I don't mean to throw a wrench into the works, but what makes people hate natural horsemanship so much?

Some of the methods have been utilized for centuries, and the term "natural" as it applies to training horses is found in the writings of Xenophon on the art of horsemanship. Daniel Sullivan practiced "join up" in the 1700s, but he called it by a different name.

In 1858 John Solomon Rarey from Ohio was summoned to Windsor Castle in England to calm a horse for Queen Victoria after word of his "horse whispering" methods spread. Rarey put his hands on the horse and laid it down on the ground and then he lay down beside it and rested his head on its hooves. I'm posting a link on Rarey if you are interested in learning more about him. Willis J. Powell promoted "new" natural methods while Rarey was the famous horse whisperer of the 1800s.Those who brought the concepts to the forefront of horse training in more recent years were probably Ray Hunt and Bill Dorrance, but all of these methods are rooted in melding of centuries old practices and methods with origins found in a variety of cultures. Many variations on the methods have evolved, incorporating new ways of applying the same ancient principles. The recent label of "Natural Horsemanship" was made famous by Pat Parelli, but the concept of "natural" in horse training has always been that of working with the nature of the horse to gain willing cooperation as opposed to forcing submission.

The nature of the horse is his way of learning and reacting to the world around him, and the more we incorporate knowledge of that nature into our communication with our horses, the easier it is for horses to learn.

Over recent years I've seen a gradual transition away from harsh methods using force and aimed at quick results that predominated much of the horse training practiced in the US, and am glad to see that more and more people now have access to learning about better ways of communicating with their horses.

Whenever significant change happens, the pendulum typically swings a bit farther in the direction of the change than it probably should, but that is often what allows the change to happen at all. As the society adapts, the pendulum will eventually find its balance in the middle and come to rest, and in this case, the world of horse training will most likely be a better one for the change having happened.

I also see trainers today being held to a higher standard of accountability for their methods, and those methods being questioned more openly and freely these days. This has put some "trainers" who have used more forceful methods under the microscope, and they don't like it much. The change has come as a bitter pill for some to swallow.

I don't care what term is applied, as long as the training methods are as much about training the humans as they are about training horses, and involve working with the nature of the horse, rather than against it, in order to gain cooperation through better communication, I call those methods correct.

Here is the link I mentioned.................

http://rarey.com/sites/jsrarey/

It's because the term "natural horsemanship" has become fake. If you strip the extras and the media and the unnessisary expenses, it really is the best way to train. In thoses terms, natural horsemanship means training with the horse in mind. Thinking about why they react the way they do and work around that instead of just pushing them through training. I blame it mostly on media because all the big name trainers actually have a pretty got idea of what they're doing but then the media blows it up and makes up ideas to help sell merchandise and the trainers get caught up in it. With NH freaks, it shows how easy it is to fall into that trap. They're not there for you to copy every move, they are there to help you. If you go to a clinic a responsible experienced person would know what to take out if it. Like you said you use the methods often, me too. That's what they're there for. But then there's the inexperienced people who get carried away. It's exactly that, a lable. They take the old-time methods, add a thing or two, and people think they made it up. Now, instead of meaning 'working with the horse to train', natural horsemanship means Parelli, Clinton Anderson, Monty Roberts ect.. And that's not what it should mean. If you mention "natural horsemanship" someone askes you something like "oh, who's methods do you use?". I use a bit if all them because there's nothing wrong with watching it if you know what to take out of it.

Like others have said, its not the techniques, its the one size fits all, if you watch my DVDs you will be a horse trainer, and all of your problems will disappear, that gets my goat. The way they market to beginners, and timid riders, who dont have the skills, proper mentality, or work ethic to succeed in such programs.

Im not against NH per say, but when someone tells me thats what they're into, I have to sit back and evaluate what kind of NH person they are. Are they the ones who worship parelli? Do they treat their horses to death? What kind of relationship do they have with their horse? Are they the kind of people that forget horses are herd animals who need a leader? Or are they afraid of their horse? Do they spend more time playing games than actually making progress? Are they making progress? Are they people who simply understand how horses work and use their natural reactions and instincts to painlessly manipulate horses behaviors into trained skills?

ADD: I don't have an issue with a person who understands horses using Parelli, or any other big name programs, most of those horses will benefit. But what I and I think a few others are trying to say is, people who are already in over their head, who own horses they're already intimidated by or feel sorry for, or have a problem horse they aren't capable of handling to begin with, seem to be the majority of the people who try and ultimately fail these programs. When a skilled horseman uses NH which i think is a broad term, (I would say its just proper effin horsemanship) it creates a finely tuned line of communication and clear expectations. Just as gallop mentioned, the primary focus needs to be on the human when it comes to training a horse. The majority of horses don't have a problem learning, its people who can't own up to the fact that they're in fact the ones lacking.

Again, when practiced properly I call NH just plain old horsemanship. There isn't anything natural about it, its just someone who actually knows wtf they're doing who doesn't do ignorant things that for some reason are called traditional by NH advocates. I've never met 2 trainers who train their horses the same way, yet if we don't follow one of your NH leaders, everything we do is lumped together as traditional and harsh or cruel. Which is why when someone says they're into natural horsemanship my little antennas pop out to try to feel out if youre a total idiot jackwad or not because of the way "followers" treat "non-followers". Every time you use body language or position to manipulate or read a horse, its NH, weather youre a parelli follower or not. I dont have to watch his videos to not beat my horse into submission which is what you jackasses act like anyone who doesn't join those programs do.

Tonight, I just rode an 8 year old green mare who had less than 2 months undersaddle over a year and a half ago and hasnt been worked at all on the ground since november 2010, in a cutback english saddle. I never had to hit her, run her knees to the ground, tie her head down or up, hobble her, or any other ridiculous nonsense, I did a total of about 15 min ground work and got on. We had no issues. I didnt have to watch DVDs to accomplish it, or open up a can of whoopass because I know what the hell im doing. I didnt use NH, I used horsemaship. The experiences I've had have taught me how to read a horse well enough to know what I can and can not get away with, and how to keep my composure to remain in control of the situation.

You covered a lot of good ground there. I don't "hate" NH, but in general, I think I could say that I "don't approve" of it.

1. The name. NOTHING we do with horses is NATURAL.

2. The showmanship, "I'll solve all your problems" mentality.

3. On the more radical side of NH, the "relationship with your horse" mentality. I believe that horses want/need leaders, not friends. We remove them from the heard, they need a heard leader. That is the relationship I am looking for. Yes, a willing partner, but not an equal partner.

4. I think one of the favorite techniques, the circles/longing on the 12 foot lead is harmful to the horse. That is just too much torque too many times on horse legs.

5. On the plus side, one thing that most NH practitioners seem to do is LOAD A HORSE. When I bought a yearling from 700 miles away 2 years ago, the best place that I could find to overnight on the way back was with a NH trainer. I immediately thought "Well, if she won't load the next day, I know we will have help." After her first trailer ride in 100 degree heat, I surely didn't blame her for not wanting to load. The NH guy helped us load her with only minimal stress, none of which was directed at the trailer, and she has been a reasonably good loader ever since. If she doesn't choose to load at a particular moment, a smack with the lead rope on the buttocks gets her going everytime.

Ed to add: again, me and Jeff agree....happens waaay too often, very scary ;)

It's not that I'm against people learning to read what their horse is telling them, nor am I against a more calm approach to teaching your horse.

What I'm against is these concepts have been around for absolutely ages, most decent trainers have got a handle on the idea you can't beat a horse into submission and cut corners. Just some businessman with a big money spinning brain on has decided to use these concepts and call it an all new 'natural horsemanship', put a whopping great price tag on what's essentially glorified rope and sticks, and tell people you HAVE to have this in order to make your horse trainable.

It's convincing people that if you watch a couple of DVDs, spend a load of money on some stuff and pop out looking proffesional that you've suddenly mastered what is years of training, skill and dedication.

I've seen too many people watch a bit of parelli and come out convinced they can train a horse and bring them on perfectly, and it usually ends in tears.

I am absolutely not against people taking the time to learn to read their horse, and have an open mind to new ideas - but I can see from a mile off that it's a scam with too many people as usual following it like sheep.

It's not teaching people to think for themselves, just get convinced once again if they spend money they can cut corners.

IMO it's like any other form of training...a nightmare in the wrong hands. Idiots think they can read a few Parelli or Monty Roberts books and then buy a mustang fresh off the plains and turn it into a riding horse. It's just a nightmare in the hand of inexperienced people.

"Natural Horsemanship" is a marketing gimmick made up to sell overpriced stuff to beginners and to convince people who have never ridden and are scared to ride that they can train a horse, and do it better than any other rider out there. And that anyone who rides who doesn't use the nh name, the overpriced crap, and the videos etc. is an abusive, hateful person who shouldn't be allowed near a horse.

Do I bash nh? Sometimes. But I feel the whole movement is based on that "us vs. them" mentality, where nh followers feel superior to everyone else, and don't hesitate to try to rub our noses in it. In person, I shrug my shoulders and go win my class; that makes my point for me. On discussion forums like this one... I can only tell you what I think. And I think it's all marketing, no substance.

When nhers stop bashing everyone else in the world, they won't get bashed back.

edit: non NHers are as adamantly "my way or the highway" as NHers????? No way. I've never had to sit through an entire ride listening to anyone but an nher go on and on about how great their training methods are and how I should try them and how I'd be better and don't I want to have a bond with my horse and why would I ever use non nh methods they're all so cruel and how much happier my horse would be and oops sorry did I hit you with my carrot stick again? my horse doesn't listen real well in his parelli halter I'm riding with cuz I'm cool and you're not and anyway if you don't want a bond with your horse then you're ruling him through pain and fear and MY way is so much - oops, didn't mean to run into your horse like that is he okay - anyways as i was saying MY way is so much better than yours and - oops yea he kicks a bit sorry - but nh is the only way to go...

Nor am I a selective listener. You're judging me there. Further, you're assuming I use none of the methods you find so wonderful. You don't know how I train. You've assumed your methods are better. Typical.

I think your question contains the "keyword" here and that is "hate". Look at all the hateful, negative language used here. It is truly sad but at the same time, it reveals the truth about the people who are ranting with their hateful venom. I don't get how people can hate people they do not know and call them hateful, disparaging names when they have never met these people or worked with them. Then you have those who say things like "all Parelli horses are dangerous and crazy and out of control". What a bunch of nonsense. I have three horses that have been trained using natural horsemanship, most of it was the Parelli methods because Parelli was the only NH trainer in the market when I began. If you find a horse that is "explosive and out of control", it is not a Parelli trained horse. It is a horse that was ruined by someone who was a Parelli "wanna be" and failed miserably. You can't blame the method because the user was an idiot and did not bother to properly learn the method. And if you are too stupid to understand that, well I guess we will see you continue to bash and gush your nonsense to make yourself appear knowledgeable. Sorry, it is too easy to see you are a silly blowhard and I have to laugh some more. And what is with all the talk about cults. I have never seen a NH cult and I just wonder where are these cults and how is it I have avoided them all these years? It is laughable. There is another keyword I will throw in here, and that would be "ignorance" and there is evidence of a lot of that here along with all the "hate speak". Just laugh it off as it is too absurd to take seriously. NH is just a word and you can dissect it in a million ways and some make it sound so rigid and I totally disagree about the "all encompassing" and "one way or the highway". What a bunch of nonsense. Every horse is different. If your ability as a handler is not open to this, you are lost and you will fail. You have to be able to read your horse and change your response. Again, this is why I urge people to go to a clinic. You must develop your feel, timing and balance. You must be able to feel of your horse and feel for him and understand what he is telling you he needs. Almost anybody can follow a simple ABC cookbook, but that is not what NH is about. You must be able to understand that all horses are different and you have to relate to them how they understand. NH is about learning to communicate with your horses through feel and every horse feels things in a different way. Too many just are unable to understand this and many do not want to spend the time it takes to master this communication and without it, you are lost. I don't get all the bickering about the small stuff. We should be greatful we have an opportunity to learn from these gifted horsemen. I know I am.

I agree and have the same thought processes as Gallop on the natural horsemanship foundation so I won't bother repeating that information again. I will be forever grateful for the time I was able to learn from Ray Hunt and I was introduced to Ray's methods by one of my wonderful Austrailian trainers. I find that I have learned something from everyone I have worked with, even if it was that some of their methods were not for me. I take what I want to use from different trainers and move on. I dont' find it necessary to rant against people unless I think what they do is dangerous. I find it easy to relate my personal experiences and give someone my advice if they ask and I don't get all negative and hateful about it. And I can only offer advice relative to my personal experiences. If I have never met someone or gone to one of their clinics, I don't think I'm qualified to give an opinion on their methods. And I don't have any aversion to people who market their services and products and derive an income from such. I think that is just good business practices. I know I charge for my services so I see nothing unfair about that.

For the most part, you just have to ignore all the negative talk and general bashing. When someone starts ranting and name calling, I basically lose interest. Such a lack of ability to relate in a positive manner just for the sake of being informative and helpful tells me enough about a person to know I can't believe a word they have to say. Like you, I don't understand all the "hate speak". Who cares who founded what and why rave like a lunatic about the use of a term and pick apart the verbage just to make a personal justification for your belief systems. Makes no sense. Natural horsemanship, as I understand it and use to a level of excellence, is wonderful and I will continue to use it and advance my relationships and communication with my horses for the rest of my natural life. I encourage you to do so as well if you choose to do so. Have a wonderful and blessed day.

First Natural Horsemanship is NOT new.....it has been around for centuries but lately has developed some new names from people taking credit for it. Watch the original The Virginian (The one made in the 50's or 60's--I will try and remember the name of the star) and you will hear him mention "gentling" the horse he trained for the School Marm. He referred to this as opposed to the "bronc" she liked and wanted to get. In fact he took the bronc and switched it for that horse and pretended that horse was the bronc she had wanted broken.

Second I have no problem with Natural Horsemanship.....I have a problem with the two people most often quoted as the "leaders" of NH.

EDIT

"One example of people bashing NH, while actually doing quite a bit of NH without the lable. Below is a great example of this. You guys are going to enjoy it...it is hilarious:" Did you even read my first paragraph? The techniques have been around for centuries. NH just gives them new terms and pretends this person or that person came up with the ideas.

"Parelli's first three levels with a horse while in high school, and they really stressed that you need to gain the horse's respect before their trust and that you must always be an alpha." Ha ha ha. He may stress it with words but encourages actions that does not ensure the people become the dominant individual. Here are some examples.....

http://bumpypath.blogspot.com/2008/08/taking-parel...

http://board.horsechannel.com/Topic325716-10-1.asp...

Parelli trained horses are often dangerous. Doesn't mean they all are...but I have only been kicked at by a few horses in my life....and MOST of them were trained with Parelli methods by people who quite honestly had no business with horses, but then again that is who Parelli appeals to most. One of those mares pawed me in the head. I am alive because I saw what was coming and ducked. The hoof grazed me and caused a headache that lasted three days and the top of my head was so tender I could barely touch it.

Don't get me wrong, Parelli horses are all angels...until you ask them to do something they really don't want to do....then they often explode.

Monty Roberts? Seems all those claims he made about his childhood weren't quite true.

Third I agree with Burdfour in the respect of the relationship between you and the horse. I will tell anyone point blank....There is NO equality in the relationship between a horse and rider. One is dominant and the other the submissive. If you are not the dominant individual in the relationship the horse will adopt the attitude that you are not strong enough to protect it. Which in turn will seriously undermine the horse's trust in you, and that can cause a dangerous situation in a hurry.

EDIT Again you miss my point.....We are not doing NH......NH is doing many things that are in fact traditional, but relabel it as NH. And again Parelli may talk a good game....he just doesn't DO a good game. I am sorry but you will never convince me that the Parelli system of training is a good system.....I have come too close to being killed with horses trained using his methods, and have seen too many trail horses trained with his methods go absolutely bonkers. As far as his advice......he can keep it, I am simply not interested. I usually don't take this line with trainers but I have seen too much of his nonsense, both from him and from other "Parelli Certified" trainers to be taken in.

The last instances were two cases of horses we sold to two different "Parelli" trainers. One was a two year old gelding with good ground manners....My (at that time 7 year old) daughter could lead him and he did not even consider trying to even take a bite of grass while he was on the lead. A year later they sold him because they couldn't handle him on a lead. He became a favorite horse of the people they sold him too....AFTER they retrained the ground manners that the Parelli trainers messed up. The other horse was an arabian weanling filly that we sold to Parelli trainers in OK. Already broke to lead but not to load. A few years later they sold her because she was dangerous and wanted to know if we wanted her back. Now the bad thing is this.....these are the only two Parelli trainers we have ever sold horses to. One was before I knew or cared exactly who Parelli was.....the other because I did not think to ask their training methods before they drove up from Corpus Christi TX to Manes MO to get the horse I had advertised. I couldn't by any rights back out by that time so I bought the bullet and sold the horse.

I personally am a user and promoter of natural horsemanship and tend to agree that there are a lot of people who either treat is as a cult or are completely against it but I don't think it's for one reason alone but a group of reasons.

First, I think it's because natural hosrmanship basically tells riders "everything you've dne up to this point has been wrong and abusive to your horse" and I can't argue that some riders might take offence to that. They don't want to think they've been doing wrong to their horse and therefore reject the idea. Another factor that ties into this is how natural horsmanship is presented. Like I said, the people who folow natural horsemanship are like a cult; it's their way or the high-way. They shove their ideas upon others and end up causing more harm then good.

The number one reason I can think of that some people avoid natural horsemanship is because it's simply inconvenient. This method promotes the use of bitless bridles, no spurs, long hours of training and spending time with your horse and for most people, that's timeand energy they just don't want to spend (which is extremely unfortunate and frankly, sad).

All this makes NH users over-protective of their method and over-sensitive about other methods, making anything that other riders use for training "evil". Other riders are repelled by the idea of natural horsemanship because of the time and energy required, and the idea that they've been training "wrong" and abusing their horse and they therefore reject it.

If it were up to me, I'd like to put together sites, web-shows, etc. promoting the ideaof natural horsemanship without thrusting the idea on others. Making it both easy to understand without punishing those who refuse to use it. But too bad this world isn't perfect.

Everyone here has valid points. So I'm only going to add a little... Rick Gore. He does his own way of horsemanship, which I find is really great and works well. He doesn't approve of all the bitless bridles, so on and so forth. He's pretty down to earth, funny, and knows his way around a horse. If you youtube him you'll get a good look at what he's about. Although a lot of hardcore english riders don't like him.