The moment when the trainer/rider stops defining ethical behavior as doing what is good for the horse and replaces that definition with the doing only what the horse wishes to do the rider/trainer ceases to practice natural horsemanship. Such a person often seeks to elevate their weakness into a virtue--equating their failure of leadership with compassion.
It is not.
It is bad enough that such an attitude poisons their relationship but the more significant problem is that it taints the reputation of natural horsemanship. Of course, there is a ready market for such a weak and deceptive message.
Natural horsemanship has as its first principle the recognition that horses are looking for a leader. It is only in that leader that they find true security. If a person's psyche is so damaged that it equates leadership with coercion and abuse the human needs a healing that proper natural horsemanship can provide. There certainly is no healing in the idea that looking out for the horse's best interest instead of giving into its whims is bullying.
Humans want autonomy. Horses want security.
If one thinks that natural horsemanship means a relationship governed by the horse's whims than one certainly has no autonomy. And the poor horse certainly has no security.
Training that is based on 51% control and 49% affection builds an honest relationship.
(Here is a photo of our beautiful Marsh Tacky mare. More about the Marsh Tacky's to come. If you are looking for a Marsh Tacky I know will be happy to direct you to a breeder.)
No comments:
Post a Comment