the other day that I don't see too much stuff that really shocks me anymore.  But there is still something that shocks me, and that's seeing professional riders, at the top of the sport, behaving this way.

It sickens me.

And it really pours fuel on the fire of this whole "natural horsemanship" freakout debate.

As y'all have probably gathered, I am not a follower of "Natural Horsemanship" (with capital letters, no less!).  I can't, won't and don't agree that ANYTHING about riding horses is "natural".

But just because it isn't natural doesn't mean it is cruel or wrong.  It's also unnatural to wear shoes with comfy support in them.  It's unnatural to live to a ripe old age.  And it's unnatural to drive a car.  Or fly in a plane.  Or even walk on cement.  Or have a dog.  Having a root canal done to save you from terrible pain is unnatural.

But I'm willing to bet most of us have done a few of these things.

It's unnatural to breed kitties down to the adorably cute and manageable size of the ones I have living with me.

You tell this cat that he isn't wanted because he isn't natural.  Go on.  Say it to this face.  I dare you.

And sometimes, natural things can be really bad.

It is natural for a horse to starve to death if he has bad teeth.  It is natural for him to get a belly full of parasites and die a painful, colicy death.  It's perfectly natural for him to injure himself out on the vast frontier and perish because he couldn't get to water.  Heck, all modern medicine is opposing the natural--veterinary and human.  Cancer is "natural", and so is blindness, cataracts, arthritis, infection, dysentery and a whole bunch of other nasty things.  Dying from all sorts of things we can cure easily these days was, at one time, perfectly natural.

As you can probably tell, "natural" has become a bit of a buzzword for me.  My favorite is when a product says it's "natural", and therefore (implied), "awesome" or "better".  As in, "all natural drugs."

You know what else is natural?

Foxglove.  Digitalis purpurea, if you're a plant nerd like me.

But that doesn't mean you should go around eating it for fun.

Anyway--life is complicated.  Nothing is really all that clear cut, is it?

So back to the video.

I don't know a ton about this guy aside from the fact that he isn't riding anymore (I guess he decided it was inhumane).  But I wanted you to watch it as an example of what you can do without a bit, spurs, various gadgetry.  Supposedly.  I can't vouch for how he trained these things.  But in the video, at least, the closest he gets to a gadget is a neck rope and a cuing whip, which he doesn't appear to touch the horses with.

His horses actually remind me a lot of Arabian halter horses.  They seem to switch on and off much like those horses do.  As a side note, I certainly wouldn't tolerate that level of fooling around and frankly his horses kind of terrify me--but I guess it works for him.

Although watching his videos reminds me of The Crocodile Hunter for some reason.

And we all know how that ended.

Anyway.

Personally I felt guilty for even riding a horse with a bit after watching this video, which I suspect was some of the point.  Then after a few minutes my rationality starts seeping back in.  I understand the bit as a communication tool.  I also understand I fear too much for my life to just throw it ALL away. 

But part of me understands that the bit is sort of a psychological safety net.

I really freaked out the first time Chev and I had a canter in the hackamore.

I had all these terrifying thoughts like, "What if I can't get her to stop?  What if we can't steer?  WHAT IF WE BOTH DIE??"

In retrospect, and basking in the glow that always accompanies doing something that was scary and NOT dying--not even having anything WRONG happen--I realized that I was being pretty dumb about it.  I know rationally that the training I've done with Chev so far has not relied heavily on the bit.  She knows seat, weight and voice cues.  So of course she turned, moved and stopped when I asked.  Why can't I just put some faith in her?  Why do I freak out a little (or a lot) when I don't have a bit in her mouth?

I think it all comes down to this idea of control that I struggle with constantly.

I know that rationally I can't "control" her, and I don't want to--but I still have a hard time relinquishing all mouth control.

The people riding in this video are riding with the kind of contact that produces bone spurs in the mouth.

I suffer from TMJ and various other jaw disorders, and I can only imagine the kind of pain something like that would produce.

This is a pretty interesting conversation on the topic of mandibular bone spurs in horses: http://www.ultimatedressage.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=57741

Of course it's specifically about Dressage, because it's authored by the lovely people over at the Ultimate Dressage forums--but my usual caveat applies--this could be ANY horse discipline.  I think we see it less over on the western side of things because strong contact is so discouraged (in the open air, at least).  Still, that's not to say horses don't suffer in other ways.

I'm tempted to once again quote that excellent article from Sustainable Dressage on bits, bitting and the action of the bit, but seeing as I've already posted it--two times I think?--it's time to give it a rest.  No sense in beating ya'll over the head with it.

I keep meaning to do an entry on various gadgets, what they're supposed to, what they actually do, and how there's nothing new under the sun.  Dressage borrows from western, and vice versa, and all over the board.  But I guess that's a topic for another day.

She has been schooled in the snaffle for 3, almost 4 years now though.  So she does know it very well.  We both feel comfortable there.  So maybe some of this has to do with me just not being all that willing to toss the comfort zone aside and start over with something new.

I'll tell you though, loping around in a hackamore does feel pretty cool.

Chevy gets her feet done tomorrow and I'll be taking out the HDR to see how it sits on her, and maybe doing some walking around.  We'll see how that goes!

Contact

Contact is something I think about a lot.

It's something I should probably attempt to define for those of you who read but aren't horse-crazed individuals.

The dictionary-type definition of contact helps us understand what it means for the horse person.  Generally, contact is defined (relevantly) as "the state of physical touching" and "as a means by which to give and receive information" and "to communicate with".

In horseman's terms, the word contact is frequently used to describe the connection between the rider's hands, the reins, and the horse's mouth.

There are a lot of different types on contact, and their use and application varies widely based on the style of riding.

For example, hunter/jumpers tend to keep what's called "strong contact".  This loosely translates (sometimes incorrectly) as a "tight grip on tight reins".  Jumpers are notoriously very strong horses, and showjumping courses are timed and can be very technical--the speed and bravery needed to compete successfully can make for a very strong horse.  Here's an example of probably the most famous female rider showjumping team in recent memory:

Beezie Madden and Authentic make it look easy.  (Image © 

Randi Muster)

Western pleasure classes abhor contact of almost any kind.  They are said to be "riding on a loose rein", often a "draped rein", which means the bit is in a neutral position most of the time and signals are often passively imbued or given with mostly all seat/leg.  Here's an example of what's successful in high level Western Pleasure:

Katherine Fuller on One Jazzy Sheik, top 5 in Amateur Western

Pleasure at the 2009 AQHA World Show

 Personally, I respect both of these kinds of contact.  I understand that they have a totally different purpose, and that the training, equipment and end goals are completely different.  The amount of contact is appropriate for the discipline.  You wouldn't want those reins flopping around and getting caught as you try to clear a 6' jump, just as you wouldn't want to be putting a lot of contact pressure on the horse's mouth when he's wearing a large curb like the one in the Western Pleasure photo above.  Either would be equally disasterous.

Well, the jumping one might be worse.

But they would both be pretty bad.

One area that I think is constantly in a state of debate is Dressage.

My foundation is in basic Dressage, like a lot of riders.  I have heard many people tell me over the years that Dressage horses must be ridden in tight contact.  I have even heard, in books by masters, no less, that as the horse progresses into a larger bit, like the traditional Weymouth/Bridoon combination bridle (aka, the double bridle), that plenty of spur and leg must be used to compensate for the lack of forward produced by contact on a "sharp" bit.

Ahem...does this seem a bit crazy to any of you?

Just humor me here for a few minutes.

As you may have gathered from my post the other day, I love Dr. Reiner Klimke.  He won 6 Olympic gold metals over the course of his life.  Tragically the world lost him in 1999, when he succumbed to a heart attack at age 63.

Here's an image of Klimke and his "great love", the Trakehner Biotop.  

Look at that (lack of?) contact!  This is what I picture in 

my mind when I think of "perfect contact".

Dr. Klimke is considered by many to be one of the great masters of Dressage (I certainly feel that way!).  Look at Biotop: he is forward, free, happy, and not behind the vertical.  They both look absolutely wonderful.  He is riding off the snaffle rein much more than the curb rein, just as he should be.  There is a straight line from the snaffle rein to his hand, while the curb rein remains mostly inactive.

Biotop is in perfect elevation and is not being held up be the reins at all.  He has his nose just slightly ahead of the vertical, and he looks free up front and engaged behind.  He also looks happy.  And so does his rider.

By all accounts, Biotop was a challenging horse to ride, even for a master like Dr. Klimke.  Yet he warmed the great stallion up not in the double bridle, but a simple snaffle.  That was his philosophy.  And I think it's evident from the photo of Biotop that for him, contact was certainly not a means of force-controlling the horse.  It was there for precise communication only.

Unfortunately, I think this picture is becoming pretty rare in the Dressage world.

I know it is so fashionable to pick on the Dressage super star Anky Van Grunsven, but I just can't help myself.  She is a perfect example of how Rollkur, or "hyperflexion of the neck" is still winning at the highest levels of Dressage.  Here's an image of "Iron Hand Anky" riding a horse in full Rollkur:

Anky riding in contact so strong horse is forced to break over at the 3rd vertebrae, 

which can cause permanent musculo-skeletal damage

Here's another image of a horse being ridden in Rollkur.  Note the rolling eyes and whipped-eggwhite foam coming from a very unhappy mouth.  His crank noseband is on so tight it's even starting to asphyxiate him:

Lord save me from this bloody "contact"!

If you had that kind of "contact" on another human being, I think you'd be asking for some serious trouble!  In all honestly, I don't think ANYONE outside of the horse would would describe what is happening there with the reins as "contact".  I think it would more accurately be described as "brute force".

So when did "contact" go from light pressure to something that causes bone spurs in the horse's neck and mouth?  I don't know.  But it surely isn't the correct way of doing things.

Anyway, these are some pretty extreme examples.  If you want to read something truly scary, I encourage you to click on over to Sustainable Dressage's pages on Rollkur, where she describes in awesome detail about what it is and how it affects the horse:  http://sustainabledressage.net/rollkur/index.php

What do you consider to be appropriate riding contact?  Do you ride that way because people have told you to, because you have found it on your own, or because you fear what your horse will do to you if you don't?

What happens when you "throw the contact away"?  Does your horse not know what to do, fall on his face or take off with you?

If contact is for subtle communication, a light touch, and to give your horse an aid--can he feel it through all of your contact?

If you ride with almost no contact, how do you get your horse to come back to you?

Have people told you that the only way to control your horse is by moving up to a sharper bit?

I guess the point here isn't the point fingers and blame everyone, but rather to understand that contact doesn't have to mean pain.  It doesn't have to mean tight reins.  It only has to mean that you can feel your horse's mouth, and he can feel the signal that you're transmitting to him.  That can be done on all kinds of reins, and I think is independent of rein length, or rein tightness, to some degree at least.

What do you think?  I do read all comments and I love a discussion!

Bits

I'm sitting here, sipping my latte (I am a still PNW girl at heart!), thinking about bits.

Flyin' Horse posted a great question to the Equine Mind Meld yesterday morning. 

Her basic question was about bits/bitting/why you would use a bigger bit.  She wanted to know why, if a horse can be ridden fine in a snaffle, you would ever "move up" to a curb.

I hemmed and hawed about submitting an answer.  As I said before, I'm always hesitant to jump right in with my opinion, even if it is based in a lot of research and scientific fact.  I guess I feel like, as I've also said before, there are always a lot of answers that could be correct.  In the end I didn't write anything.

But, basically (have you ever noticed when someone says "basically", they're about to launch into a long explanation that isn't basic at all?)--the goal is to move from less subtlety (bigger aids, less education) to more subtlety (smaller aids, more education).

Education, of course, refers to both the horse and rider.

I was really happy to see that in her post response today, Mugwump quoted Sustainable Dressage.

Particularly this great article I've mentioned before on The Bridle & the Bit.

Chev was started for her first 30 days under saddle in a basic sidepull.

The trainer wanted to stay completely out of her mouth at the time.  She wanted to just get Chev going.  Step one was just teaching her to move under saddle with a rider, and that's what she learned.  Her first 10 days were spent entirely out of her mouth, learning to walk, trot, and stop.  There wasn't a whole lot of steering involved.

After 10 days or so, she was moved into a basic smooth mouth broken snaffle on an O-ring (loose ring).  She learned to steer and move different parts of her body: shoulders, hips, ribcage.

She was off to a good start.

What do I ride her in now?

A basic smooth mouth broken snaffle on an O-ring.

She is still an uneducated horse, so she rides in the snaffle.  Even 4 years later.

I've found one she really likes.  The mouthpiece is medium-thick with a nice curve to it.  The rings are loose and fairly heavy.  It hangs low in her mouth--she's learned to carry the bit along instead of having the bridle hold it up for her.

I was always taught that horses should have two wrinkles at the corners of their mouth if the bit is adjusted properly.  Being the snot I am, I wondered, "Why?" 

For Chev, this was too high.  She couldn't relax.  I think bit placement has a lot to do with individual personality and mouth conformation.  And, at some point I wanted my horse to take some responsibility for the communication piece in her mouth.  By lowering the bit, it was an offering of respect.  Sure, she could evade it more easily.  A naughty horse would have gone straight to the "tongue-over-the-bit" trick (although I suspect they have their reasons).  But in my mind, it was giving her an opportunity to use the bit freely for communication too.

It was the difference between asking and telling.  And it did make a big difference in her behavior under saddle, and accepting the bit as something useful instead of something that was merely to be tolerated.

Lowering the bit a hole or two on each side allowed it to be a passive instrument instead of a constantly active one.

But, I'm getting way off track again.

Chev in her snaffle.  The noseband is just there for style--it's not tight enough to prevent her opening her mouth to play with the bit.

My horse rides in a snaffle because she is an uneducated horse.   I'm comfortable with people looking at her and thinking, "She is not in a curb.  She's not a finished horse."  Because that's exactly right--she isn't a finished horse.

Horses riding in bits beyond their means is a little bit like cars with tons of emblems all over and nothing under the hood.

I am a car aficionado.  I'll admit it, I love cars.  I first fell head over heels with a little Alfa Romeo Spyder when I was a senior in highschool.  My parents, wisely, did not let me buy the car.  But it started a love affair that continues today, resulting in the kind of insanity that compelled me to drag my '91 BMW e30 halfway across the country behind a U-Haul to a state where it is completely impractical to have--simply because I couldn't part with it.  We just rolled over 21,000 miles together the other day on the way back from the barn.

There are few things that annoy me more than pretending something is more awesome than it is.  I'd much rather have the sleeper car that looks like a piece of crap on the outside but has a twin turbo under the hood.

CRX...why, why, WHY??

Get what I'm saying?

I feel like riding a horse in a big impressive bit, whether it be the double-bridle, reining curb, or twisted dog bone "snaffle" barrel bit (which is not a snaffle at all!), when the horse obviously has no education, is just terrible.

Those bits were designed with a ton of pre-signal in mind, in the sense that they are meant to be "subtle" bits.  The barrel bit is almost never used that way.

I talked about this whole issue a little in my post on Feel.

You don't cram a young, uneducated horse into the double bridle or a curb bit without running into a whole bunch of problems.

That's because these bits all require EDUCATION and FINESSE to be used properly.  And that means education of the horse AND rider.

They were never meant to be used as forceful submission objects. 

They were never meant to be used as crude emergency brakes.

They were meant to increase transmission of signal between horse and rider.

So there you have it: the reason we "move up" in bits as the horse's training progresses.

Snaffle bits don't transmit cues with much pre-signal all by themselves.  Well, of course they don't.  All pre-signal comes from the rider.  But a snaffle doesn't amplify any of this signal the way a signal bit (like the ultimate in all signal bits, the vaquero spade bit) does.

Example:  The halt in the snaffle.

You have lots of opportunities to tell the horse what you want without yanking on the reins.  Or even touching them for that matter.

I sit deep and back first.  This shift of weight should tell Chev something is up.

Then I say "Hhhho."  

Then if I don't get anything, I pick up the reins.  She just about always stops at this point.

If she doesn't feel like listening, then I put some pressure on the reins--just enough to get a response.

This is all well and good if you're riding two-handed in an arena with no obstacles.  If you're ranch roping and riding one-handed, ever more subtle and correct cues are needed, so as the horse moves up through training levels, his education becomes more refined and so does the type of hardware he wears.

This is true for the Dressage horse, the reining horse, and the vaquero cowhorse.

And it's a pretty incredible process.

The problem is, you CAN fake results with a lot of hardware and gadgets--to a point.  It's not a good solution, but bits are used as forceful control devices.  I'm sure that's why we see so many horses riding in 5" shanks when they barely know how to turn or stop.

Holding the neck back with sheer force causes tremendous pressure on the nuchal ligament.  The horse breaks at the second vertebrae producing "false collection".  Image courtesy of Theresa Sandin at Sustainable Dressage

One of my pet peeves is draw reins.  What on earth are they supposed to accomplish?  I've seen them used extensively as they seem to be especially beloved in Western Pleasure training for "schooling a low headset".  What it really seems to teach the horse is to dump on the forehand and hollow out the back.

A horse in drawreins, breaking over hard at the 3rd vertebrae to escape the pressure.  Image courtesy of Theresa Sandin at Sustainable Dressage

I'll have to do an entry soon on various gadgets, because it seems like there are as many gadgets out there as there are problems people have with horses.

We're going on 4 years in the snaffle, and I'm pretty happy with where we are.  Her cues are becoming more refined, and her responses faster and more light.

For us the next step isn't the curb though.  It's the traditional hackamore. 

Sustainable Dressage

There's another website I found years ago, when I was working on retraining my gelding, Ben.

It's written by a very insightful Swedish woman.

It's a pretty incredible resource, whether you ride Dressage or not.

Sustainable Dressage

My background is in basic Dressage and hunters, but the information is just as valid in my western training.  A lot of it is "good common sense" (which can be altogether too uncommon).

Her explanations of bit mechanics are the best I've found.  And many are complete with diagrams, for those of us who are visual learning types.  In fact, it may be a great place to start:   The Bridle & the Bit

Ride on in, and check it out!