Good <strike>Pat Perelli school of </strike> horsemanship

Pat Parelli is a genius at marketing. There's nothing fundamentally wrong with his teaching, but it's really nothing more than any sound thinking horseman would do, just dressed up with gimmicks and labels.

Bareback riding is great for communication between horse and rider, but can get exhausting for long distances. A saddle will help the rider relax and let the leather take the stress of constantly balancing, even if they choose to ride without a bridle.

Natural horsemen exist in both English and Western disciplines. It's really kind of free of discipline, to be honest - more a foundation to base training off of. Any horse will benefit from natural horsemanship. But I wouldn't put Parelli's name on it - just keep it generic. There's a fair amount of controversy surrounding him and personally, speaking only for myself, I'd feel like it was an advertisement for Pat Parelli more than a book about ranchers and their horses.

Also, it is true that a very accomplished horseman can ride without a bridle, but out on the open range, where anything can happen without warning, *some* kind of backup control is usually warranted. If a bobcat pops up out of nowhere, your horse could be halfway to California before you get him stopped without a bridle.

It is true that masters of horsemanship are often able to communicate beautifully with their horse and not need any tools/equipment, but your average Joe isn't up to that level of skill. I'm certainly not, not even when I'm riding every day.

So I guess just bear that in mind. And I hope that helped a bit. Remember it's only my opinion and there are other horse people here who may completely disagree. )

Parelli is a differnt training approach that uses the horses psychological makeup to develop a more refined communication.

There is no specific tack involved, it can be western or english. The ultimate is to ride without any tack at all (not even a halter - google halterless jumping on youtube, Mrs Parellis often does demos on it).

But even a devoted Parelli person would not work a fence without tack. Your are most likely to use western tack because that will allow for tools, etc on the saddle (they'd likely also have saddle bags - you can google those to see what they look like). The saddle is a positive thing because a well fitted saddle spreads the weight evenly over the back of the horse making it more comfortable for the horse to carry.

A parelli trained horse is going to have a wider 'vocabulary' than a traditional western trained horse because of the training technique. For example, your riders could be able to use hand signals to have a horse help them or move to them while they're in the middle of something. One Parelli skill is to call the horse to you using only a hand signal.

Sample scenario:
A tree is fallen across the fence. The goal is to untangle the wire and pull the tree out of there by tying the tree to the saddle horn and having the horse pull the tree out. (Here the breast collar on a western saddle helps keep it on the horse's back)

Traditional horse: Once the tree is tied on, the man would likely go to the head of the horse and lead the horse away, dragging the tree behind. If he needed to cut more wires or what ever, he'd 'ground tie' the horse and go back to cutting the wires. Then return to the head of the horse.

Jerk Trainer (50% of Western people fall into this category): Ties tree to saddle, then forces the horse away by shouting at him or slapping something on his rump. (Hopefully, horse kicks jack**s in the head or drags the tree over him)

Parelli: Tree is tied to saddle and the man go back to the tree and tell the horse to walk out (pick your command) till the rope is tight, then tell the horse whoa to stop so he can cut more wires or what ever (horses routinely hold ropes tight in calf roping). Then tell the horse to walk on again. The horse is accustomed to paying attention and being a partner in complex interactions.

These are real rough descriptions. You could post on a Parelli board for a trainer to provide you better input specific to your work. IF you specifically cite the Parelli training techniques, you'll find there are devotees who will pick up on anti-Parelli techniques. Then there are also ideological detractors who claim Parelli is a way the justify never riding your horse.

I'm not a devotee, but there are many other natural training techiques out there. It depends on what you're story calls for. If it's a simple farm horse, then Parelli is a good choice. If you need more complex skills then clicker training is better at very precise or multi-step complex skills.

Whoops, posted at the same time. Natural horsemanship is a great way to train a horse from the ground up and I wish more people used it. It's a matter of speaking a horse's language, of knowing what a flick of an ear or a snort signifies, and of being able to communicate your wishes to the horse in a way the horse can understand.

If your ranchers treat their horses with care and respect, then that's the basis for healthy relationships. Everything stems from that, not from being "stronger" than the horse (which no one is anyway) and not from being able to push the horse around.

I respect the fact that my horse weighs a thousand pounds and could stomp me flat if she really wanted to. She respects the fact that I am herd leader, I will protect her from the scary things that want to eat her, and I am to be obeyed.

It works out fairly well. ;o)

Just thinking about it, here is another example of differences between some "traditional" and a more natural horse training technique:

Tieing a horse to a post. The horse is wearing a halter and when they reach the end of the line that is holding them to the post, many horses panic (they're flight animals) and will struggle against the halter. Their instict is to pull against the rope in an attempt to escape. When a horse panics (truely panics) there is no thought process for them. They are physically reacting to fear and can injure themselves and (in a total panic melt down) even kill themselves.

Traditional: Get a foal young enough that there isn't much weight to them. Tie them to something (hopefully with a wide strap around the back of their ears) and let them stuggle until they decide the rope is stronger than they are. On an adult, unhandled horse, I've seen people put them in stalls and tie them up (the thought being the stall is smaller, so the horse won't struggle as much). This is started for short period, then time is increased. The thought process is the horse learns that the rope is stronger then they are, so in the future will not fight it.

Natural technique: Teach foal/horse to accept halter. Once that's done, eventually teach them to 'give to preasure'. This is teaching them that when they hit the end of the rope, the way to relieve the pressure is to move into the rope, not try to flee away from it. The next step in the "Parelli" progression is to teach the horse to actually pull you with the lead rope/halter. Basically, the thought is that they learn the halter/rope are not a trap and are as much a tool as any other tack.

I've had an adult mare who paniced when tied. Either she'd learned to break ropes or something happened on time when she was tied up. Who knows because she came to me a hot mess. We worked it out using the natural techniques. That particular time, I did use stepping on the lead line to teach her to give to the pressure because she reared when she paniced.

chartruscan said:

My thinking is that the ranchers ride with bridles and saddles, but grew up being trained to also ride bareback, to learn how to "be one with the horse". It's not a huge plot point or even a minor one. I'm just looking for what differences there might be from typical Western riding in daily ranching life. Descriptors of how they sit in their saddle, how much they use the reins and for what, etc.

Click to expand...

A responsible person might work in a ring without tack because it's a challenge and fun. On VERY RARE occasion, they might hop on out in the field to goof around a bit. But because the horse is a flight animal, (when paniced their brain shuts down and just says RUN, RUN, RUN.) they wouldn't do this often. It's the riders job to get a paniced horse's head back (or bale out at 35mph).

The reality is bareback riding come about naturally because when you go out to catch them in the field, you can walk back or ride back. So you hop on and ride back. When you need to make a quick run to the back side of the farm to get the idiot colt that jumped out for the tenth time. You can throw a halter on, grab a rope and go OR you can lug out a saddle, put on a bridle, then go get the d*** colt, then when you get back, have to carry the saddle and bridle back into the barn. So, it isn't really a "learning to be one with the horse" so much as "becoming one with the horse" because you're too lazy to lug a heavy saddle out of the barn.

BlueMouse said:

I respect the fact that my horse weighs a thousand pounds and could stomp me flat if she really wanted to. She respects the fact that I am herd leader, I will protect her from the scary things that want to eat her, and I am to be obeyed.

Click to expand...

It always amazes me to see some idiot pounding on a 1000 pound animal that can kick lightening quick. All my horses have come here for free, mostly because of owners like that.

As with any training program, it will depend on the level of bonding between horse and rider. It will also depend on the intelligence of both.

My horse was trained western before I bought him. But I spent everyday that first summer with him, brushing, grooming and riding. While I rode with a grazing bit, most of the time, I just let the reigns over his neck and guided him with my knees or a shift in the saddle. I also did a lot of bareback riding. The thing my sister could not figure out why the horse came to me and not her, is that I talked to the horse, and brought him treats.

I would say, he trained me more than I trained him and it was a good experience that I took with training other horses.

And while my horse could also do English, there is a world of difference between Western and English when it comes to jumping.

My GF back then had a part thoroughbred / Arabian. Very high strung. She was part German / French, very high strung. Not a good mix for either. Yet, whenever I rode her horse, he never acted up and I could put him through his paces. The difference is the attitude and the horse could sense this and was more likely to do what I asked of it to do. (She hated that).

It's called "natural horsemanship," and is considered to have started with Tom and Bill Dorrance. Ray Hunt, Monty Roberts, John Lyons, and a host of others use the same basic approach. Parelli is more or less the same, although a bit more into what some might call "tricks," such as going without tack.

Both traditional and natural horsemanship rely on the fact that all the horse wants to do is get along. Natural horsemanship tends to understand that a horse needs very minimal cues. Traditional horsemanship uses big cues. The end result is probably pretty much the same, and reflects more on the quality of the trainer then anything else.

More important then the technique is understanding what you want and how to get there. And any horse that has had a lot of experience with humans needs to be dealt with in part on its history. My present horse is a Mustang that I ride with a rope halter and has never seen a bit.

A Quarterhorse I owned I rode in a Kimberwicke bit, because a curb bit caused him to toss his head, and a snaffle didn't stop him. Not my preferred choice, but it worked with a minimum of work on my part and stress on the horse's part. No way in hell would I have tried him in a halter. His habits were set and I picked him up when he was twenty.

Horsemanship has nothing to do with riding style, whether it is Western or English or driving or pulling horses.

People who work a lot with horses use whatever technique will provide the best results with the least effort. Personally I love the halter breaking technique of put halter on horse with a 20' lead line dragging behind. Turn horse out. As the horse steps on the lead line, he'll learn that a jerk on the lead line means stop. Very easy technique for me to teach the horse, as I don't have to do any work. It's a technique that is used in both traditional and natural horsemanship.

Parelli is a good trainer. A lot of horses respond well to his training methods. Some do not. Of course I can say the same thing about traditional methods.

Best of luck,

Jim Clark-Dawe

chartruscan said:

Again, these are progessive ranchers, who treat their animals with respect.

Click to expand...

We traditional horsemen and women treat our animals with respect as well.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

This isn't about Parelli in particular, but since it's been brought up, I'm going to enter a caveat about the twenty-foot rope:

It's inadvisable to leave a horse trailing any rope that's long enough to tangle around his hind legs. All it takes is a tangle and a sudden fright, and the animal you thought was secure is down with a broken leg. (In my knowledge: a lovely mare who was left with a permanent limp and nearly crippled due to a trailing long line and a barking dog.)

For safety's sake, the lead rope exercise is best done in a small enclosure--a stall or round pen, with a rope long enough for the animal to step on, but not long enough to wrap around his hind feet. Heavy round lead lines are safest, as being less likely to snarl than flat "tape" lines.

While youngsters and hot bloods seem to be more likely to find stupid ways to injure themselves, any horse can--and this is the sort of accident that really is totally preventable.

L.C. Blackwell said:

This isn't about Parelli in particular, but since it's been brought up, I'm going to enter a caveat about the twenty-foot rope: I can end up with a caveat about just about any way to train a horse. It's impressive how many ways things can go wrong with a horse. Then again, that's what EQUINE LIABILITY is about, so I guess I actually benefited from it.

It's inadvisable to leave a horse trailing any rope that's long enough to tangle around his hind legs. All it takes is a tangle and a sudden fright, and the animal you thought was secure is down with a broken leg. (In my knowledge: a lovely mare who was left with a permanent limp and nearly crippled due to a trailing long line and a barking dog.) Yep, it can happen. On the other hand, the horse will be rope broke and will ignore ropes around its body, it will learn to give to a tied rope, it will learn which foot is actually standing on the rope, it will learn to walk with its nose to the side to prevent tangling, and because it's used to getting tangled and having ropes on its feet, if it walks into wire and gets trapped, it will just stand there until you come along to get it out. There are pluses and minuses to most things in life.

For safety's sake, the lead rope exercise is best done in a small enclosure--a stall or round pen All training should start in the smallest enclosure possible, but this technique has been done to drive untrained horses., with a rope long enough for the animal to step on, but not long enough to wrap around his hind feet. Yep, makes sense, but I'd prefer starting with longer ropes. It gives me more room to work when there are problems (you'll have problems with any training method). It's much safer if the rope tangles on something and you've got a few feet of distance to get it untangled. Heavy round lead lines are safest, as being less likely to snarl than flat "tape" lines. And cotton. Not nylon.

While youngsters and hot bloods seem to be more likely to find stupid ways to injure themselves, any horse can--and this is the sort of accident that really is totally preventable. Most horse accidents are at some level preventable. Done right and paying attention, it's reasonably safe. Done wrong and not paying attention, you'll get screwed, and so won't the horse.

Click to expand...

You should watch my horse. He knows exactly which foot is standing on the rope, and can walk without letting the line go between his feet. And because he's used to it, last winter when he walked through the electric fence (it was under the snow because the snow was that deep) and got himself tangled up in it, he just stopped and waiting for me to rescue him. Despite the idiot dog I'd acquired a few weeks earlier and hadn't been around the horse much and was sure my horse was going to eat me (in other words, the dog was trying to protect me from the vicious horse)(the dog, although a nice personality, is still an idiot -- four skunkings and two porcupines in a little over a year = idiot dog), my horse stood quietly while I dealt with the situation.

He could have easily broken a leg if he decided to freak, and I've known horses who've done that in this type of situation.

All methods of training a horse have pluses and minuses. You've got to assess the risks, and figure out what will work for both you and the horse. For example, I definitely would not use this technique working with a racehorse right off the track. Although well broke in many ways, a racehorse tends to have no clue what it's doing with its feet. Although many racehorses lead like crap, and require a chain shank, which I don't like, a retired racehorse needs a different approach to getting a handle on life off the track.

Best of luck,

Jim Clark-Dawe

Kelsey said:

chartruscan said:

Again, these are progessive ranchers, who treat their animals with respect,

Click to expand...

We traditional horsemen and women treat our animals with respect as well.

Click to expand...

This! Why be insulting to traditional horsemen and women?

KatieJ said:

This! Why be insulting to traditional horsemen and women?

Click to expand...

Ditto on that.
The tone of some of these posts was enough to make me want to walk away.

I grew up third generation on a working cattle ranch. You don't get much more "traditional" than that.
My first horse was a Shetland pony a neighbor gave to me when I was four years old. I learned to ride bareback before my mother would buy me a saddle.

My mother used to say a horse wasn't broke unless you could ride it bareback with a string around its nose.

I've seen Parelli at shows. It was fun to watch, but there wasn't much there that I didn't all ready know. He's just packaged it and sold it for mass consumption. Which really isn't a bad thing.

When I wanted to go riding, I took my halter and lead, and went out into the horse pasture. Once I found the herd, I'd catch the lead mare, put the halter on, throw the rope over her neck, jump on, and come home. The whole herd would come with, and I could catch and saddle whoever I wanted when I got to the barn.

Do you know what happens when you walk out into the pasture with a saddle in your hands? They laugh at you. Then they run.
They let you get close again. Laugh at you, then run some more.
Our horse pasture was eighty acres. That's a lot of running.

For fun I would ride bareback with the halter and lead anywhere I pleased, but when we had to move cows a saddle and bridle were a must.

There were badlands, and draws, pastures full of prairie dog holes, and creeks full of scrub and cottonwood trees. Downed barb wire fences, Spanish swords (yucca plants that really hurt when you get jabbed), cactus, and all manner of spiny brush, stock dams with mud up to your knees, a river that shifted enough you were never really sure where the deep spots were.

That one sneaky cow in the herd that always breaks away? Guess where she likes to hide? In all of those places above.

A cow whose had her new baby out in the pasture away from the rest of the herd? She doesn't want to go back to the herd, and she doesn't want to go where you want her either. She's going to evade you, she's going to run from you, if she's protective enough she might even take you.

Have you ever had two bulls start fighting in the middle of your nice smooth cattle move? Oh, that's lots of fun.

I've been clothes lined off my horse by tree branches, I've been cut and scraped by tall plants.
I've had my cinch come loose while trying to negotiate an almost vertical rocky hillside. Fortunately my horse stopped and waited for me when I bailed off on that one. Needless to say I walked the rest of the way down.

My horse knew a lot of voice commands. Mostly she neck reined, I didn't do a lot with leg commands. It was more body language, I'd lean and she knew where to go.
She never left me out in the middle of nowhere, even if she did get spooked. She was my buddy, and she trusted me.
A whistle and call could usually bring her right back, or at least get her to stand still and wait for me if we did get separated.

I still prefer bareback whenever I can. My knees ache every time I think about getting in a saddle.

I forgot something very important. Horses can be very individual. They can have strong personalities just like people do. My mother absolutely hated my horse, and my horse hated my mother. If my mother got on my horse, that horse wouldn't mind for anything. She'd throw her head, she'd side step, she'd fight the bit. Once the horse spun and slammed my mom's leg into the fence, like she was trying to scrape her off.
The wrong person on the wrong horse can be a match made in hell.

chartruscan said:

Apologies! Original comment coming from a place of extreme ignorance, which is being corrected.

Click to expand...

Please don't take this wrong but, I strongly suggest you get some experience before you publish any stories in which you know very little about the subject. Repeating what you see or have been told generally shows up as this author doesn't know what they are talking about...

By the way, what do the progressive ranchers in your story do exactly? What do they ranch? How many acres? The reason I ask is because this will determine how many horses they can handle, and how they handle them.

Gently, folks. The forum is here is to share experience and knowledge about issues and situations not everyone has been able to experience for themselves.

chartruscan said:

The story is sort of a modern day western trope, evil rancher barons translated to stockyard owners, factory farms inching out the family ranch, dirty FDA inspectors, etc. The hardships of doing things the right and humane way, versus the efficient and fiscally beneficial way.

Click to expand...

With respect, you might want to spend a little (more) time looking into the agricultural industry, too. For example, the FDA would not be involved. I believe you're thinking about the USDA. And, while I've had plenty of issues with the redundancy, red tape, and waste of the agency, some of the best people I know work for the USDA. Also, a "factory farm" is a reflection of size and methodology rather than ownership. One of the worst "factory farms" in our area is owned by a single family - making it, by legal definition, a family farm. And some of the most responsible, "progressive" ranchers in our area happen to be a partnership legally incorporated for tax and inheritance reasons. As with anything, there is a serious risk of oversimplifying and generalizing issues that involve far more complexity than most people realize.

As far as the horse stuff goes, there are a number of good books that provide a great overview of horse training, riding, and handling. While some are probably more technical than you're looking for, others might be worth browsing. For information on natural horsemanship, you might read TRUE HORSEMANSHIP THROUGH FEEL by Bill Dorrance ~ he was a pioneer of the movement and his book has a lovely, authentic, conversational style. I also think HOW YOUR HORSE WANTS YOU TO RIDE by Bucklin is good for general accessibility and detail.

Good luck.

I admire your desire to get this right. A lot of books about ranches clearly show that the closest the writer ever came to cow shit is the bull shit they're writing. However, this forum might not be the best place to start your research. This forum works really well with specific questions, but less so with broad questions. I think here we're not seeing what specifically you're looking for and the answers that we can come up with are so broad we'd be writing for days.

Ranching and farming come from a different sort of background, which is why "family farms" are an issue, and family ranches are much less so. Back in the late 1800s, many of the ranches were owned by Easterners and/or British and French investors, so the ownership of ranches as corporations is not unusual. Now, when you look at something like the King Ranch you'll see this is a big business in many cases.

I'm not quite sure where you're trying to go. Ranchers are rather opposed to things like tree huggers and PETA, and some people would argue that PETA is involved in the humane treatment of animals. Some people would argue that over-crowded feed lots are inhumane. Some people would argue that raising cattle to turn into beef is fundamentally inhumane. And some of these people would classify any rancher as abusive of animals.

On the other hand, ranchers hate people that abuse animals for no purpose. They'll use a cattle prod, but because it's a good tool to get the job done. But some people argue that any use of a cattle prod is inhumane.

Another example is sending horses to slaughter for meat. California no longer allows this, which some people would say is humane. But putting down a horse can cost a few hundred dollars (vet visit and backhoe). Result is some horses in California are being let lose in wilderness areas or allowed to starve in backyards. Which other people would say is also inhumane.

For most ranchers, they won't send a good horse to slaughter, but the horses that aren't good, they can go. I've had horses I've put down and buried, but I've had others I would have had no compunction about sending to slaughter and if I'd been nicer to them, would have. Instead, I let them go to other owners, who probably also had trouble with them. So am I humane or inhumane?

For a good book on modern ranching by an outside who was experiencing it, I'd suggest The Cowboy Way: Seasons of a Montana Ranch. WESTERN HORSEMAN is a good magazine that features a well-run ranch in nearly every issue. You'll find tons of materials on humane/inhumane treatment of animals on the internet, that you'll have to read enough to understand how that interacts with ranching and then form your own opinion.

Please note I'm not trying to advocate a particular position. You need to investigate and form your own position, one that makes sense to you. Although I like meat, I respect my daughter's decision to not eat meat, and will throw a tofu burger on the grill when she's home. Once you begin defining your position, I think you'll find a lot of your questions answered for you.

Best of luck,

Jim Clark-Dawe

chartruscan said:

Believe me, this story isn't being rushed, and I'd like to look like a fool on the intarwebs rather than if I go and visit a farm or ranch and make an ass of myself in person.

Click to expand...

http://montanaforreal.blogspot.com/