Thoughts on stuff and things (Or, how idiots like me can succeed with the horse)

I'm fixing up this trailer I got with the SO the other day, and I'm all freaked out about using the angle grinder (as a child I was afraid of sparklers too...don't judge).  I am not a fan of sparks.

So as I'm holding this thing gingerly in my work-gloved hands trying to psych myself up for it, a thought occurs to me:

"Megan, literally complete idiots use this thing without issues."

So I took a deep breath, got on the damned horse (figuratively) and used the damn angle grinder, sparks and all.  I did forget to breathe DURING the actual grinding in the beginning...but I got better at it.

Anyway...Sometimes I feel the same about horses.

I feel like "training" horses has become this big mysterious thing that one certain "horse whisperers" can do.  Like there wasn't a time when tons of people trained their own horses.  With varying results.  But still.  No NH needed.

The only thing I really see in common with these lower-end trainer people (and I'm not talking about the top-of-their-sport people), very generally, is that they are reasonably intelligent and observant and consistent about what they do.  They have a little sense about how horses learn and they use it to their advantage.

Of course, complete idiots also train horses and do a reasonably good job for the same reasons (I might be in this category.  What do I know, anyway?).

Rules for angle grinders:

1.  Make sure your equipment is hooked up right.  We don't want one of those disks sailing off  who-knows-where at 11,000 rpms.

2.  Don't try to jump in there and touch metal without getting the damn thing running first.  This results in unpredictable and dangerous behavior on the part of the angle grinder.

3.  Be sensitive and consistent for best results.

4.  Know when to stop.

Sound familiar?  Complete idiots can do this stuff.  You can do it!  Get out there and work your angle-grinder/horse.

Crooked legs

I actually made it out to see Chev yesterday, and arrived right before my farrier.  He's been working with a 4-year-old filly through the barn owner for some people he's never met, and was there to ride her.

I think it's strange that people will have their horse in training and never come out to see it.  This is a "free" horse--and believe me, no untrained horse is free--that the barn owner is apparently charging the owners $700 a month for training and board.  Farrier told me he's getting $400 to train the horse (a reasonable fee), and in 30 days already has her w/t/c and stopping like a champ.  He's doing a pretty good job with the little filly.  They have signed up for another month of training (which in any other case would be wise).  What I don't get is, full care board is $260.  So what's the other $40 for?  Hmmm.

Anyway.

I can't imagine these poor people know much about horses, because their "free horse" unfortunately looks like this up front:

Oh dear.

The first time the farrier had this horse out for training, tied to a post, I literally did a double take and said, "Tell me her front end doesn't really look like that!"  I thought she must have just been standing funny, but no, she is so pigeon-toed her feet almost point at each other when she's squared up.  This conformity is so bad she already has massive amounts of sidebone forming, her fetlocks are trashed--and she's only 4 years old.

So here's what I don't get.

Besides the obvious fact that this poor sweet animal should never have been created in the first place, since this kind of conformation fault is most certainly hereditary...

Why, oh why, when this filly came in, did no one tell the unsuspecting and largely clueless owners that they had an animal unlikely to stay sound in ANY kind of work for more than a couple of years?

Why did no one mention to them that their $1400 in training could have bought them a nice, well broke, registered horse that can already do everything they hope for?

Oh yes--I know...

Because that way no one makes any money.

I want to make this clear though.  I don't fault the farrier one bit.

He has been contracted out by the barn owner to do the training.  He has neither met, nor spoken with the owners directly, nor have they come to see any of the training sessions, nor does he have any way to contact them--except through the barn owner.

What a mess.

And the poor filly is sweet as can be--of course.  If her legs had been straighter she most certainly would have been worth every dollar of training put into her.

But in my opinion, it is cruel and hastens the breakdown of a horse with this kind of deformity to ride it at all.

In my opinion, she should be made as comfortable as possible with corrective trimming and a nice pasture for as long as she can live without pain.

But as a riding horse, I don't see much of a future here.  It's true she doesn't stumble--yet--but it's only a matter of (short) time before she breaks down completely.

What a shame.

In other news, I rode the beast after more than a week off, and she was good.  Unfortunately when I got her back to the tie rack afterwards her pulling back issue resurfaced.  I decided to just leave her tied for 30 minutes, during which time she had several more episodes.  She'd get to the end of the rope, suck back and pull pull pull, almost sitting down like a dog with her hind legs braced under her, realize she wasn't getting anywhere, and come forward again.  It was actually fairly calm, if you can ever describe a 1,300 pound animal pulling with all its weight on a metal post as "calm".  This time, everything held fast, and after 6 or 7 times, she was done with that, even licked and chewed after she gave into the pressure.  I would feel worse for her (since surely it must hurt to do that)--except all she has to do to avoid the pain is not pull back.  I still think (thanks to the Hancock in her) that it will take another few sessions of this to cure her completely.  But it's a start.

Chevy has more than a few conformation faults of her own, but at least all 4 feet point in the same direction--forward!

 Does this picture make my head look big?

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!

The rearing horse

I have been suffering from some pretty hardcore insomnia lately.

You may have noticed almost all of my posts are written after midnight.

Well, tonight's viewing of close to one million horse videos on youtube is not helping the situation.

A while back, after much hemming and hawing, I wrote I response to a woman who was wondering what to do when her (admittedly very green) horse turned to face her and started popping off his front end into a rear.  If you want, you can read the original thread here:  http://equine-mind-meld.2312922.n4.nabble.com/Stopping-rearing-before-it-becomes-a-habit-td4336642.html

I'm not going to lie--there is NOTHING that terrifies me more than the rearing horse.

I have seen them go up and over backwards on top of people.

I hope it is NEVER something I have to experience.  I haven't ever seen anyone killed by it, but with the rearing horse, getting crushed is always a possibility.  And I'm just not willing to take that risk.

Me and horses have an understanding: under NO circumstances, EVER is rearing around humans okay.

That is in regards to humans on the ground, and in the saddle.

Rearing, striking, squealing, bucking in the pasture with your horse buddies is all okay.  That's the appropriate place for that behavior.

Therefore, I don't feel a shred of guilt coming down fast and hard on a horse that is getting up in the forehand.

I had to teach Chev how to lunge.  She came to me able to be saddled, and someone could sit on her back.  She was mellow as all get-out, and I give her previous owners serious props for teaching her to load and not spoiling her in any way.

She didn't have a clue about lunging, which is just fine at about 3 when she started her education.  There were brief bouts of airs above the ground, as young horses do--but she quickly learned that rearing got her NOWHERE.  Well, nowhere but a whole heck of a lot more work.

I deal with the rearing horse very aggressively.  If not due to pain, rearing is the biggest finger your horse can give you.  It is the most basic gesture not only of disrespect, but active aggression.  And, I'm sorry.  But I am the head honcho any time I'm around a horse.  When I lunge I carry a lunge whip, and I am not afraid to use it.  That being said, my main weapons are always stomping, rapid arm waving and screaming like a banshee.

As soon as the horse is going at a respectful clip away from me and has completely forgotten about rearing, I back off.

It's pretty simple.

Aggressive behavior from horse = THE MEGAN OF ABSOLUTE TERROR!!

Horsey rears, and subsequently thinks he is about to meet his maker.  That's how terrible I become.

'Course, you have to be fair when you have this kind of power, or else you're just a Terrorist.

I always back off when I get the response I want.

Notice I didn't say "back down".  I back off.  I remove the pressure I was putting on horsey so I send a clear signal about what behavior is okay.

Therefore horsey becomes respectful of my position without being afraid of me.

A lot of people think this is cruel.

Personally I think what happens to a horse after he's labeled (with good reason) a rearer and a man-killer is worse.

So it's better to avoid this whole problem as much as possible.

Tonight I watched a lot of videos of horses rearing, trying to pinpoint the moment they set their mind to it.

The really terrifying thing about the rearing horse is they can do it with almost no warning.

This video stopped my heart.  Fortunately for both horse and rider, he did exactly what needed to happen to save the situation.  Had he pulled back or not held to the horse's neck, I think it's very likely the horse would have gone over backwards with him aboard.




Didn't your heart stop for a few seconds when you watched that?

I want to stress again, this rear appears to have nothing to do with the rider whatsoever, and everything to do with what they say is an abscess that burst from his hoof the next day.  I think it's pretty apparent from the video that the abscess was in the right front hoof, as you can see the horse avoiding putting weight on it throughout the video--one hard step onto the hoof seems to be what sets him off.  When he feels his rider has heard him, he stops.  Much to the man's relief, I'm sure.

So that, my friends, is why I don't tolerate rearing in any form.  I consider even a little pop off the front legs a certain precursor to full on rearing, which once the seed has been planted, is a tough thing to "un-train".

The woman with the young rearing horse got all sorts of advice from people who said she was pushing her horse too hard.

The horse is a 4-year-old Arabian gelding who has enjoyed a cushy life as a pasture puff up until this point.

Unlike the horse above, and while I'm hesitant to say anything without actually seeing said horse, I'm pretty sure he was just expressing his displeasure about being asked to do anything more than eat carrots and hay all day.

I don't think 4 years old is too young to learn to go around in a large circle on the line.

Nor do I think you do your baby any favors by keeping him on a short rope--it just causes more stress and torsion on joints that aren't yet well developed.

Get him out on the line, and make him and his little uneducated hooves stay out there.  It's about time for your little young'un to learn about personal space.

The girl in this next video doesn't seem to have any clue that her poor riding seems to be this horse's primary reason for his behavior.  She doesn't even seem to understand how dangerous this can be, since she describes this as "just goofing around".




I think to the horse-tuned it's pretty obvious how unhappy this horse is throughout the whole ride--I feel like I saw no fewer than 7 moments before the rear that told me that ride was going south, FAST.  And she ignored all the warnings.  So, there you have it.  It's a great contrast to the video above, because this poor horse's entire problem seems to be his rider!  She doesn't even have a clue that she's training her horse to respond with this behavior every time.  Not that she deserves better behavior, since she's listening to him so little.

No wonder comments are disabled.

I'm sure pretty soon the horse will be "too naughty to be ridable."  Sure.  Totally his fault.  Poor thing.

Nip it in the bud!

I don't want this to be a blog that slams other training methods...

But...What the hell were they thinking?

I actually titled this file "Parelli WTF.jpg".

I really don't want this blog to at all be about "I'm right" and "they're wrong".  If there's any one thing I can freely admit, without a "but" in there, it's that I am not a trainer, and I don't know everything there is to know.

In fact, I've said before that I know just enough to know I don't know enough.

And I really, truly believe that!

That's part of what makes horses fun.  There is always something more to learn, something to realize you're not doing right, and a way to fix it.  It's a learning process, and it can last you through your whole life.

That being said...is the Parelli camp actually advocating that I have to eat grass with my horse to "collect my horse's heart" and bond with him?  I seriously thought this was a cruel photoshop joke on Mr. Parelli when I first saw this cover.

If that's "Mastery", then I'll happily stay a dumb horse gal bumbling along in ignorance for all eternity...

Because that, folks, is just plain crazy.

A day of thanks

I owe more than a little bit to a great trainer.

I haven't ever met her, and I doubt I ever will.

She isn't a BNT, and you won't find her DVDs on ebay or her show on TV.  She doesn't do clinics, or train horses anymore.

But she's helped me more than anyone else with understanding my horse.

I know her through her blog, the Mugwump Chronicles.

My blog name is a tipped hat to her.

If you haven't already, it'll be worth your invested time to duck in & give it a read.

www.mugwumpchronicles.blogspot.com

It's always time well spent.