# Ban use of horse whips?



## Pilib (22 June 2009)

http://www.edp24.co.uk/content/edp24/new...3A23%3A47%3A150


----------



## stencilface (22 June 2009)

Hmm, I'm half and half with that one.  I don't like using whips and can't remember the last time I actually used one on my horse - I don't even carry one anymore.

But trouble is more often than not they are used at the wrong time and for the wrong reason.  I have seen too many people hit their horses after they stop in front of a fence they have been presented the horse at completely wrongly (ie rider belts horse at the fence, flapping reins etc).

But then don't think I agree with a complete ban?  But then grey areas VERY difficult to police for already harassed stewards.

Hmmmm.


----------



## WishfulThinker (22 June 2009)

Me to, half with it. 

After seeing CHILD whipping a pony so badly it was cantering an jumping and PEEING and pooing all at once it was that distressed, and no one stopped them - ok it was about 10 years ago, but that was at a big local SJ show as well. 

But, what if someones horse refuses not through rider error, but because they are pissing about and a few short smacks behind the leg might be jsut what they need to remind them who is in charge.


----------



## millitiger (22 June 2009)

so they want to ban the use of whips and spurs as a punishment but not as an aid?
it would be correct in 99% of cases but there are some horses, few and far between, who will stop/ misbehave for a reason that not the rider's fault and sometimes a slap down the neck can help.

or do we teach horses that if they stop/nap/misbehave for no reason we won't do anything and will either retire or be eliminated? surely teaching some of the more intelligent horses that they can control us.


----------



## Wasrandyra (22 June 2009)

If used correctly then I don't see the problem, how they will monitor this I dont know.

You can abuse a horse in more ways that whipping it - bits, spurs  etc etc where does it stop?

As far as I am aware mis-use of the whip in affiliated competition and the warms ups is not allowed.


----------



## Silverspring (22 June 2009)

I would never use a whips for punishment, I would use it to back up an aid.

Hand on heart I have never taken my hand off the rein to smack with the whip I do use it to ask a horse to work more from behind or to (try to) avoid them shying or napping by tapping on the shoulder.

It's madness to make a blanket ban on whips at shows, what next ban all saddle as so many don't fit and hurt the horse.  Then ban bits with a single joint as they can hurt the horse's mouth, ban gags as they are clearly just for punishment...actually just ban people from keeping horses and all join PETA...yum vegan hippies.


----------



## ladyt25 (22 June 2009)

I partically agree but IS a horse 'misbehaving' say when it stops at a fence? Does it warrant several smacks with a whip? I am not convinced. I am not perfect myself and I actually cringe when I think of how i would used a whip far too often when I was younger but, now I am older and have learnt a lot more and been educated by good instructors, I would not use a whip if my horse refused a fence. The reason being it was more than likely my fault it happened!

If I believed I had done all I could to place the horse right etc and yet it still threw the towel in then I would be questioning why and would look at rectifying it at home in my own time without a whip. Generally horses' reactions to things are down to lack of confidence, lack of understanding, genuine fear or pain. I don't think there's actually that many (if any) horses out there who actually rationalise their behaviour. Sure there is learned behaviour but i really don't believe a horse thinks that deeply about what it  is going to do and what result it would achieve by it!

All too often you see bad riding resulting in a horse refusing and this is swiftly followed by the rider punishing the behaviour using the whip and more often than not the horse in question knows full well that that is what is coming!!! I just don't think there's a need and where really does it get the rider at the end of the day.

Personally I do think something should be done in respect of the use of whips in racing. I understand the need to maybe use the whiop to help with steering and avoiding collision  but I cannot stand seeing jockeys continually hitting a horse when approaching the finish.


----------



## Quadro (22 June 2009)

i may be shot down for this but ........... i jump affilated and i would never jump with out a whip, the main reason being if a horse starts to backoff i can give him a reminder on the shoulder to make him concentrate on the job in hand, have you ever been "whipped" so to speak????? it does not hurt at all and it is more the noise that is a reminder than anything else, im not condoneing excessive whipping by any means but i think a whip is a valuable aid .
if it is banned what is to stop me using the loop end of my reins instead????? does the same thing???


----------



## martlin (22 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]

Personally I do think something should be done in respect of the use of whips in racing. I understand the need to maybe use the whiop to help with steering and avoiding collision  but I cannot stand seeing jockeys continually hitting a horse when approaching the finish. 

[/ QUOTE ]

Errmm, I think if you watch carefully, you will see that they actually don't hit the horse 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 They ride 'from the whip', but that merely involves presenting the whip the way a horse can see it, not smack it


----------



## viewfromahill (22 June 2009)

I'm with you on this one! Perhaps some of you doubters should watch your animals in the field and see what they do to each other, they can be brutal to gain anothers respect -  then ask yourselves if what we do in the ring, a few short sharp smacks (WHEN it is appropriate to do so and this is where good training is needed) really does anything different but probably alot more kindly!!!!


----------



## Alibear (22 June 2009)

Oh dear how will people tell if it's being used as an aid or as a punishment? Surley punishment is an aid in some ways?
If whips are banned then you can use them as an aid either?
All to confusing, even the NH people use whip whops and the like , which are really just whips in disguise.


----------



## Onyxia (22 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]

Horse trainer Johanna Macarthur, who hosts the Norfolk Horse Training and Equitation Club at her centre at Aylmerton near Cromer, however said: In modern society it is never acceptable to use punishment on a horse.

[/ QUOTE ]
Really? 
	
	
		
		
	


	




Now I am as against excessive use of the whip as anyone,but NEVER punish your horse?
What exactly are we then to teach these big animals? "Do what you want,we are not going to correct your bad behaviour just praise your good"?
If a horse kicks me it gets a smack.If it bites,it gets a smack.If it puts me in danger in any way,it will get a smack-and that smack from my hand will hurt a hell of a lot less then the kick a field mate would dish out.....


----------



## Tinkerbee (22 June 2009)

Well that would be Maisy unrideable


----------



## only_me (22 June 2009)

without a whip i would not be able to ride my horse in an indoor arena


----------



## Stateside (22 June 2009)

On this forum we read every day about horses misbehaving and problems that a good old fashion smack in the first place would have stop progressing into the problems these people now have. To many do gooders that don't understand horses in this world already. I would like to see some of these  people with a real problem horse which when behaving badly can be a killing machine.


----------



## ladyt25 (22 June 2009)

Not always true though martlin. I watch a lot of racing I do enjoy it and i know and can tell the difference between the horse being 'shown' the whip - ie when it is flashed by the their side and, when the jockey has actually hit the horse. 

Also I don't agree with we should punish a horse (as per another poster mentioned). We have all come across difficult horses and sure we have all probably hit them but, is it necessary? I would be pretty sure that 9 times out of 10 the reason a horse has developed certain problems is because of how it has been treated in the early stages of it's ridden/handled career.

Firm handling and praise for a horse doing well is much more preferable. Backing up an aid with an appropriate tap can be beneficial but what I think people are saying is that too many people resort to over use of a whip when it is not needed. I have seen many cases recently. A rather (shall I say hefty!) woman at a unaff SJ kept hammering her horse at a practice fence (too big as a first attempt IMO - it was only a 95 cm class). Horse rushed panicky every time and it stopped - what did she do? Walloped it! She did lower the fence but the horse still looked terrified every time it jumped.

Somehow, through hitting and brute force she got into the JO but I have top say I did feel a sense of karma when she got dumped rather swiftly at a fence! Still, doubt she learnt anything from it.


----------



## Donkeymad (22 June 2009)

Can't agree with it all. I hate to see a whip being miss or over used, but there are times when a whip needs to be used as an aid. Carriage drivers usually carry a whip. they do not  _hit_ a horse with it, but lightly tap as guidance. Where does a lunge whip come in? It (should) never touch a horse.


----------



## Coffee_Bean (22 June 2009)

No they need to stay legal. My girl can be a little spooky at fillers, it took me 8 attempts to get over a water tray once and she did get a big one-hand-on-reins wallop on the 6th/7th attempt. I understand she was not being malicious, but to refuse so many times when she so clearly understands what is being asked of her is unacceptable.  She never ever gets hit when she behaves, and I only use my leg 99% of the time when jumping. Schooling she gets lots of small light taps behind the leg to remind her, but she doesn't get stressed or object about that, it is there as a reminder and to back up my aids. 

If I feel her backing off at some fillers, I will drive with my seat and legs and often give her a tap on the bum on the approach, and it does work most of the time, she just needs a little encouragement!! 

I understand people coming in and saying no if someone is repeatedly walloping their horse and it being against club rules and being cruel etc but it should be left to the RC or whatever to decide what is unacceptable, in the individual situation.


----------



## L00bey (22 June 2009)

Haha I cant hit rupert for punishment anyway I'll only get punished twice as badly in return


----------



## Quadro (22 June 2009)

a schooling whip does not hurt the horse but it is mearly a "tickle" is tickling cruel now 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 this really annoys me as it just taking things to far


----------



## Shilasdair (22 June 2009)

It's an interesting debate.  
	
	
		
		
	


	




For a horse to feel safe and secure with a rider/trainer, I think the rider has to be dominant.  And clearly a human is not going to win in a kicking/biting match with up to 750kg of horseflesh.  So, yes, I use a whip to reinforce my status, and to ensure that the horse respects my space at all times.
Do I beat my horses?  
No, but I will smack them if I think it is needed.
I prefer to use more positive reinforcement - so praise, treats, rests, withdrawal of aids, etc, than negative, as I'm sure does everyone.
But the negative reinforcement or 'punishment' has to be there to make the horse physically respect you.

In the past I taught at a yard where a mother/daughter combination threw away their whips as 'instruments of torture'.  They wanted to bond with their horses, instead, did join up, etc, were loving and caring.  
Horse number one, Penny, became unrideable, and they retired her from work, and bought their second horse, Tilly.  Within a month or two, Tilly refused to go out the gates, wouldn't go in the school either.  They wanted to put them to sleep as unrideable, possibly due to brain tumours, but the riding school bought them.
Penny - took one smack and her working life was restored.  Tilly took three smacks in the school, and then remembered how to work, too, so her future was assured. 
	
	
		
		
	


	





S


----------



## the watcher (23 June 2009)

Shils - you are sooo mistaken - we should be sitting down in the fields with our horses and reasoning with them as to why they are doing what they are doing, or even taking the next step and accepting that they are horses and should not have to do what we want them to do.









No, I can't keep that up.



Yes, whips have a purpose, and occasionally that is to deliver a swift rebuke and correction. Like children, horses need firm boundaries and leadership to keep them safe.


----------



## Paddywhack (23 June 2009)

Whips should be used as an extra aid/encouragement only,but i have seen more than once on ODE's riders taking their frustration out on the horse with an angled the whip,and if you read the article that is what they want to ban.I will carry a whip(we got lots of scary cows in the fields and monsters in the hedges)
But can't remember last time i had to use it.


----------



## macarthur (25 June 2009)

Hello everyone 

Thank you for debating punishment with the whip - I am Johanna Macarthur from Norfolk Horse Training and Equitation Club - we wrote to the BHS regarding Banning the use of whip and spurs as punishment IN COMPETITION - the reason for this forum!

There is confusion and misunderstanding on appropriate application of the whip between riders - shown on this forum too i.e. understanding the difference between motivation-negative reinforcement and punishment .  This is precisley why we need the whip as a means of punishing horses banned.

simply explained... without the in-depth scientific explanations!

Punishment is about applying pressure 'after an event' an example would be (as used by a poster here) 'refusing a jump',
Jumping correctly...
It is acceptable to motivate the horse with a whip tap going into the jump, just as you would/should! do with your leg, this is negative reinforcement -  if correctly trained and the horse is not over-faced, not ridden badly by the rider (Pulling his head in - which is also a 'stop!' or being unbalanced by his rider leaning backward etc.,) then the horse should understand GO! and fly over the jump. 
After it has landed it cannot be tapped/'smacked' with the whip this would be punishment.  

If the horse refuses...  

the rider CANNOT stand in front of the fence and beat the horse with the whip - this is punishment! - and likley only to make the horse fearful of the fence - completly opposite to what the rider wants! NEITHER can the rider, ride away  beating the horse or spurring, also PUNISHEMENT!
WHEN the rider re-approaches the fence it should be as if it is for the first time - (no fear and a calmnes of purpose) a good rider will apply more GO! with the leg,ensure straightness and will also reinforce the leg signal with the whip - this is perfectly correct application of negative reinforcement.

Negative reinforcement is what horses understand and learn by - it simpy means we apply PRESSURE (i.e. our leg) and the instant the horse moves we take the leg off - a RELEASE of pressure, the horse learns to move off the lightest touch to go or move, to earn his release - this is his 'reward' for getting it right!  Giving a wither rub, food reward etc is known as 'Positive reinforcement' and works spectacuarly well when combined with 'pressure and release training' (negative reinforcement)

If we do not clean up our act many more equine disciplines will go the way  of the hunting ban - the public simply will not put up with seeing the whipping of horses, which endure pain and fear, for our pleasure! 

I fail to see any arguement for using the whip or spurs as punishement in competition or training (beating/ whipping/ smacking) - imagine a child at school trying to recite his times tables when he gets stuck the teacher shouts and throws a board rubber at him, is that child likely to be more or less nervous when he has to recite his tables next time? - the answer is less - he will be less likely to 'try', becomes demotivated and this is what happens when you beat horses as punishment.

Most horses are beaten in competition because the rider feels frightened, humiliated and angry and this is taken out on the horse - we have all seen it - in every competition! show jumping, dressage, eventing, every discipline and It must stop.  We must stop punishing our horses for being confused.

I train problem (very dangerous horses) every week and I never use punishment - I do use the whip constantly for guiding a movement with light whip tapping, sometimes the tapping becomes faster and harder until the horse moves - I train for clarity and lightness.  This is done in-hand (critical when most horse people ignore ground work as boring or not useful) and in the saddle.  I could supply a hundred testimonials by owners for the horses trained by me in this way.   Every horse is also positively reinforced with primary and secondary reinforcers (rewards) rubbing withers and food when appropriate.

SO in the 'moment of the movement' use a whip appropriatly to urge the horse to GO!, but if he makes a mistake or refuses (go back to training and re-examine why he did it!?) do not berate him with your whip.

Horses do not do things to spite us they do not have the brain capacity or structure to do so and by using phrases such as "he knew what he was doing" or "he tries to get out of it", or "he was being naughty!" "was being disrespectful" suggests the horse is complicit in trying to out manouvre the rider - this is nonsense, it was just rider or horse error, or bad training, he didnt understand, or was confused or simply couldnt do what was asked of him.

I welcome debate because this is how we appraise and critique what we do and how we learn!

best wishes to you all Johanna x


----------



## macarthur (25 June 2009)

Being impotent with horses is equally confusing to them as being aggressive. Being Fair and ensuring clear guidelines is what makes horse training successfull.

If all it took was a 'smack' there would be no problem horses!  I understand the point you are making but as trainers is is important to clearly say what you do to train a horse.


----------



## Amymay (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
They ride 'from the whip', but that merely involves presenting the whip the way a horse can see it, not smack it   

[/ QUOTE ] 

Oh believe me they do.  And the sooner whips are banned in racing the better.

There is simply no place for them in the modern sport.


----------



## Amymay (25 June 2009)

Morning Jo, welcome to HHO.


----------



## Shilasdair (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
 Being impotent with horses is equally confusing to them as being aggressive. Being Fair and ensuring clear guidelines is what makes horse training successfull.

If all it took was a 'smack' there would be no problem horses!  I understand the point you are making but as trainers is is important to clearly say what you do to train a horse. 

[/ QUOTE ]

I am sorry I didn't have time to 'clearly say' how I train horses, but I have to comment that your post could be edited to increase clarity.  Having read it, I have no idea whether you are for or against use of the whip - you appear confused.
Luckily, HHO has just the right smiley -  
	
	
		
		
	


	





Personally, Johanna, I don't have, nor ever will have 'problem horses' - horses are either trained or not.  I am sorry that you view your horses as inherently 'dangerous' - horses react in unpredictable but predictable ways to stimuli, and as a trainer, we need to try to form their reactions in a way that suits us, and keeps both rider and horse safe.  Very few horses are inherently aggressive - and those few are often suffering from physical problems such as hormonal imbalances, brain tumours, pain.

I am sorry you feel 'impotent with your horses' - perhaps if you detailed your problems here, we'd be able to help you sort them out?  
I don't think horses have any idea of 'fairness', for what it is worth.  For example, I don't suppose one of my four year olds thinks 'That's just not fair!' when I work the other, or vice versa.
Regarding equine behaviour - may I recommend Nankervis and Mills' book - easy to read, yet invaluable.
S


----------



## macarthur (25 June 2009)

Hello

I dont wish to personalise arguements as it isnt helpful.

I am not confused I understand very well correct application of equine learning theory and how the horses brain work and how thus they are better able to be trained.  In a short text here it is not easy to explain Equine Learning Theory Principles and all of the ins and out - I wanted to clear up some of the comments made that are simply not correct terms.

I understand the correct application of both negative and positive reinforcement positive punishment and negative punishement, extinction, adaptive behaviours, associative learning etc, it is a huge subject!   As you say we should all read books about how they learn and ethical horse training - might I suggest Academic Horse Training or the Truth about Horses by Dr Andrew McLean.

I am concerned about traditional dogmas and mindset.

Horses must never be punished for being confused or being unable to perform a movement - it leaves the horse with negative associations, confusion, fear etc., not just with the signal, but also the handler and environment.

Fear and pain is deeply learned.

I train horses - I have a reputation for being able to reform dangerous and undesired behaviour - and yes most is casued by previous bad handling, training and riding - often by people that are convinced they are correct and have nothing to learn - they are the ones that try to make the horses fit into their training, instead of expanding their own knowledge and understanding of the horse innate behaviours and psychology.

Either you think it is OK to beat horses with whips or kick them hard with spurs to punish them for non-performance .  Or you think it is unacceptable. I think unacceptable.

By the  way my 'own' horses are impecably behaved and contented.


----------



## Shilasdair (25 June 2009)

Hi again
I think communication is the problem, both between horse and trainer/rider, and on this thread, between posters.  
	
	
		
		
	


	




One person's 'punishment' is another's 'negative reinforcement', for example one could argue that, by whipping your horse on the lunge as you described, you are punishing him for failing to move forwards.
Your position is still unclear - you say you think it is unacceptable to 'beat horses with whips' but for you, on the lunge, it is acceptable?
I think you have to take a stance - either whips and spurs are acceptable to use, or not.  I say they are acceptable.
This does NOT mean that I support horse abuse - so please stop trying to equate the use of artificial aids, with threats to horse welfare.    You must remember that whips/spurs are tools - one can equally abuse a horse without using either - I've seen some OTT leg aids, and rein aids for example, which were abusive, and currently, I see some very abusive use of 'training aids'.
I am sure, JV, that we are pretty much agreed on the substance of what constitutes abuse, but I don't believe that caring, decent riders should be denied whips and spurs  (which are meant to refine, not increase the aid, incidentally) just because of a few individuals who can't ride properly, nor understand horses.
If you see a horse being abused at a competition, in the ring, or at home - blame the rider, not the tools - and report them to the BHS/WHW/show organisers.  I would, and have.
S


----------



## FinnishLapphund (25 June 2009)

For those for a ban of horse whips, an example from Nordic reality : 

In Swedish Harness racing whips are allowed, as I recall f.ex. you're allowed to use it five times but you're not allowed to let go of the rein while you use it (= you can't use it as you would a carpet beater). If you break the rules you get a fine, you can also be taken to court and risk being sentenced for animal abuse etc.

In Norwegian Harness racing the whips have been banned for a few years and the result is that the drivers are using the reins instead. Or they can f.ex. bend forward and push with their hands on the horses behind. And it is much more difficult to regulate, because the driver will only say that they needed to move the reins for this or that, that they only wanted to pat the horse in encouragement...



So I predict that if UK f.ex. ban the use of whips at racing, the jockeys will use their reins or hands instead and I doubt you can ban riders for having reins or hands...


----------



## macarthur (25 June 2009)

"one persons punishment is another persons negative reinforcement" is absolutley not correct they are two totally different applications based on the pressure principle and understanding of equine learning please go to www.aebc.au for clarification on this point as you are confusing arguement with fact and scientific scrutiny.  You can google negative reinforcement, posititive reinforcement, punishement, etc for absolute understanding of the 'true' meaning of what you are discussing and refering to here.

I am sorry but I dont know what you mean about the Lunge?  I havent mentioned Lunge? Of course a whip can be used in lunging provided it doesnt cause fear in the horse and is not used to violently strike him, surely Lunge work is for classical conditioning to voice commands? - not an opportunity to chase the horse by beating him to run in circles?! however lunging is not a competition is it - and therefore has no place in this discussion. which is about competition!

whips must not be used to punish horses for non-performance in competition - I dont know how else I can say this? 

Of course we are not saying take all whips and spurs away - you have said this not me!

we are saying do not use them to PUNISH horses. EVER IN COMPETITION.

You say blame the rider not the tools - that is excatly the case we have made!! - the tools are there, but cannot be used inappropriately by the rider - then the rider can use them to reinforce the stimuli but not to punish non-performance in competition.

surely you can see that this would raise the level of riding expertise and training in the UK?  why argue 'for' beating horses ?

please go to EPONA.TV and check out footage and examples of scientific scrutiny relating to welfare in the trained horse.

best wishes Johanna


----------



## the watcher (25 June 2009)

I do struggle a bit with an animal handler who relies on 'scientific studies' and named behaviours that would be more appropriate on a psychiatry couch. All very well if your subject understands the debate - but horses do not.

If they do wrong in nature they are rebuked, they understand it, they expect it and they learn from it. I'm not advocating beating here, but to take away all scope for correction is just wrong.


----------



## Starbucks (25 June 2009)

Hi Jo,

I have a question.  I think I agree with you, but I was just wondering what you would do in this situation..  My horse can be quite aggressive towards other horses when hes hunting.  He doesnt kick out with his back legs but he bites a lot and has lashed out with his front let before and hit a pony in the face!! (Pony was fine).  So  in this situation is it acceptable to punish him, or not?  If not what am I supposed to do??


----------



## dieseldog (25 June 2009)

Jo,

I don't see how you can police what you want.  It will be too subjective.

Also the article says whips are banned in Scotland.


----------



## TarrSteps (25 June 2009)

So basically, you're not allowed to beat your horse because you're p11ssed off, correct? 
	
	
		
		
	


	




  Fair enough, if you ask me.

The problem is defining the terms and codifying something which is so situational.  Do we start to factor in rider strength?  Does a small child on a pony have the same effect as a 200lb adult rider?

To be honest, I'm not for or against it.  I don't think JA has stated that they want all whips and spurs banned, has she?  And the idea is only with regard to competition, not to training.  No one is talking about banning artificial aids outright.  (Which is another thorny issue . . . if whips and spurs are okay why not draw reins etc?)  That's been brought in by other posters taking a "worst case scenario" approach to the idea.  After all, all sorts of things that used to be common practice are now no longer acceptable (Black Beauty and overchecks, anyone? 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 ). 

The fact is, if you just took whips away, people would adapt.  And one way, I hate to say, they might do so is to not take horses into competition until they're pretty sure the horse is going to go without use of force.  In some ways it's harder to say "okay here, not okay there) and to guess intent strictly from behaviour.

All that said, I almost always ride with a whip and hardly ever use it. 
	
	
		
		
	


	




  This stance has come from experience - I used to use the whip more often and I've learned that in many of those instances I was simply wrong.  I either didn't understand the situation or didn't know enough to fix it in other ways.  That said, as tools to extend our reach and influence, they can be invaluable TRAINING aids - which, by definition, become less necessary as progress is made.  

I'm not sure people NEED them as much as they think they do.  I suspect if whips and spurs were banned (which no one is suggesting) then people would either find another way (as discussed above) or, perhaps more likely, discover they needed them less in the first place.


----------



## SuzyQ (25 June 2009)

In so far as I can read the Scottish directive, they have not banned whips. Just classified the use of the whip for punishment as an abuse. So if you use the whip for negative reinforcement, that would still be okay. Is that right?


As for the hunter which bites and strikes out after other horses, the secret would be to find out what causes the behaviour and then remedy the cause. Unless we believe that the horse is simply "bad", punishing it with the whip seems a pretty short term solution. What if the horse's aggression is rooted in fear? Then what happens when he's whipped? What if his aggression is rooted in confusion? Then what is achieved by beating on him? Long term, I mean.


Can we make animals feel safer or less confounded by our own behaviour by beating them? I wonder.


There is lots of evidence which shows that fear and confusion in animals can make them aggressive towards people and abnormally aggressive towards other animals.

On the other hand, there is NO evidence to show that a horse's brain has evolved to be able to understand human agendas and ambitions, and so it is unlikely that horses know when they are being naughty.


So, knowing these things, how could we support punishment of horses during competition? I don't see how. Nobody is saying you can't smack a colt at home for digging his teeth into your arm, although I personally wouldn't. They are just saying that in a sport which is about training animals, the animal's failure to understand its training should not be taken out on the animal. Nobody is saying that if someone's badly trained stallion comes after you on two legs and teeth bared, you can't defend yourself with any means at your disposal. They are just saying that if you can't train your horse properly, it's your own problem.


What horses do to each other in the field is the lamest ever excuse for abuse. As social interaction between humans and horses is completely and utterly unnatural, no level of aggression may be considered "normal". Aggression (both ways) must always be seen as dysfunction, as it is not part of the objective of the interaction.


Hephey

Suzy


----------



## martlin (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]



whips must not be used to punish horses for non-performance in competition - I dont know how else I can say this? 

Of course we are not saying take all whips and spurs away - you have said this not me!

we are saying do not use them to PUNISH horses. EVER IN COMPETITION.



[/ QUOTE ]

I would like to know how on earth are you proposing to a)judge it? and b)police it?


----------



## Starbucks (25 June 2009)

You could judge it by noticing if someone hits their horse when it's refused and police it by banning them/giving a warning if they do so. Simples.


----------



## martlin (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
You could judge it by noticing if someone hits their horse when it's refused and police it by banning them/giving a warning if they do so. Simples. 

[/ QUOTE ]
Ha, but how are you going to judge if it was 'negative reinforcement' or 'punishment'?


----------



## Starbucks (25 June 2009)

Depending on if it is applied before or after the incident?


----------



## martlin (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
Depending on if it is applied before or after the incident? 

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, lets say after the incident... is it punishing it for stopping or 'negatively reinforcing' to move on?


----------



## Starbucks (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
 As for the hunter which bites and strikes out after other horses, the secret would be to find out what causes the behaviour and then remedy the cause. Unless we believe that the horse is simply "bad", punishing it with the whip seems a pretty short term solution. What if the horse's aggression is rooted in fear? Then what happens when he's whipped? What if his aggression is rooted in confusion? Then what is achieved by beating on him? Long term, I mean.


[/ QUOTE ] 

I don't think he is bad but i think he might be doing it to be dominant over other horses?  he's especially bad when he's stood near his best friend Caffrey.  I have no idea why it would route from fear.. he's never had any bad experiences that i know of.  If it was routed from fear - how would you deal with it?


----------



## SuzyQ (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You could judge it by noticing if someone hits their horse when it's refused and police it by banning them/giving a warning if they do so. Simples. 

[/ QUOTE ]
Ha, but how are you going to judge if it was 'negative reinforcement' or 'punishment'? 

[/ QUOTE ]



I suppose judges and officials would need a basic knowledge of learning theory to tell the difference, which is probably a good idea for them to have anyway  
	
	
		
		
	


	






Suzy


----------



## martlin (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You could judge it by noticing if someone hits their horse when it's refused and police it by banning them/giving a warning if they do so. Simples. 

[/ QUOTE ]
Ha, but how are you going to judge if it was 'negative reinforcement' or 'punishment'? 

[/ QUOTE ]



I suppose judges and officials would need a basic knowledge of learning theory to tell the difference, which is probably a good idea for them to have anyway  
	
	
		
		
	


	






Suzy 

[/ QUOTE ]

You could say that, but on the other hand, like with all other scientific theories... why do you think this particular take on things is the right one?


----------



## Starbucks (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
 Quote:

Depending on if it is applied before or after the incident? 


Well, lets say after the incident... is it punishing it for stopping or 'negatively reinforcing' to move on?  

[/ QUOTE ] 

Well, i think I could tell the difference and hopefully so would the judges!  Also - you'd hope that people would try and abide by the rules.. I don't mind getting into trouble for some things but I certainly wouldn't want to get into trouble for abusing my horse!


----------



## martlin (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
 [ QUOTE ]
 Quote:

Depending on if it is applied before or after the incident? 


Well, lets say after the incident... is it punishing it for stopping or 'negatively reinforcing' to move on?  

[/ QUOTE ] 

Well, i think I could tell the difference and hopefully so would the judges!  Also - you'd hope that people would try and abide by the rules.. I don't mind getting into trouble for some things but I certainly wouldn't want to get into trouble for abusing my horse! 

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not suggesting not abiding the rules, I'm talking about practical applying of aids. If, lets say a horse stops at a jump, regardless of reason, I'm not to punish it... but it refuses to move - plants itself in short, I might need to use the whip with my aids to get it moving again - in any direction... would that be a punishment or negative reinforcement and how would YOU or stewards/judges be able to tell? Would you ask me for explanation or just ban me?


----------



## Onyxia (25 June 2009)

(QR)
I still fail to see how a tap with the whip is abuse.
If a horse is out of line in the field the dominant horse will kick or bite it _intending_ to hurt.
We (I would hope) use a tap to shock as you would a smack to a small child so the unwanted behaviour stops before it becomes a problem.
Ou of curiousity once,some friends and I did use a whip on arms to get an idea of the force used.While whacking it as hard as you can hurt,a tap as it woud be used did not,and a horse will feel the impact much less then a human arm.


----------



## Starbucks (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
 I'm not suggesting not abiding the rules, I'm talking about practical applying of aids. If, lets say a horse stops at a jump, regardless of reason, I'm not to punish it... but it refuses to move - plants itself in short, I might need to use the whip with my aids to get it moving again - in any direction... would that be a punishment or negative reinforcement and how would YOU or stewards/judges be able to tell? Would you ask me for explanation or just ban me? 


[/ QUOTE ] 

Well that would be negative reinforcement if you were trying to get it to move - so you wouldn't get banned. It would obviously take a lot of discretion from the judges (as do the rules as they stand now) but I think it would be a good idea really.


----------



## martlin (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]

Well that would be negative reinforcement if you were trying to get it to move - so you wouldn't get banned. It would obviously take a lot of discretion from the judges (as do the rules as they stand now) but I think it would be a good idea really. 

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, I think the BSJA rules on use of whip are pretty clear and do not leave that much for discretion.
I'm not in favour of anything that would mean subjective judging - the more is left for 'discretion' the easier the rules are to bend and the more susceptible to abuse...


----------



## Starbucks (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
 I still fail to see how a tap with the whip is abuse.
If a horse is out of line in the field the dominant horse will kick or bite it intending to hurt.
We (I would hope) use a tap to shock as you would a smack to a small child so the unwanted behaviour stops before it becomes a problem.
Ou of curiousity once,some friends and I did use a whip on arms to get an idea of the force used.While whacking it as hard as you can hurt,a tap as it woud be used did not,and a horse will feel the impact much less then a human arm. 

[/ QUOTE ] 

I think the point is that most of the time they aren't even being naughty/out of line.


----------



## Onyxia (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]

I think the point is that most of the time they aren't even being naughty/out of line. 

[/ QUOTE ]
Outside the Pony Club I really have not seen anyone whacking a horse out of frustration,not saying it doesnt go on (and the coursebuilder ex had some shocking stories about what went on behind closed doors!) but I dont see it happening,guess thats a point in itself,if you are going to abuse the whip you would do it in training where there was noone to see not in the middle of a showground.

It's also hard to judge what is naughty and whats not,I find with R that a sharp vocal correction before he does something wrong(and knowing my child means I know when he is about to act up just as you would with a horse) would look nasty because he hadnt done anything yet,but is being repremanded to prevent a bad behaviour.
So a correctoin before an incident has it's place.even if it might look unjust from the ground.

I dont think for a second anyone here is in favour of letting people who do abuse the whip get away with it,but dont want to see a legitamate correction taken away because a very few are muppets.


----------



## Starbucks (25 June 2009)

Well that would be negative reinforcement if you were trying to get it to move - so you wouldn't get banned. It would obviously take a lot of discretion from the judges (as do the rules as they stand now) but I think it would be a good idea really. 



Actually, I think the BSJA rules on use of whip are pretty clear and do not leave that much for discretion.
I'm not in favour of anything that would mean subjective judging - the more is left for 'discretion' the easier the rules are to bend and the more susceptible to abuse... 



[/ QUOTE ] 

What actually are the BSJA rules??  People seem to get away with plenty of whacking!!
		
Click to expand...


----------



## martlin (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]



			Well that would be negative reinforcement if you were trying to get it to move - so you wouldn't get banned. It would obviously take a lot of discretion from the judges (as do the rules as they stand now) but I think it would be a good idea really. 



Actually, I think the BSJA rules on use of whip are pretty clear and do not leave that much for discretion.
I'm not in favour of anything that would mean subjective judging - the more is left for 'discretion' the easier the rules are to bend and the more susceptible to abuse... 



[/ QUOTE ] 

What actually are the BSJA rules??  People seem to get away with plenty of whacking!! 

[/ QUOTE ]

You are allowed to hit the horse no more than 3 times during the round, you can't raise your hand above your shoulder level, the horse is to be smacked on the rump.
Use of whip according to these rules is when you take your whip hand of the rein - so tapping on the shoulder is not consider use of whip.
Hope I described it clearly, if not - you can have a look in the rulebook, it's available on-line on the BSJA website.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Starbucks (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
 Outside the Pony Club I really have not seen anyone whacking a horse out of frustration,not saying it doesnt go on (and the coursebuilder ex had some shocking stories about what went on behind closed doors!) but I dont see it happening,guess thats a point in itself,if you are going to abuse the whip you would do it in training where there was noone to see not in the middle of a showground. 

[/ QUOTE ] 

Have you really not????  I see planty of it! 
	
	
		
		
	


	




  You would hope that you wouldn't need these rules wouldn't you. I think most riders are fair, it's just the odd one.

I'm don't totally believe that horses can't be "naughty", obviously some horses don't particularly like some things and would refuse because they don't want to do it/have got fed up.  But if they don't want to do it have we really got the right to whip them because we do?


----------



## Starbucks (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
 You are allowed to hit the horse no more than 3 times during the round, you can't raise your hand above your shoulder level, the horse is to be smacked on the rump.
Use of whip according to these rules is when you take your whip hand of the rein - so tapping on the shoulder is not consider use of whip.
Hope I described it clearly, if not - you can have a look in the rulebook, it's available on-line on the BSJA website.  

[/ QUOTE ] 

Thanks, I could look at my rule book.. but i'll take your word for it.  I'm glad my horse is a good boy!


----------



## Shilasdair (25 June 2009)

QR
A few points;
1. Claims of 'scientific evidence/studies'
Great, I like science as much as the next person, probably more 
	
	
		
		
	


	




, so if you are going to claim that your training is proven scientifically, let's have the full references, and an explanation of why the study findings support your concept.
Thanks for the advice to google various words - that's not really the normal way to investigate scientific studies, though.  
	
	
		
		
	


	




It might be worth noting that 'Learning THEORY' in itself suggests that there is a lack of proof, and therefore other theories may be just as, if not more, valid.  
	
	
		
		
	


	




I'd find it really helpful if you could give your qualifications, Johanna, as you seem to suggest that you have the more educated views in comparison with us, the horse owning/riding public, thanks.

2. I reiterate - one person's 'negative reinforcement' might be viewed by another as 'punishment' - there is no clear objective definition, and to suggest, JM, that this is due to some deficit of understanding in horse riders/trainers is too simplistic (and redolent of the deficit models in public communication of science which we are hopefully trying to move beyond).

3. If you want to ban the abuse of horses in shows (which is already covered by most organisations/bodies involved) with specific detail, then you must first decide what constitutes abuse, then who will judge it, and how, and what the consequences will be for the parties concerned?  Such rules have to be black and white, in order to be practical, and personally I think there are many grey areas.

4. Natural equine behaviour - those who think herds of semi-feral horses live together in perpetual peace and harmony are viewing the world through rosy glasses.  In nature, horses fight, sometimes fatally, they most certainly injure each other by kicking/biting, etc.  Horses certainly understand group hierarchy - and the rider/trainer must be above their subject in the hierarchy to be effective.  If ever you needed an illustration - the recent programme 'My life as a horse' should have demonstrated the need to be at the top of the hierarchy, the basis of physical strength, and a human's inability to do it without using tools (the human 'horse' was encouraged to try to gain dominance in a herd of horses at feed time, without a whip to extend her reach, and was kicked by the lowest ranking horse as some of us could clearly have predicted).

S


----------



## Onyxia (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]

Have you really not????  I see planty of it! 
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]
TBH I saw it a lot more in the south,here there are quite a few borderline,but not quite pushing it enough to be wrong.
Does that make any sense? Gah,it's too hot to think!

 [ QUOTE ]
You would hope that you wouldn't need these rules wouldn't you. I think most riders are fair, it's just the odd one.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think thats why I have issue with banning them TBH,anything that prevents the majority doing something perfectly legal that doesnt hurt anyone because a few are too stupid to behave gets my back up.
Perosnaly,I normaly ride with whip which then spends most of its time tucked into a boot.I dont see any point in it;s use if legs will do but like to know it was to hand if it was needed,ie,horse did something dangerous and needed to stop the behaviour.
As wiht R,vocal correction is far better,cant forget your voice for one thing 
	
	
		
		
	


	






[ QUOTE ]
I'm don't totally believe that horses can't be "naughty", obviously some horses don't particularly like some things and would refuse because they don't want to do it/have got fed up.  But if they don't want to do it have we really got the right to whip them because we do? 

[/ QUOTE ]
Well,naughty is subjecttive,but I get what your saying and I'm with you.
Trouble is,what is normal horse behaviour to some things can be a danger.
We put them in such unnatural situatoins and need them to behave for everyones saftey,and most do.Firm but kind handling and training from the start will normaly produce a horse that will put it's trust in a  rider to know more about whats going on then they do.
But a fair responce form a horse that can be a danger to itself,rider or others around needs to be corrected-if you choose "OI you b*gger STOP" or a tap with a whip is up to the rider and what they feel is needed in the situation.
Because I would always prefere to praise then punish,I really do belive in nipping things in the bud though,so will always defend the right to give a correction even if it looks like one was no needed at that point from the ground.
Better a small correction before a bad behaviour is done,then to try to reason with an animal we cont talk to about why it shouldnt have done what it did.

Off topic,are you roasting too?
Where has the Yorkshire rain gone?


----------



## rara007 (25 June 2009)

The whip is essential in driving, to get them going well. How else would you teach them to bend correctly in shafts round bends, or move over back to the outside track if the only contact you have is the reins. I never use the shaft of the whip to hit the horse though, only to hold it agaist their side, or flick them with the lash. 

There are so many good uses of the whip, and its only the few that spoil it for the rest. TBH people who beat their horses arn't going to stop because its the law not to use whips are they 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 A pony club style kick with spurs, or long reins for slapping could be just as painful for the horse, which I'm sure would happen more if whips were banned.


----------



## Shilasdair (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
The whip is essential in driving, to get them going well. How else would you teach them to bend correctly in shafts round bends, or move over back to the outside track if the only contact you have is the reins. I never use the shaft of the whip to hit the horse though, only to hold it agaist their side, or flick them with the lash. 

There are so many good uses of the whip, and its only the few that spoil it for the rest. TBH people who beat their horses arn't going to stop because its the law not to use whips are they 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 A pony club style kick with spurs, or long reins for slapping could be just as painful for the horse, which I'm sure would happen more if whips were banned. 

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree entirely, Rara.
Whips are used as an aid, with no abuse, in lunging, long reining, in hand work, and side saddle.
I think the simplest way to safeguard equine welfare is to utilise the existing laws, and report any incidences of abuse to show organisers, and the governing body for that particular sport.
I know people do report concerns to show directors/organisers/stewards, and it is rare for no action to be taken, often a gentle warning is enough to prevent further abuse.
Of course when they go home....but then, no whip ban is going to help that either...
S


----------



## jumpthemoon (25 June 2009)

What are peoples opinions of the use of the whip in xc then? Say for instance you are approaching a large solid fence and the horse starts to back off? If we are not allowed whips in competition what would you do? pull up? Not enter in the first place? Kick on and hope thats enough? 

Surely there are many instances where the use of the whip actually aids safety for both horse and rider?


----------



## Starbucks (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
 What are peoples opinions of the use of the whip in xc then? Say for instance you are approaching a large solid fence and the horse starts to back off? If we are not allowed whips in competition what would you do? pull up? Not enter in the first place? Kick on and hope thats enough? 

Surely there are many instances where the use of the whip actually aids safety for both horse and rider?  

[/ QUOTE ] 

Read the thread -  no one is saying you couldn't do that. It's more about not smacking them when they've stopped.


----------



## martlin (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
What are peoples opinions of the use of the whip in xc then? Say for instance you are approaching a large solid fence and the horse starts to back off? If we are not allowed whips in competition what would you do? pull up? Not enter in the first place? Kick on and hope thats enough? 

Surely there are many instances where the use of the whip actually aids safety for both horse and rider? 

[/ QUOTE ]

Nah, you see that would be 'negative reinforcement' so that would be ok to use the whip


----------



## jumpthemoon (25 June 2009)

Glad you cleared that up for me Martlin 
	
	
		
		
	


	





I don't agree with beating a horse in a temper but I think a well timed smack is part of a horses education - you can't sit them down and reason with them - you can't ignore bad behaviour - IME you have to make it crystal clear to the horse that there is GOOD behaviour and BAD behaviour, and that BAD behaviour is NOT acceptable.


----------



## martlin (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
Glad you cleared that up for me Martlin 
	
	
		
		
	


	





I don't agree with beating a horse in a temper but I think a well timed smack is part of a horses education - you can't sit them down and reason with them - you can't ignore bad behaviour - IME you have to make it crystal clear to the horse that there is GOOD behaviour and BAD behaviour, and that BAD behaviour is NOT acceptable. 

[/ QUOTE ]

On second thought, it might actually be punishing for not going forwards 
	
	
		
		
	


	




... so you might need the expertise of a steward to tell you 
	
	
		
		
	


	





As my old coach used to say - one good telling off will save the horse a lot of suffering in the future...


----------



## Quadro (25 June 2009)

ok, as the argument seems to centre around bsja i will add my piece, i jump bsja and if my horse stops i will smack it on its behind as it needs to know it has done wrong there is no point patting it saying "there there its ok" and this will be taking as "positive reinforcement" and i take the horses there to go over the jumps not just to look at them, i also have what may be described as "difficult" and my use of the whip is the same with them as with any other horse, this "policy" will be very difficult to police and as i said in a previous comment how will you stop me using the end of my reins instead????? i think this is ridiculous and totally unworkable almost as bad as the hunting law


----------



## jumpthemoon (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]

On second thought, it might actually be punishing for not going forwards 
	
	
		
		
	


	




... so you might need the expertise of a steward to tell you 
	
	
		
		
	


	





As my old coach used to say - one good telling off will save the horse a lot of suffering in the future... 

[/ QUOTE ]

Lol! Sounds like a sensible philosophy to me


----------



## SuzyQ (25 June 2009)

Surely, all science is theory. Nothing is ever PROVEN. But when my horse is sick, my vet will prescribe whatever drug has been shown to be the most likely to cure the thing which ails her.... in the same way, if there are studies showing a correlation between - say - biting and motivational conflict issues relating to the bit or headcollar... then the ethical thing is to address the issue through re-training of the signal involved in the conflict... not to try and punish your way out of it when - so far - there is no evidence what so ever that this will resolve the basic issue. Punishing a horse for not performing or for showing conflict behaviour is like treating a bowed tendon with chants and scented candles. It might work, but it probably won't.  Considering how widespread punishment is, you'd see far fewer behavioural problems if it actually worked.


In the same way, if a horse won't jump, it's either because it can't or because it hasn't been trained to do so. In either case, whose responsibility is it to make sure the horse can and will jump without coercion?


Even if horses did understand our need for them to hop, skip and jump their way around the competition scene, they STILL wouldn't be morally obliged to humour us. It would STILL be on us to make sure they were willing and able.


Suzy


----------



## jumpthemoon (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
ok, as the argument seems to centre around bsja i will add my piece, i jump bsja and if my horse stops i will smack it on its behind as it needs to know it has done wrong there is no point patting it saying "there there its ok" and this will be taking as "positive reinforcement" and i take the horses there to go over the jumps not just to look at them, i also have what may be described as "difficult" and my use of the whip is the same with them as with any other horse, this "policy" will be very difficult to police and as i said in a previous comment how will you stop me using the end of my reins instead????? i think this is ridiculous and totally unworkable almost as bad as the hunting law 
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]

**applause**


----------



## Starbucks (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
 ok, as the argument seems to centre around bsja i will add my piece, i jump bsja and if my horse stops i will smack it on its behind as it needs to know it has done wrong there is no point patting it saying "there there its ok" and this will be taking as "positive reinforcement" and i take the horses there to go over the jumps not just to look at them, i also have what may be described as "difficult" and my use of the whip is the same with them as with any other horse, this "policy" will be very difficult to police and as i said in a previous comment how will you stop me using the end of my reins instead????? i think this is ridiculous and totally unworkable almost as bad as the hunting law  


[/ QUOTE ] 

See, I don't smack mine (Saying that I can't remember the last time he stopped BSJA) because I know he tries and if he does stop then there must be a reason for it, this was back when he was younger I guess.  Going on your theory he'd refuse all the time now because i didn't nip it in th bud.. but he doesn't..  We don't get a smack every time we cock it up afterall...


----------



## SuzyQ (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
 [ QUOTE ]
 As for the hunter which bites and strikes out after other horses, the secret would be to find out what causes the behaviour and then remedy the cause. Unless we believe that the horse is simply "bad", punishing it with the whip seems a pretty short term solution. What if the horse's aggression is rooted in fear? Then what happens when he's whipped? What if his aggression is rooted in confusion? Then what is achieved by beating on him? Long term, I mean.


[/ QUOTE ] 

I don't think he is bad but i think he might be doing it to be dominant over other horses?  he's especially bad when he's stood near his best friend Caffrey.  I have no idea why it would route from fear.. he's never had any bad experiences that i know of.  If it was routed from fear - how would you deal with it? 

[/ QUOTE ]


Dominance is just aggression to compete for resources. If your horse wants to be "dominant" over other horses, perhaps you just need to train him to ignore this drive and listen to your aids instead, just like you have probably trained him to ignore his drive to eat or lie down for a nap while you are out riding 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 You can do this using negative and positive reinforcement. All animal training relies on these principles. Not punishment, which by its bewildering nature confuses animals more than it sorts them out.


All horse training is teaching horses to ignore what they want to do and instead do what we ask them to do. This includes their possible need or wish to be aggressive to other horses.


A horse who strikes out and attacks with his teeth, I would expect to be a very forward horse who might not be that easy to hold or stop - a wild stab in the dark might be asking if this horse shows any other bit or headcollar-related conflict behaviour like bolting, leaning, head tossing or pawing when asked to stand?


If this is the case, I know that there are trainers who specialise in fixing these problems through re-training of the basic signals or aids which dysfunction and cause confusion and anxiety. This is basically what I think Jo Macarthur is on about. I have seen it work many times, and although I am not a professional or anything close to it, I have found the methods very easy to apply. I have audited some clinics with Andrew McLean who did much of the research into the mental capabilities of horses and their effect on how horses learn, what they are able to learn and how flawed learning causes fear and aggression. There are some articles on www.aebc.com.au - they are free to read (sorry if someone has already linked). That's where I got started.


Suzy


----------



## jumpthemoon (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]

See, I don't smack mine (Saying that I can't remember the last time he stopped BSJA) because I know he tries and if he does stop then there must be a reason for it, this was back when he was younger I guess.  Going on your theory he'd refuse all the time now because i didn't nip it in th bud.. but he doesn't..  We don't get a smack every time we cock it up afterall... 

[/ QUOTE ]

Now I've had problems with mine stopping and have had help from a very respected BE Coach. Initially he didn't get a smack when he stopped and we spent weeks working on building his confidence. He got to a certain point and then started to take the p. Now, he gets a smack if he stops for no good reason - for the first few months my coach would determine what was a good reason as I didn't jump on my own. 

He still needs the odd smack but has really come on - not just in the jumping. When we started I couldn't ride him in the school without him napping and rearing, couldn't hack out, even in company. 

I'm not saying all horses should be smacked every time they stop at a fence, rather all horses are different and it is very difficult to judge without knowing the horse whether the use of the whip is excessive or not. If I used the whip on my TB the same way as I use it on my WB, this would be excessive - how can someone who doesn't know the horse determine this?


----------



## FinnishLapphund (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
Surely, all science is theory. Nothing is ever PROVEN. But when my horse is sick, my vet will prescribe whatever drug has been shown to be the most likely to cure the thing which ails her.... in the same way, if there are studies showing a correlation between - say - biting and motivational conflict issues relating to the bit or headcollar... then the ethical thing is to address the issue through re-training of the signal involved in the conflict... not to try and punish your way out of it when - so far - there is no evidence what so ever that this will resolve the basic issue. Punishing a horse for not performing or for showing conflict behaviour is like treating a bowed tendon with chants and scented candles. It might work, but it probably won't.  Considering how widespread punishment is, you'd see far fewer behavioural problems if it actually worked.


*In the same way, if a horse won't jump, it's either because it can't or because it hasn't been trained to do so. In either case, whose responsibility is it to make sure the horse can and will jump without coercion?*


Even if horses did understand our need for them to hop, skip and jump their way around the competition scene, they STILL wouldn't be morally obliged to humour us. It would STILL be on us to make sure they were willing and able.


Suzy 

[/ QUOTE ]


Maybe the horses you know are more noble and pure minded than those I've met but I've met and seen horses who very well knew what was expected of them but they still just wanted to know if they really had to jump, that particular obstacle with this rider (= older riding school pony, been there done that and I only jump/canter if you really know that you want us to jump/canter, otherwise we will stay on the ground/trot-attitude)...


----------



## FinnishLapphund (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
ok, as the argument seems to centre around bsja i will add my piece, i jump bsja and if my horse stops i will smack it on its behind as it needs to know it has done wrong there is no point patting it saying "there there its ok" and this will be taking as "positive reinforcement" and i take the horses there to go over the jumps not just to look at them, i also have what may be described as "difficult" and my use of the whip is the same with them as with any other horse, this "policy" will be very difficult to police and as i said in a previous comment *how will you stop me using the end of my reins instead?*???? i think this is ridiculous and totally unworkable almost as bad as the hunting law 
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]

You don't need to use the end of your reins, if you adjust the example of the Norwegian drivers I talked about to suit riding, you could just use the rein going from your horses mouth and to your hand and smack that to the side of your horses neck. It will be very difficult to regulate that...


----------



## Starbucks (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
 A horse who strikes out and attacks with his teeth, I would expect to be a very forward horse who might not be that easy to hold or stop - a wild stab in the dark might be asking if this horse shows any other bit or headcollar-related conflict behaviour like bolting, leaning, head tossing or pawing when asked to stand?


If this is the case, I know that there are trainers who specialise in fixing these problems through re-training of the basic signals or aids which dysfunction and cause confusion and anxiety. This is basically what I think Jo Macarthur is on about. I have seen it work many times, and although I am not a professional or anything close to it, I have found the methods very easy to apply. I have audited some clinics with Andrew McLean who did much of the research into the mental capabilities of horses and their effect on how horses learn, what they are able to learn and how flawed learning causes fear and aggression. There are some articles on www.aebc.com.au - they are free to read (sorry if someone has already linked). That's where I got started.


Suzy 


[/ QUOTE ] 

Thanks Suzy.  You are right in that he is very forward and hard to stop.  Well not all the time but he has his moments (he likes galloping so XC/hunting/fast work).  That's about it though and i have no other problems at all.  He is totally perfect to handle, he's a total gent.  He's not that tough really, if another horse is boss in the field he gets on with them fine, but if he's boss he will bully and chase them. He's having some time out ATM but I'll have a read of your link..


----------



## Bellagate (25 June 2009)

Too many people are putting winning before the wealthfare of their horses.  If all competitions banned the whip you would still have a winner.  The problem is riders want a quick fix and take their horses to comps before they are ready.  Moretime needs to be spent training and schooling.  Youngsters are being rushed into competitons before they are mature enough and strong enough, which leads to frightened and confused horses, which in turn makes them out to have behaviour issues.  So then what happens is the WHIP comes into play, this is all because we rush and don't spend enough time preparing horses properly!!!  Too many people are beating up their horses for a silly bit of coloured ribbon!


----------



## Starbucks (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not saying all horses should be smacked every time they stop at a fence, rather all horses are different and it is very difficult to judge without knowing the horse whether the use of the whip is excessive or not. If I used the whip on my TB the same way as I use it on my WB, this would be excessive - how can someone who doesn't know the horse determine this?  

[/ QUOTE ] 

I agree with what your saying, but you could always do that when your at home?


----------



## martlin (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
[

Dominance is just aggression to compete for resources. If your horse wants to be "dominant" over other horses, perhaps you just need to train him to ignore this drive and listen to your aids instead, just like you have probably trained him to ignore his drive to eat or lie down for a nap while you are out riding 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 You can do this using negative and positive reinforcement. All animal training relies on these principles. Not punishment, which by its bewildering nature confuses animals more than it sorts them out.


All horse training is teaching horses to ignore what they want to do and instead do what we ask them to do. This includes their possible need or wish to be aggressive to other horses.


A horse who strikes out and attacks with his teeth, I would expect to be a very forward horse who might not be that easy to hold or stop - a wild stab in the dark might be asking if this horse shows any other bit or headcollar-related conflict behaviour like bolting, leaning, head tossing or pawing when asked to stand?


If this is the case, I know that there are trainers who specialise in fixing these problems through re-training of the basic signals or aids which dysfunction and cause confusion and anxiety. This is basically what I think Jo Macarthur is on about. I have seen it work many times, and although I am not a professional or anything close to it, I have found the methods very easy to apply. I have audited some clinics with Andrew McLean who did much of the research into the mental capabilities of horses and their effect on how horses learn, what they are able to learn and how flawed learning causes fear and aggression. There are some articles on www.aebc.com.au - they are free to read (sorry if someone has already linked). That's where I got started.


Suzy 

[/ QUOTE ]

So, how would YOU go about training that horse?
All you have written might be right, but it isn't good enough to say 'you need to ride better' that's neither constructive nor helpful. If you wan't to tell people how things should not be done, IMO you need to offer alternative solution.
So how do you train them? Do you sit them down and talk? - I think we have established by now that this is not possible 
	
	
		
		
	


	




'Positive reinforcement'? give them a Polo every time they do not misbehave? - surely believing that they can make a link between the reward and not misbehaving would be stretching your imagination a tad to far


----------



## Starbucks (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
 So, how would YOU go about training that horse?
All you have written might be right, but it isn't good enough to say 'you need to ride better' that's neither constructive nor helpful. If you wan't to tell people how things should not be done, IMO you need to offer alternative solution.
So how do you train them? Do you sit them down and talk? - I think we have established by now that this is not possible 
'Positive reinforcement'? give them a Polo every time they do not misbehave? - surely believing that they can make a link between the reward and not misbehaving would be stretching your imagination a tad to far    

[/ QUOTE ] 

I'm struggling to see what i'm supposed to do TBH.  I try and stop him doing it and he gets a slap (with my hand because I keep forgetting to carry a whip!) and told off a bit of he tries to bite someone.. It's a bit annoying because it makes flask exchanges difficult sometimes!


----------



## jumpthemoon (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
 [ QUOTE ]
I'm not saying all horses should be smacked every time they stop at a fence, rather all horses are different and it is very difficult to judge without knowing the horse whether the use of the whip is excessive or not. If I used the whip on my TB the same way as I use it on my WB, this would be excessive - how can someone who doesn't know the horse determine this?  

[/ QUOTE ] 

I agree with what your saying, but you could always do that when your at home? 

[/ QUOTE ]

You could - but then you are being inconsisent - the horse does it one day it's ok - the next and it's not. I've always been taught that consistency is vital when training animals (and people 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 ) Hopefully you get to the point where you don't need to smack when you're in the ring, but smaller lower level comps are used as training in order to progress to higher levels.


----------



## Gonetofrance (25 June 2009)

Can I ask if those against the whip have ridden professionally/competitively, or had problem horses to retrain, or difficult youngsters to work with?


----------



## Starbucks (25 June 2009)

Who said they were "against" the whip?

As for me, yes to your questions (apart from proffesionally!) I just think it looks bad to general members of the public, which is why it might be an idea to consider..  I don't think it would make much difference to SJ/Eventing if you couldn't wallop your horse after a refusal - do you?


----------



## Vicki1986 (25 June 2009)

interesting post.

on  the one side i can understand why the ban "overuse" (i think ban the use is ridiculous) of whips is understandable but isnt this a rule at all shows already - something is always in the rules about excessive whip/spur use.

having watched a horrid BRAT jump her delightful pony at a show, when it stopped at a jump which was totally her fault, she represented it - it jumped, then on landing she gave it about 3 good hard whacks.  She should have been called into the judges box afterwards IMO. disgusting riding. ride it properly, or if your going to tap it up do so before the fence, not after the pony has jumped (beautifully i might add) and is carrying on perfectly.

However banning the use of whips at comps will be unpoliceable IMO and is hugely unneccassary.

Most people use their whips correctly. I rarely see any excessive use.

this comment though interests me...." In modern society it is never acceptable to use punishment on a horse."
(Parelli?)
Really? I disagree.  If a horse eas to bite me it would get a bump on the nose sharpish.  My horse has kicked out at me once - she got kicked back.  I will never ever "punish" her for not being able to work to a standard i want, but simply manners and SAFETY for other animals/myself/children on the yard - horses need to respect there handlers.  The same with my dog, if he ever nipped me he'd get a pinch on the nose. I have a fair but firm line with all my animals, who are as a result happy &amp; well behaved. Animals, especially horses, like to know where they stand with their pack leader IMO.


----------



## macarthur (25 June 2009)

hello Mother hen

sorry you are wrong - horses do understand scientific meaning - it was written for them as a result of studying their natural behaviours - training they understand and use in their own environments - innate behaviours.  The global scientific evidence for banning PUNISHMENT is overwhelming and is as a result of hundreds of scientists (including as far back as PAVLOV in the 1920's)  around the world with hundreds of thousands of studied horses to come to verified conclusions on reactions for learning, including, observation statistics, measures of stress levels, adrenalin, diamorphine etc.,, increased heart rate , in the trained horse.

As opposed to reading a book and hand me down dogmas in riding.

No-one can make people search for advancement - so this is why a ban is necessary to protect horses from treatment by humans who dont understand how to correctly train horses.

I dont hide behind science at all - I am happy to explain what I do and how I do it  - I use equine learning theory (science)immersed into my work daily, to ensure an ethical, fast, effective, safe and above all, easily reproduced form of training - I live in Norfolk and I welcome you to come and see the training that I advocate - I have nothing to hide and I am very open to other views and ideas for training if it involves ethical principles.


----------



## TarrSteps (25 June 2009)

I am curious why people keep saying this is about banning whips altogether and/or stopping people from retaliating with force when a horse does something dangerous?  I don't see that in the original concept.  Of course people will agree and disagree but it seems unfair to accuse people of being hysterical bunny huggers 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 when they're not just to make a point that has little to do with the original idea?  Doesn't everyone agree that hitting a horse in anger or after the fact is unfair and a bad idea?  Not to say people don't do it (c'mon, I would almost guarantee everyone here has done it once) just that it shouldn't be publicly acceptable.  Rather like the business on the Isabell post - no one is saying "never", rather they're saying "when".


[ QUOTE ]

All you have written might be right, but it isn't good enough to say 'you need to ride better' that's neither constructive nor helpful. 

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to the original debate but isn't this the "dirty little secret" of so many of the discussions about how we ride and compete horses?  Similar to the point that's raised in the xc safety debate, why is is not acceptable to tell people that in order to do such and such safely and humanely they SHOULD need to ride better?  I'm not saying people can do this magically in the blink of an eye but why is it unfair or unreasonable to ask it?  As to *how* people should "ride better", well, surely that would depend entirely on the rider and the situation.  It could hardly be a one size fits all solution.

The fact is riders DO have to take responsibility for how their horses behave.  Alas, it isn't enough to just say "that's the best I can do" if the best one can do isn't good enough.  Horses don't care if it's the best one can do.  Absolutely, horses WORK for us (I'm a-okay with that, in fact I make my living reinforcing the status quo and yes, I occasionally hit horses, sometimes rightly, perhaps sometimes wrongly, as I said before.) and I agree we have the right and responsibility to make sure they understand the rules.  BUT, just like any employer, a humane approach is not only socially required these days but morally responsible.  Yes, people do still have slaves and they do still abuse them but we're supposed to be beyond that.  And no, I'm not saying people treat their horses like slaves, merely that HOW we treat other living things is part of a wider social landscape, especially now, and open to debate.

[ QUOTE ]

'Positive reinforcement'? give them a Polo every time they do not misbehave? - surely believing that they can make a link between the reward and not misbehaving would be stretching your imagination a tad to far 
	
	
		
		
	


	









[/ QUOTE ]

To be fair, that's not an accurate understanding of the process.  The point is to reward an appropriate behaviour in place, as it were, of the negative one.  This is, after all, the basis of correct riding not just training.  And punishment after the fact is generally not a great motivator with animals because they don't think "backwards" to the point where the behaviour started.  So if you use the stick AS the horse is ignoring the leg that's a negative reinforcement and the horse will make the connection if it's done with good timing and understanding.  Using the stick after the horse has ignored the leg is less effective.  I know it seems a subtle difference but it's all important and, I suspect, an important element in this debate.

The problem is we, as people, are not at all good at doing what we say we're doing.  How many people hit a horse after a stop then ride much more strongly (and often, I have to say, correctly, paying attention to their line, speed etc) then next time.  Does the horse go because it's been hit or does it go because the rider "rides better" the second time?

Btw, I'm NOT in favour or outlawing the use of whips, just for those who seem to feel any debate is unacceptable 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 , and I think it will be very hard to police the intent of whip use.  And, like the safety debate, who gets to say what's unacceptable or not?  We used to be much better about accepting the word of established elders, I suspect, now it's a bad thing to tell people how they should or shouldn't behave.  Perhaps anyone who hits their horse should be hit once for each time themselves?  That way, if you think it's justified, you shouldn't mind.


----------



## macarthur (25 June 2009)

Hello Starbucks
Firstly ask the question why does he do this?
2) how can we retrain him
3) how do we test.

Firstly it is natural for horses to not want strange horses nr them - so a natural response,
2) He must understand the correct signal for stop and go - stop means all four feet planted and still relaxed body - in all circumstances he must stand. or go -means go forward in the appropriate gate.

Horses that obediantly understand and consistently offer stand and go are much less likely to kick out at other horses.

If he kicks out you should shout out a brisk No!" and immediatly ask him to back up,  it is also acceptable 'if' you are able to immediatly reinforce him with a whip tap on the shoulder simultaneously as you shout NO!" - generally this is quite hard to do, as we are busy turning to avoid further clashes etc.

You need to test him in other environments with new horses with your new trained skills to test stop (we call this PARK - ITS LIKE A DOG BEING TOLD TO STAY)

I would also introduce clicker training to ask him to stand and drop his head as well as 'park' and then click and food reward him to a voice command - so that when hunting and a horse gets close to you, you can say "Down" and he will be more concerned with the click and immenent treat than the horse coming into his space - I promise you this is effective and can be done!! 

All undesired behaviours if repeated constantly by the horse and/or rider over long periods of time are difficult to outtrain -they are referred to as 'learned behaviours' especially so if it is something learned in fear or pain.

good luck and I hope this has answered your point?

johanna


----------



## macarthur (25 June 2009)

hello well said and debated!

Lucinda McAlpine said to me yesterday she thinks of a whip as a conductors baton to encourage and guide the movement - isnt that a lovley analogy...

now whoever heard of the conductor going down to the pit and beating the string section for getting a wrong note.!!!

johanna


----------



## macarthur (25 June 2009)

tarrsteps

I could weep with joy at your pearls of wisdom - this is exactly what we are saying 

johanna


----------



## macarthur (25 June 2009)

SuzyQ

well said - clarity without emotion - its just so simple. this is exactly what we are saying and driving toward.

johanna x


----------



## macarthur (25 June 2009)

simple the same way as we currently police and judge excessive,misuse, etc., this is already proved to be very difficult as it is so subjective as has already been pointed out.

This proposed ban on punishment, provides an opportunity for the judges to be correct in ruling - without arguement! they will know there is no grey area - the horse has clearly been punished with whip and or spur for non-performance. unacceptable and very clear to the naked eye!


----------



## macarthur (25 June 2009)

Hi Suzy

Yes yes yes!!! It was Andrew who alerted me to the Danish ban.
 johanna


----------



## Shilasdair (25 June 2009)

I see that you don't attempt to answer my post, JoMacarthur, and can therefore only conclude that your confidence outweights both your scientific qualifications, and practical knowledge of horses.
Incidentally, the 'thousands of scientists agree with me' thing only works if you do it properly  
	
	
		
		
	


	




If you are trying to write a scientific document to increase the public understanding of science, then you must describe all the findings of relevant studies to date, not just those which support your hypothesis.  You also have to give references for your sources - so that I, and other readers can research further.
S


----------



## Shilasdair (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
Surely, all science is theory. Nothing is ever PROVEN. But when my horse is sick, my vet will prescribe whatever drug has been shown to be the most likely to cure the thing which ails her.... in the same way, if there are studies showing a correlation between - say - biting and motivational conflict issues relating to the bit or headcollar... then the ethical thing is to address the issue through re-training of the signal involved in the conflict... not to try and punish your way out of it when - so far - there is no evidence what so ever that this will resolve the basic issue. Punishing a horse for not performing or for showing conflict behaviour is like treating a bowed tendon with chants and scented candles. It might work, but it probably won't.  Considering how widespread punishment is, you'd see far fewer behavioural problems if it actually worked.


In the same way, if a horse won't jump, it's either because it can't or because it hasn't been trained to do so. In either case, whose responsibility is it to make sure the horse can and will jump without coercion?


Even if horses did understand our need for them to hop, skip and jump their way around the competition scene, they STILL wouldn't be morally obliged to humour us. It would STILL be on us to make sure they were willing and able.


Suzy 

[/ QUOTE ]

I have to disagree with you - the point of science is to take ideas, theories, hypotheses about the world, and try to prove them true or false by experiment.
Regarding your point about the vet prescribing drugs - these drugs will have been subject to tests called Randomised Control Trials, controlled in such a way as to reduce error, such as 'the placebo effect' perhaps by double blinds etc.
Therefore when the vet prescribes 'bute - he is reliant on the facts gleaned from RCTs.  This is the problem that most scientists have with homeopathy, and the problem with a lot of learning theories - in humans and horses- there have been no RCTs undertaken.  Largely then, learning theories remain the idea of a single person, for example Greenfields Neuronal Plasticity theory of human learning.   You may agree, or disagree, but there is little evidence either way.

S


----------



## Quadro (25 June 2009)

if we are going down the scientific line then i feel we should bring Pavlov's dogs into to equation, he proved that animals learn by association so there for if the whip is used sensibly and fairly then the horse will learn that the whip will be used if negative behaviour is displayed surely???
therefore is a good thing????


----------



## SuzyQ (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]


Maybe the horses you know are more noble and pure minded than those I've met but I've met and seen horses who very well knew what was expected of them but they still just wanted to know if they really had to jump, that particular obstacle with this rider (= older riding school pony, been there done that and I only jump/canter if you really know that you want us to jump/canter, otherwise we will stay on the ground/trot-attitude)... 







[/ QUOTE ]


Hmmm... I don't think that my horses are particularly noble or pure minded. They are innocently selfish like all other horses, I guess. They do whatever they find is the thing to do to get on. The point is that however much we may think that a horse "knows what it's supposed to do", they don't. They simply have not got the cognitive abilities to understand our need for them to cross a fence or perform canter half pass. So if they do it, it's because they have been well trained. If they don't, it's because they have not been well trained. In either case, the credit is due to the rider, not the horse.


Someone asked how I would train a horse with a dangerous problem. I have already answered this. Using negative and positive reinforcement to re-train whatever basic aid is dysfunctional. As mentioned, I am just an amateur, but I have fixed a rearer, a couple of nippers and three farrier-slayers using the techniques of Andrew McLean and yes - polo mints can be used to de-train dangerous behaviour. Not by themselves (at least I wouldn't try it) but a lot of trainers use food rewards when working with problem horses, usually in conjunction with well applied negative reinforcement.


Wouldn't it be fun with a show of hands: Who thinks whips should be completely banned? I don't. I use one every day. My mare goes in a regular, double jointed snaffle and I even make use of iron horseshoes.  
	
	
		
		
	


	




 I am not a vegetarian and I don't remember the last time I hugged a tree (except the one in my saddle). I just think that riders should take responsibility for any signs of behavioural issues their horses might display instead of pretending that it's okay to blame an animal which is performing for their pleasure. If you can't train a horse to perform whatever behaviour on cue which you need it to perform in order to compete... don't compete. Maybe don't even ride. Or learn better training techniques or acquire more modest ambitions or buy an easier horse. There are many ways to solve the problem of equine "pissing about" - but in the 21st century, surely none of them involve beating a horse with a stick because it didn't understand what you asked for or didn't feel sufficiently motivated to do it. Whose fault is that?


Suzy


----------



## macarthur (25 June 2009)

Hello Shilisdair

I am sorry I have had to actually train horses and field questions to the press today - so I really, really, havent had a chance to answer everyone and that includes you - I havent the time.

I am sadly finding your responses increasingly aggressive and defensive, you have gone from a smack cures all, to challenging my 'hypothesis' and rants as to whom I can or should quote.

However if it pleases you - I quote all references in 'Equine Behaviour a guide for Veterinarians and Equine professionals' , Dr Paul McGreevy and all references as per Dr Andrew McLean - ref my earlier thread when I answered you at length.

I am not on trial here - I do not have to defend myself to you - this is not the debate - the debate is "should whips and spurs be banned in competition when they are used to punish non-performance"

Therefore I will not comment further -  I am used to dealing with people that listen and analyse and have constructive enquiry.

You can google me and you can contact me by telephone and you can come and see my training and meet my clients and their horses - you really are more than welcome .

best wishes johanna


----------



## SuzyQ (25 June 2009)

quadro, there is one flaw in your argument, and that is that  - as far as we know and as far as anyone has been able to document - horses do not know the difference between good and bad behaviour, so you can't classically condition the horse to know that if he is bad, he gets whipped, therefore he should be good. It's not possible. If it were, horse training would be very easy, and there would not be any problem horses out there.


Having said that, I use a whip, I have no problem with whips. I have a problem with using them for punishment or revenge when the horse is "bad", because as far as the horse is concerned, he wasn't "bad" - he doesn't know what "bad" is. That would require him to possess cognitive abilities even more advanced than the most intelligent primates.


Think for a moment what "manners" are. Even members of the same species - human beings from different parts of the world or even just different parts of Manchester - have different ideas about what is "respectful", "polite", "moral" etc. How on EARTH is an equidae to know that refusing to hop over some brigthly coloured sticks in a green field with a human being on his back is indicative of bad manners? Horses have not got a clue. We imagine they have, because human beings always imagine that their problems originate outside themselves. Since I learned that my horse can't be blamed, I find myself grabbing at straws to explain my own training errors rather than actually admit I messed up. If it's not the weather, it's my mare's cycle. If it's not that, it's the noisy children outside the arena ect. It's really hard to let go of all pretenses that we have anyone to blame for our problems but ourselves. But actually also quite liberating to know that everything that's wrong with your horse is something you can change by changing your own behaviour - excluding those very few horses which are really, seriously disturbed. But punishment won't cure those, anyway.


Suzy


Suzy


----------



## Quadro (25 June 2009)

yes i understand that but a horse can still learn that a certain behaviour that it undertakes will be punished by the whip which it does not like so will refrain from that behaviour which can be put under a very very basic heading of "negative behaviour"


----------



## marble (25 June 2009)

hi vicky, I am have just finished reading your post re "brat", this is the problem, judge should have had her or him up to box, and sent home.  Also Jo and the rest you can go on about whips and abuse as much as you want, BUT you will never stop abuse of animals at competition level, because you cannot see what goes on at home.  I have no problem with sticks, have a problem with spurs as so many people who wear them, do not use legs properly, (watch riders little old legs going bumpty bump, spurs going tap tap tap on pony or horses side) If we are going to stop abuse, lets have open warfare on abuse at home. AT least if a rider misuses stick at competition we can see it, and stewards should deal with it there and then. But lets open up the whole sport to spot checks at home, as we are doing with drug abuse.


----------



## Starbucks (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
 Hello Starbucks
Firstly ask the question why does he do this?
2) how can we retrain him
3) how do we test.

Firstly it is natural for horses to not want strange horses nr them - so a natural response,
2) He must understand the correct signal for stop and go - stop means all four feet planted and still relaxed body - in all circumstances he must stand. or go -means go forward in the appropriate gate.

Horses that obediantly understand and consistently offer stand and go are much less likely to kick out at other horses.

If he kicks out you should shout out a brisk No!" and immediatly ask him to back up, it is also acceptable 'if' you are able to immediatly reinforce him with a whip tap on the shoulder simultaneously as you shout NO!" - generally this is quite hard to do, as we are busy turning to avoid further clashes etc.

You need to test him in other environments with new horses with your new trained skills to test stop (we call this PARK - ITS LIKE A DOG BEING TOLD TO STAY)

I would also introduce clicker training to ask him to stand and drop his head as well as 'park' and then click and food reward him to a voice command - so that when hunting and a horse gets close to you, you can say "Down" and he will be more concerned with the click and immenent treat than the horse coming into his space - I promise you this is effective and can be done!! 

All undesired behaviours if repeated constantly by the horse and/or rider over long periods of time are difficult to outtrain -they are referred to as 'learned behaviours' especially so if it is something learned in fear or pain.

good luck and I hope this has answered your point?

johanna  

[/ QUOTE ] 

Thanks Johanna.  To be honest, that's pretty much what I do, (apart from the clcker training) he gets a slap and a shout and that's about it. It's not like I've just been letting him do this for years - he seems to have got grumpier in his old age! 
	
	
		
		
	


	




  He doesn't really move, just his neck, or in the one time his front leg but he stays stationary.

It's not really a problem now I know what he wants to do - I can stop him, but I'd rather he didn't want to be evil!!


----------



## Gonetofrance (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
Who said they were "against" the whip?

As for me, yes to your questions (apart from proffesionally!) I just think it looks bad to general members of the public, which is why it might be an idea to consider..  I don't think it would make much difference to SJ/Eventing if you couldn't wallop your horse after a refusal - do you? 

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a concept of training, not just about whether or not your horse has a stop or not.... 
	
	
		
		
	


	





I appreciate the ban is for the ring, but those that would abuse the whip anyway will find other ways to punish. How often have you seen a rider sawing viciously at their horse's mouths after a mistake? That to me is more punishing and cruel that a smack. 
If the concern is just how it looks to the public, then it's a pretty pointless exercise, as it won't make the slightest bit of difference to the horse that gets a hammering back at the lorry or at home. 
Within training horses I believe there are circumstances when a whip should be used as a reprimand. If a youngster strikes out at me in front for example, I will use a smack to the leg to indicate that if he does that, I do this. And they very quickly understand. 

Indeed, Johanna said herself here;
_If he kicks out you should shout out a brisk No!" and immediatly ask him to back up, it is also acceptable 'if' you are able to immediatly reinforce him with a whip tap on the shoulder simultaneously as you shout NO!" - generally this is quite hard to do, as we are busy turning to avoid further clashes etc.
_

FWIW, I rarely carry a whip, and although I did in the ring, I can't remember the last time I recently used one. However, I did used to have difficult horses to retrain, and a whack as a horse started to nap towards the collecting ring/lorry park would change the focus back to me from the other horses. 
Now possibly that was total incompetence on my part, but I wasn't abusing the whip, it was backing me up. 
But that seen from the ground could be construed as abuse......or punishment. To me it was neither, it was the means that allowed me to get the horse back paying attention to me. 

Horses can become different animals in the arena, you can have done all the groundwork at home, but the adrenaline from a competition can change what you are sitting on, and a problem horse will sometimes revert back to previous behaviour. 

So, where do you draw the line?

In an ideal world, I wouldn't be against the idea, but in the real world, I think it unworkable and difficult, because of the grey areas. 

Tarr Steps, I agree absolutely with what you wrote.


----------



## Cash (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
 I don't think it would make much difference to SJ/Eventing if you couldn't wallop your horse after a refusal - do you? 

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree in that i doubt it would make little/any difference to the general popularity of SJ/eventing as a spectator sport to the general public (in fact, many people may prefer to watch if they thought whips would not be used) but if i was unable to use my whip after a refusal XC i would not have much success getting round on one of mine- he is a seasoned 16.3 ISH who has evented professionally, so definitely has the capabilities and experience (he's 15 now) but also spent 3 years in a riding school- so he has learnt pretty much every trick in the book to avoid jumping a certain jump if he thinks he can. I am sure my position is not always (in fact very very rarely!) perfect on the approach, but he should be able to jump a 2'6, straightforward, non-scary XC jump without me having to put in more effort than him, and have an absolutely perfect approach. Hence i think i should be able to give him a smack when he does duck out last minute.
Sorry tunred into a bit of an essay! 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 i think thi is a v interesting topic and it is great hearing so many different opinions and views. All i have to offer to the debate is my own (pitiful) experience


----------



## the watcher (25 June 2009)

_I live in Norfolk and I welcome you to come and see the training that I advocate - I have nothing to hide and I am very open to other views and ideas for training if it involves ethical principles. _ 

I might just do that - because I am open to the belief that we never stop learning and I do have an open mind. I would certainly need to see it to understand it as I don't do psycho babble.


----------



## Shilasdair (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
Hello Shilisdair

I am sorry I have had to actually train horses and field questions to the press today - so I really, really, havent had a chance to answer everyone and that includes you - I havent the time.

I am sadly finding your responses increasingly aggressive and defensive, you have gone from a smack cures all, to challenging my 'hypothesis' and rants as to whom I can or should quote.

However if it pleases you - I quote all references in 'Equine Behaviour a guide for Veterinarians and Equine professionals' , Dr Paul McGreevy and all references as per Dr Andrew McLean - ref my earlier thread when I answered you at length.

I am not on trial here - I do not have to defend myself to you - this is not the debate - the debate is "should whips and spurs be banned in competition when they are used to punish non-performance"

Therefore I will not comment further -  I am used to dealing with people that listen and analyse and have constructive enquiry.

You can google me and you can contact me by telephone and you can come and see my training and meet my clients and their horses - you really are more than welcome .

best wishes johanna 

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi Johanna
A few points if I may, although it seems you are not used to having your statements questioned - but we are a feisty and inquisitive lot on HHO!  
	
	
		
		
	


	




1. Scientifically speaking, hypotheses are put forward to be challenged, experimented upon, and hopefully one day proven true or false (not always as easy as it sounds).
So as soon as you put forward a statement such as 
 <font color="blue">  
'The global scientific evidence for banning PUNISHMENT is overwhelming and is as a result of hundreds of scientists (including as far back as PAVLOV in the 1920's) around the world with hundreds of thousands of studied horses to come to verified conclusions on reactions for learning, including, observation statistics, measures of stress levels, adrenalin, diamorphine etc.,, increased heart rate , in the trained horse.'
</font> 
then of course, you will be expected to first clarify, and secondly back up these claims with references to the hundreds of scientists etc (and one book reference isn't quite the same 
	
	
		
		
	


	




).
2. No, of course you don't have to defend yourself, but if you put yourself forward as an expert dispelling 'dogma' then you are expected to prove your expertise, before we will accept your statements as valid.   People evaluate the information they are given according to the source, the content, the evidence, etc - surely you understand that? 
	
	
		
		
	


	




3.  I understand perfectly why you will not discuss your claims further - you are clearly used to people who merely listen, and accept without question.  HHOers are not quite that passive, unfortunately, and question everything. 
	
	
		
		
	


	




I find it a shame that you are too closed-minded to debate the issue further, as true science is about questioning everything in order to find out about the world.  
	
	
		
		
	


	




Too many people think science is about shouting your theory, sticking your fingers in your ears and singing 'la la la la' so you can't hear any arguments/evidence to the contrary.
S 
	
	
		
		
	


	





PS I appreciated the joke about the deficit model, though!


----------



## Quadro (25 June 2009)

a harsh bit can be used as a punishment and can cause more dammage than a whip???? has that been taken into account???


----------



## Shilasdair (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
a harsh bit can be used as a punishment and can cause more dammage than a whip???? has that been taken into account??? 

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's face it - if you want to abuse a horse, the means/tools to do so are endless, hence why banning whips in competition is pointless.
If anyone sees someone riding/training abusively, the best thing to do is report it to the appropriate authorities, and perhaps video it (if you can) as evidence.
S


----------



## Starbucks (25 June 2009)

It's such a shame that we even have to talk about this.  Why should anyone abuse their horse in any way?  I'm not a soft horse person at all, and agree with you all about why using the whip shouldn't be banned.  But some people are cruel about it.  Losers.

In fact why do some people even ride??


----------



## weevil (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
Too many people think science is about shouting your theory, sticking your fingers in your ears and singing 'la la la la' so you can't hear any arguments/evidence to the contrary.

[/ QUOTE ]
You mean it's not 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 I wish someone had told me that before my viva


----------



## Shilasdair (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Too many people think science is about shouting your theory, sticking your fingers in your ears and singing 'la la la la' so you can't hear any arguments/evidence to the contrary.

[/ QUOTE ]
You mean it's not 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 I wish someone had told me that before my viva 
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]










And tell me, were you supported by hundreds of scientists with thousands of studies before or after you started singing?
S


----------



## Starbucks (25 June 2009)

You may as well have not bothered Dr Weev, Scientific evidence??  I mean, what does that mean when you have people opinions on their individual horses? 
	
	
		
		
	


	





Just to put a spanner in the works (as a maths person), when people talk about scientific evidence, they often mean statistical evidence?


----------



## SuzyQ (25 June 2009)

My personal opinion on my individual horse is that any failure of ours to reach Grand Prix is entirely down to that stroppy mare and if I do give her a hiding for it, it's only fair since she eats up my savings and lives like a queen.


Yes. Feeding and caring for animals by the book entitles you to beat them when their behaviour doesn't meet with your expectations.  


Suzy


----------



## martlin (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
My personal opinion on my individual horse is that any failure of ours to reach Grand Prix is entirely down to that stroppy mare and if I do give her a hiding for it, it's only fair since she eats up my savings and lives like a queen.


Yes. Feeding and caring for animals by the book entitles you to beat them when their behaviour doesn't meet with your expectations.  


Suzy 

[/ QUOTE ]


???


----------



## TarrSteps (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
tarrsteps

I could weep with joy at your pearls of wisdom - this is exactly what we are saying 

johanna 

[/ QUOTE ]

Please don't. 
	
	
		
		
	


	





The irony is that I think most people on here actually agree, whether or not they want to admit it.

Everyone agrees use of a whip has its place under certain circumstance, both as a subtly used tool (the conductor's baton) and as a form of defence/extreme negative reinforcement (obviously used with sense and timing) in situations which might lead to danger or are otherwise unacceptable.

Everyone agrees hitting a horse out of anger or after the fact is bad horsemanship and socially suspect.

Perhaps the sticking point is when in their training horses should be competing?  Is it valid to ask people to refrain from competition until they are as sure as possible there will be no need of a whip for training purposes?

Or do people just not like being told what to do with their possessions?  After all, the same debate has been had over hitting kids.


----------



## SuzyQ (25 June 2009)

Martlin, does my last post somehow shock or baffle you?


Suzy


----------



## Bellagate (25 June 2009)

This isn't about a smack with your hand,  this forum is about excessive use of the whip in competitions!!!


----------



## martlin (25 June 2009)

It does indeed, baffle rather than shock - not many things shock me nowadays


----------



## SuzyQ (25 June 2009)

Why would it baffle you? I am keen to know 
	
	
		
		
	


	






Suzy


----------



## martlin (25 June 2009)

I was just baffled why you felt the need to post it? And what was it supposed to prove?


----------



## macarthur (25 June 2009)

Please do! 

if you google me you can find all the links both to me and Norfolk Horse Training and Equitation Club when we have training days etc., - you are all welcome. very much so and it will be 'practical' rather than psyco babble! - I promise!
and I will throw in tea and home made cakes!

Very best wishes Johanna


----------



## SuzyQ (25 June 2009)

Martlin, it wasn't supposed to prove anything. Just maybe hone in on what we are actually discussing here. Does caring for an animal entitle a person to punish that animal for performing behaviours unwelcomed by the person?


What do you think?


I may get myself a goldfish and I  may wish to train it to do tricks. Would you say it's okay for me to punish the fish whenever it fails to jump through hoops? Surely, as goldfish are far less sentient than horses, I can take much greater liberties in depriving and/or abusing my fish than I ever could when training my horse, don't you think?

Of course, I would have to tailor my punishments to the small body of the fish, but let's assume I came up with a way of causing it considerable fear and animating it to display violent avoidance behaviours.... would that be okay? If I did it to a fish? For fun?


Suzy


----------



## martlin (25 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
Martlin, it wasn't supposed to prove anything. Just maybe hone in on what we are actually discussing here. Does caring for an animal entitle a person to punish that animal for performing behaviours unwelcomed by the person?


To certain extent, YES.

What do you think?


I may get myself a goldfish and I  may wish to train it to do tricks. Would you say it's okay for me to punish the fish whenever it fails to jump through hoops? Surely, as goldfish are far less sentient than horses, I can take much greater liberties in depriving and/or abusing my fish than I ever could when training my horse, don't you think?

Of course, I would have to tailor my punishments to the small body of the fish, but let's assume I came up with a way of causing it considerable fear and animating it to display violent avoidance behaviours.... would that be okay? If I did it to a fish? For fun?


As to the fish, I wouldn't have a clue, don't know if it is possible to train a fish to do anything.

On another note. Do you think it is OK to fence horses in with electric fencing?

It is the same principle as smacking for disobedience... Try to cross the fence - get zapped - punished
Refuse to go forward - get smacked - punished
simples


----------



## SuzyQ (26 June 2009)

I have electric fences around my paddocks and as there are a million things for the horses to do other than touch the fence and a million places for them to go, I don't consider that the fence poses any threat to their welfare.

In the riding situation, the horse's opportunities are somewhat more limited. It can't just remove itself from the source of its discomfort, and so it displays conflict behaviour. When you punish a buck, a bite or a refusal, you are punishing a symptom of a training error which you or your predecessor in the saddle committed. The horse is just expressing that he is confused or in pain or possibly that he has learned the wrong response to your aid (falling off is a potent, negative reinforcement and this is how bucking is learned)  - by teaching him the right thing (for which purpose I happen to use a whip, albeit not as a punisher) - you eliminate the need to perform aggressive or hyperreactive behavior. Horses are generally lazy. They'd rather not buck or kick if they can help it.

Punishment is good for one thing: Inducing fear. I want my horses to be a little (or a lot, possibly) afraid of touching the fence around my paddock. But I don't want them to be afraid of me or any of the aids I use when riding. So I don't use aids for punishment. Also, if my horse walks through my fence, that IS my primary problem in that situation. If my horse bucks or bites or rears, the actual problem behaviour is not the primary problem, but a symptom of a primary problem. Punishing the symptom is never as effective, safe or humane as addressing the primary cause. 


If my horse walked through the electric fence because he was starving and there was nothing to eat in the paddock and his gastric pH was approaching 1 and there was a haystack on the other side of the fence... then the humane and reliable solution would be to chuck a bale of hay in for him  - fixing the cause of the problem - rather than turning up the voltage on the fence. I think there is a real parallel to riding. Where there is a behavioural problem, there is almost ALWAYS a dysfunctional basic response to an aid. This is what Andrew McLean did his PhD in - correlations between behavioural problems and training errors. If you look at the stats, it's something like 95% of horses that bite, which have got issues with understanding any signals to stop or slow. When the signal and response are retrained, the conflict behaviour disappears. I don't know of any published studies which contradict the findings of Dr. McLean - certainly, the same has been found to be true in other species. Animals who can't understand what we are asking them to do, become aggressive, fearful or apathetic.  A horse might become "a b@stard", "a whimp" or "dull", regardless of its basic temperament. But he would not be at fault, and whilst punishing the behaviour might work to plan, the basic issue which might have been troubling the horse will not be resolved.


Goldfish can be trained, as youtube will attest. They are taught through positive reinforcement with a flash of light as the secondary reinforcer to swim in formation. You can train anything using the principles of negative and positive reinforcement -  even amoeba. It's a pretty handy tool. Animal training is mostly done using food rewards, but as we are sitting on our horses anyway, we might as well use pressure as a motivator as well - the good thing about negative reinforcement is that you don't have to wait around for a behaviour to occur of its own before you can train it. You can use an aversive (a whip, perhaps, or a bit) to cause the horse some degree of discomfort and make it trial various behaviours. When you get the right behaviour, you can remove the aversive stimulus, and you have reinforced the behaviour (you probably know how it works) - this is very clear for horses to understand. It's natural (I'm almost afraid of typing the word) for them to seek comfort away from aversives - they seek the shade when the sun is hot, they swish their tails to make bugs go away, they drink to stop being thirsty, they scratch to not itch etc. Almost everything a feral or free living horse does, it does to remove or avoid a discomfort - and a few things they do to be positively reinforced: Seek out particularly tasty things to eat, groom their mates, play...


It is a myth that punishment is "natural" to horses. Very few interactions are aggressive, and those are always about competing for resources - not about "teaching manners". There are no manners in horse society - just distance and proximity. They don't attack eachother for NOT doing things. They attack eachother for being too close to a priority resource, a friend, a pile of hay, a water trough.... sorry, that got nerdy, but it's important to admit that horses do not spank other horses for misbehaving, even if it might look as if they do sometimes. There is always a simpler explanation, which does not involve anthropomorphizing the animal.


Suzy


----------



## wizbit4260 (26 June 2009)

Oh dear when will people learn to read properly!  No-one is saying BAN WHIPS OR SPURS, just DON'T use them as a punishment.  They are invaluable as a training aid, but are cruel, stressful and ineffective when used to punish.

This is not a difficult concept people.  Train your horses to be obedient before asking them to jump &amp; leap about for your pleasure.   If your horse doesn't perform how you want, then you need to go back and have a look at your training.

I really don't understand why most people seem to be so against not punishing.  Is it because most people can't be bothered to train their horses properly and they want instant results?  Horses don't "misbehave" to get one over on us or to make us look stupid (we are v. good at that on our own!).  They "misbehave" because they don't understand what we are asking, because they have not received adequate training.  Do not punish your horse by hitting it with a whip or hounding it with spurs because it doesn't have a clue what you want.


----------



## SirenaXVI (26 June 2009)

If they did ban the use of whipe/spurs as punishment in competition, it really would not affect me, as, although I do use both, I do not use them as a punishment but as a reinforcement.

I have in the past been sickened by incorrect use of whip and spurs, and was under the impression that there are already steps in place to try to prevent this.  Whatever, those that abuse their animals at shows are STILL going to be able to do this at home ban or no ban.


----------



## weevil (26 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
Just to put a spanner in the works (as a maths person), when people talk about scientific evidence, they often mean statistical evidence? 

[/ QUOTE ]
Often, yes, as reviewers like to see stars on graphs. But it is well known that scientists with their fantastic grasp of statistics can make pretty much any data statistically significant 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 Also, often things are biologically significant but not statistically significant and vice versa.


----------



## livetoride (26 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
Either you think it is OK to beat horses with whips or kick them hard with spurs to punish them for non-performance .  Or you think it is unacceptable. I think unacceptable.


[/ QUOTE ]

You are entitled to your opinion, which I respect, but why do you have to try to impose it on every one else?

Personally I believe that there is some middle ground - I will occasionally give mine a smack or two for a refusal but would not call that a beating.


----------



## the watcher (26 June 2009)

livetoride, it seems to me that one or two people here have got a bit emotionally wrapped up in the whole concept of using or carrying a whip. Your (and my) smart tap becomes 'beating' to them.

That isn't to say that there aren't some people who would lay about their horses with a whip as punishment - of course there are - but they reserve their more violent behaviour for places out of public view, usually.


----------



## Bellagate (26 June 2009)

Well said wizbit, so many people are on the defensive over this, is this because they are scared of change and don't think they will be able to control their horse without a whip, if this is so GIVE UP RIDING!!!.  How many people would watch crufts and put up with seeing dogs being whipped because they won't do what you want? I watched some footage today of some of the best young riders on the circuit showjumping and it made me feel sick.  Riders were zig zagging on reins (STOP) and whipping at the same time (GO) the poor horse would then buck and rear (CONFUSION) and would then get whipped again for not obeying (POOR BLOODY HORSE).  These horses have a life sentence of being punished all because the riders haven't a clue what they are doing THIS IS SO WRONG!!!


----------



## martlin (26 June 2009)

I think you need to take a step back and a deep breath TBH...

I'm sure that most top riders you have seen don't have clue how to ride, unlike you no doubt


----------



## Bellagate (26 June 2009)

Taking a step back isn't going to help the horse - this is the problem people are turning a blind eye to cruelty because they  think it is the norm and people have been doing it like this for years.  If medics thought like this our life expectancy would still be 30 years!!


----------



## martlin (26 June 2009)

I meant you need to take a step back on the forum, you get wound up and your post become ranting and incoherent....

I also think you exaggerate


----------



## Bellagate (26 June 2009)

Home made cakes!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Bellagate (26 June 2009)

If your horse was trained enough in GO you wouldn't have a problem!


----------



## martlin (26 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
If your horse was trained enough in GO you wouldn't have a problem! 

[/ QUOTE ]

I actually don't know what you are talking about 
	
	
		
		
	


	





You will be pleased to know, that my horse is trained enough in GO (unless you mean the Chinese board game 
	
	
		
		
	


	




) therefore I don't have a problem


----------



## davejoiner (27 June 2009)

dont like it when I see riders going crazy with the whip ( round the horses head ect)  I will occasionally give mine a smack or two for a refusal or when they are being naughty like napping but would not call that a beating firm but fair is the way. Normally a good grawl at my horse and unlady like language works thou before it get to the stage that I need to use the whip


----------



## miss_bird (27 June 2009)

QR
I have read this thread all the way through (gosh that took ages.
Yes i can see the point, for whips and spurs not being used for punishent in competition, as i have seen many riders beat the s**t out of the horses if they refuse a fence and not in a positive way i mean as in taking hand of reins and hitting the horse many belts as they ride way from the fence not giving a reinforcing tap as they ride positively forwards towards the fence.
No-one is asking for a complete ban, but judges are meant to be knowledgeable so they should be able to notice the difference between a positive smack (e.g. look what you are doing and jump it this time) and (you will jump this fence you f**king b&amp;&amp;&amp;ard because if you dont the beating will be even worse next time) well if i can see the difference and i am not a judge and prob will never be that qualified then those that we all look up to should be able to tell the difference


----------



## wizbit4260 (27 June 2009)

What an odd response to a debate.  People feel very passionate about this subject  and there is nothing wrong with a bit of passion.
It would be more helpful however, if you could perhaps offer a less personal response and , dare I say, a more considered one.
There seems to be a lot of people in this debate who just want to argue for the sake of it which I find very strange.  Don't punish your horses anymore, it is a useless training tool, else you wouldn't need to keep doing it!
Cannot be any clearer or less emotive than that!


----------



## martlin (27 June 2009)

My response was far from personal, I don't have intention to argue, however this

If your horse was trained enough in GO you wouldn't have a problem! 

was fairly uncalled for, very assuming and frankly rude, so I decided to answer, my mistake.

As to the debate, for me there is a problem with defining punishment... I can distinguish punishment (or IMO negative reinforcement) from revenge, revenge is useless in horses, punishment is something that creates simple link - as the electric fence example - 'touch this and you get zapped', in other words 'don't touch it'.
I use whip as a very clear signal - FORWARD that very second. Is it punishment or isn't it?


----------



## SirenaXVI (27 June 2009)

In a perfect world maybe but otherwise........................................complete and utter claptrap, I do hate people who are holier than thou and who try to force their perceived perfectness on others, in fact your condescending tone made me feel quite angry - hows that for a bit of passion.


----------



## wizbit4260 (27 June 2009)

I am sorry you thought I was rude, it was not my intention, but it is difficult to convey meaning accurately by words alone sometimes.
No, using the whip as an aid cannot be a punishment, it is an aid to encourage the correct response at the time of asking.  Punishment is pain inflicted by the omission of obedience, ie refusing a jump.  Punishing ( by whipping, spurring, yanking on the bit etc,) or inflicting pain for such an offence is unreasonable, and ineffective - maybe this is what you call revenge?  Effective training to get an obedient horse who understands fully what is expected of it, might need to use the whip as enouragement to the GO now signal.  I don't agree that an electric fence is punishment, it is negative reinforcement of an act that the horse is currently performing.  A horse doesn't touch an electric fence, turn away and then get zapped for doing the wrong thing!
Clearly you don't use your whip or spurs to punish (enact revenge) on your horse, so does that mean you are in agreement that they should be banned for use as a punishment, which is afterall what this debate is about?


----------



## SirenaXVI (27 June 2009)

I do not like to see a whip/spurs used as a punishment, but then I don't like to see them used by someone who has no idea how to use them properly either.  Sadly I don't think a ban in competition is the answer, as, although it would stop it happening on that particular day, it will not stop those people from abusing their poor horses at home.

I would however, like to see show organisers being harder on those that are guilty of abuse, which at present they don't seem to be doing to the degree they should, so, perhaps harsher penalties and braver ring stewards are the answer.


----------



## Shilasdair (27 June 2009)

QR
Don't you all love people who adopt multiple IDs to support themselves?  
	
	
		
		
	


	




I entirely agree with myself as me.
Does that count?
S


----------



## Mithras (27 June 2009)

Theres actually a lot of inaccuracy in that article.  What on earth is this about the whip being banned in Scotland?  I've been living here for the last 5 years and competing regularly and I have heard nothing of this.  Last week I qualified for a BHS Working Hunter Championship, in Scotland, carrying a whip.

And using a whip as punishment is already banned in the rules of most affiliated associations, such as the BSJA.  And the rule is enforced - I've seen it happening at small BSJA shows where there is little public to impress - all BSJA riders know the rules and its not a problem.

Theres some horses you do need to use the whip on as a back up to the aid, within the rules, whether at a competition or not, to constantly reassert control.  Some horses try it on.  If you let them away with it, they will pass down the chain and some competition horses are too difficult to have any other kind of life.

Personally, I would really like to see a ban on inexperienced owners who fall prey to control freak figures who hold themselves up as sort of equine mesiahs and charge them a fortune for swinging crystals round their horses's heads rather than teaching good, firm, fair horse management.


----------



## Shilasdair (27 June 2009)

Well said, Headless One!
S


----------



## Mithras (27 June 2009)

I'd also like to say that competition is really the test of how good your horsemanship is.  And I often wonder how many of the headline grabbing "mesiahs" have actually got a proven competition record on a variety of different horses.  Its all very well bimbling along bitless on a beach but rather different getting the stride right to a 1.40m oxer.

Likewise some horses you might use the whip with, not excessively, to avoid them developing bad habits, such as stopping.  Not all horses are saints, some are lazy, some lack courage, some are inconsistent.  But you do no horse's future a favour by letting it develop a bad habit without some form of reasonable, quick and responsive punishment.  Horses understand that kind of use of the whip very well, its only when its overdone that its a problem and no-one with any sense would advocate it anyway.

But the kind of issues raised by this article are actually quite dangerous because some misinformed members of the public and animal rights activists tend to jump on the bandwagon as part of their hatred of "rich, priveleged" horse owners.


----------



## SirenaXVI (27 June 2009)

Don't know about headless, you seem very wise to me - bloody well said!


----------



## macarthur (28 June 2009)

Hello everyone

This will be my last post, as you will appreciate my focus (and time) is to press on with reasonable dialogue with the ruling federations on the matter of banning the use of whips and spurs for non-performance of horses in competitions - this is too absorbing!

Firstly can I say thank you for all the comments positive , negative and punishing!  That the subject has caused so much heated debate pleases me and others watching this unfold  - bringing this issue to a public forum would be worthless (and an indicator of the wider public reaction) if people were so dis-interested that they couldnt be bothered to comment!

It is clear to me in summary that the need to ban punishment with the whip for 'NON-PERFORMANCE IN COMPETITION'  is absolutly necessary based on the responses here.

Since so many people simply do not understand the difference between the permitted use of whip or spur to urge or guide a movement ................

as opposed.........

to punishment -'whacking', 'beating' 'good smack' etc when the horse has NOT PERFORMED THE MOVEMENT he was originally asked for. (quite possibly with the whip and spur, leg and seat)

If you do not understand the correct application of the whip and spur - should you even carry one? I say no!

Banning the use of the Whip and Spur as punishers in competitions will allow the officials to take immediate action when they see punishment by the rider - not negative reinforcement, but a whip, smack, kick 'after' the horse has refused to jump, piaffe, extend his trot etc., whatever the reason for his refusal.

In the case of a jumping situation (as this has been deabted hotly!)- if he refuses , he cannot be 'smacked' or kicked whislt the rider holds his head in (punished), the rider would be able to turn him away (she would not be permitted to whip, smack,spur,whack on the 'turn away') when she turns to approach the fence for a second try and rides forward to the jump she would be correctly permitted to use the whip and spur to MOTIVATE the horse to jump.

Many things have been said and accusations made - but I will say this, I do not hide behind a poster name - I could have come onto this site secretly and followed the debate, still joined in and clearly stirred up a hornets nest... but in the spirit of openess and informed debate I chose to come on as Johanna Macarthur, representing a BHS riding club.

My work (for those that need to know?) is as an ethcial 'conflict free' horse trainer - I use Equine Learning Theory and applied biomechanics in my work with horses and their owners.  I have worked with the Worlds largest horse charity - training their staff and horses, I have worked with elite riders GP horses and everyone in-between, currently I have a race horse in for remedial training and an upset youngster to be backed.  I have held positions as Chief Steward on racetracks and I raced professionally.    At nearly 50 years old I have learnt by bitter experiance what works and what does not - I am sorry I didnt find the work of Dr Andrew McLean and Dr Paul McGreevy and equitation science 20 years ago.  However my credentials are un-important to this issue.

When I look back I want to be assured that as much as horses have enriched my life then so have I done the same for them.

Punishment doesnt work - training does, the whip and spur has a place for motivating horses to learn especially when it is used in conjunction with rewards.

The abuse of horses is continual and excessive in all of our sports - if we dont clear it up, the public will, so it is up to all of us to recognise our own riding faults and do something about it!

I do not advocate parelli - as challenged by one of the posters... the quote in the 'press article' (to which I have no control!) was that "in a modern society punishment is not acceptable"  this quote attributed to me was actually said by Dr Andrew McLean (yes he also competed and represented Australia in 3 -day eventing - his australian equine behaviour centre is worth looking at! www.aebc.au )  Andrew is recognised as the global expert on the behaviour in the trained horse - he works with the worlds elite riders and trainers, (including Kyra Kirkland etc) he advises FEI, GD etc on welfare and training issues - he was expert adviser on the Rollkur debate. He trains throughout the world and willba available in the UK next March at a variety of venues - if you are interested - let me know and I will tell you where!

It was as a result of Andrew visiting Denmark this year and debating the issue of conflict riding and the punishment abuse with whips and spurs that fired a debate - like this one!
EPONA.TV (PLEASE GOOGLE THEM!!!) covered the debate and showed footage of riders punishing horses for non-performance and the public outcry changed the rule book within weeks.

It was Andrew McLean who advised me of the Denmark mandate.

The Scottish code of Practice for the welfare of Equidae can be found by googling it.  It is the law in Scotland.

The analogy of the electic fence is a good one - as the horse performs the movement the negative pressure guides him in an alternative direction! (he tried to do something)- when he hot foots it away he doesnt then get an almight Zap up the arse*! which would be punishment...


----------



## Shilasdair (28 June 2009)

So to summarise your lengthy and somewhat incoherent post, your credentials are unimportant yet you are the one to judge whether others may/mahy not discipline their horses.
Righty-o.
S


----------



## Bellagate (28 June 2009)

Lovely, Well said!!  Obviously some people by the amount of posts just want to have a good  argument, and not really interested in improving the welfare of horses, what a shame!!!!!!!


----------



## Onyxia (28 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
Lovely, Well said!!  Obviously some people by the amount of posts just want to have a good  argument, and not really interested in the welfare of horses, what a shame!!!!!!! 

[/ QUOTE ]
Ohhh I like that logic 
	
	
		
		
	


	





Where do problem horses  come from?
People who dont ask or question,just follow a method or teacher because they were told to......questioning methods and/or thinking is a GOOD thing for both horse and human.


----------



## Bellagate (28 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
(QR)
I still fail to see how a tap with the whip is abuse.
If a horse is out of line in the field the dominant horse will kick or bite it _intending_ to hurt.
We (I would hope) use a tap to shock as you would a smack to a small child so the unwanted behaviour stops before it becomes a problem.
Ou of curiousity once,some friends and I did use a whip on arms to get an idea of the force used.While whacking it as hard as you can hurt,a tap as it woud be used did not,and a horse will feel the impact much less then a human arm. 

[/ QUOTE ]


A horse would feel it alot more their skin is far more sensitive than ours.


----------



## Shilasdair (28 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(QR)
I still fail to see how a tap with the whip is abuse.
If a horse is out of line in the field the dominant horse will kick or bite it _intending_ to hurt.
We (I would hope) use a tap to shock as you would a smack to a small child so the unwanted behaviour stops before it becomes a problem.
Ou of curiousity once,some friends and I did use a whip on arms to get an idea of the force used.While whacking it as hard as you can hurt,a tap as it woud be used did not,and a horse will feel the impact much less then a human arm. 

[/ QUOTE ]


A horse would feel it alot more their skin is far more sensitive than ours. 

[/ QUOTE ]

Your evidence being?
S


----------



## Bellagate (28 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
It's an interesting debate.  
	
	
		
		
	


	




For a horse to feel safe and secure with a rider/trainer, I think the rider has to be dominant.  And clearly a human is not going to win in a kicking/biting match with up to 750kg of horseflesh.  So, yes, I use a whip to reinforce my status, and to ensure that the horse respects my space at all times.
Do I beat my horses?  
No, but I will smack them if I think it is needed.
I prefer to use more positive reinforcement - so praise, treats, rests, withdrawal of aids, etc, than negative, as I'm sure does everyone.
But the negative reinforcement or 'punishment' has to be there to make the horse physically respect you.

In the past I taught at a yard where a mother/daughter combination threw away their whips as 'instruments of torture'.  They wanted to bond with their horses, instead, did join up, etc, were loving and caring.  
Horse number one, Penny, became unrideable, and they retired her from work, and bought their second horse, Tilly.  Within a month or two, Tilly refused to go out the gates, wouldn't go in the school either.  They wanted to put them to sleep as unrideable, possibly due to brain tumours, but the riding school bought them.
Penny - took one smack and her working life was restored.  Tilly took three smacks in the school, and then remembered how to work, too, so her future was assured. 
	
	
		
		
	


	





S 
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]Brilliant didn't realise solving problem horses was so easy!!  Just whack them several times and bobs your uncle!!!!
Just wonder why there are so many of them if the answer is so straight forward.


----------



## Onyxia (28 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(QR)
I still fail to see how a tap with the whip is abuse.
If a horse is out of line in the field the dominant horse will kick or bite it _intending_ to hurt.
We (I would hope) use a tap to shock as you would a smack to a small child so the unwanted behaviour stops before it becomes a problem.
Ou of curiousity once,some friends and I did use a whip on arms to get an idea of the force used.While whacking it as hard as you can hurt,a tap as it woud be used did not,and a horse will feel the impact much less then a human arm. 

[/ QUOTE ]


A horse would feel it alot more their skin is far more sensitive than ours. 

[/ QUOTE ]

Your evidence being?
S 
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]
Waiting for that too Shils 
	
	
		
		
	


	




Expect it wil be along the lines of "you dont agree so are wrong" 
	
	
		
		
	


	






Ellen W's display today was a prime example of bad use of the whip &amp; spurs.
Everyone has seen it and she should be punished to the full extent of the rules-however the other 30 odd all used them well,when needed.
I think it would be sheer stupidity to bann something that most of us are able to use properly because a handfull cant,esp since we allready HAVE rules in place to punish those too handy with the whip.


----------



## martlin (28 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]

Ellen W's display today was a prime example of bad use of the whip &amp; spurs.
Everyone has seen it and she should be punished to the full extent of the rules-however the other 30 odd all used them well,when needed.
I think it would be sheer stupidity to bann something that most of us are able to use properly because a handfull cant,esp since we allready HAVE rules in place to punish those too handy with the whip. 

[/ QUOTE ]

Very valid point, EW has done something I would call revenge, she took out her dissapointment on the horse - absolutely pointless, never mind unnecessary and bad PR  
	
	
		
		
	


	




Now, if the mare backed off and then got slapped, kicked on down the bank (although one would have to be mad to launch a horse from the top 
	
	
		
		
	


	




) it would make some sense, as the horse IMO would be punished for backing off and sent forward (or down as the case might be 
	
	
		
		
	


	




)


----------



## Bellagate (28 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(QR)
I still fail to see how a tap with the whip is abuse.
If a horse is out of line in the field the dominant horse will kick or bite it _intending_ to hurt.
We (I would hope) use a tap to shock as you would a smack to a small child so the unwanted behaviour stops before it becomes a problem.
Ou of curiousity once,some friends and I did use a whip on arms to get an idea of the force used.While whacking it as hard as you can hurt,a tap as it woud be used did not,and a horse will feel the impact much less then a human arm. 

[/ QUOTE ]


A horse would feel it alot more their skin is far more sensitive than ours. 

[/ QUOTE ]

Your evidence being?
S 
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]
Waiting for that too Shils 
	
	
		
		
	


	




Expect it wil be along the lines of "you dont agree so are wrong" 
	
	
		
		
	


	






Ellen W's display today was a prime example of bad use of the whip &amp; spurs.
Everyone has seen it and she should be punished to the full extent of the rules-however the other 30 odd all used them well,when needed.
I think it would be sheer stupidity to bann something that most of us are able to use properly because a handfull cant,esp since we allready HAVE rules in place to punish those too handy with the whip. 

[/ QUOTE ]

The so called evidence is as follows - Its called the Pannicus response, this is the muscle twitch of the body which shirks of a flys foot when it lands - the skin is sooooo sensitive to external stimuli.


----------



## Mithras (28 June 2009)

Jo Macarthur - you are not going to read this but anyway I reserve the right to comment.

I think you are in this to make a name for yourself - yet another would-be "mesiah" jumping on the bandwagon with a neat handle.

But as a lawyer, I really must take exception to this comment of yours:-

"The Scottish code of Practice for the welfare of Equidae can be found by googling it. It is the law in Scotland."

It most certainly is not.  Codes of practice are, at best, depending on their propriety, of persuasive value only.   Your whole statement is utter nonsense, and it is extremely harmful when people make false statements about what is law and what is not, because you have caused a newspaper report to be printed in a Norfolk publication which misrepresents the law in Scotland.

This particular Code of Practice is entirely voluntary, not mandatory.  It was introduced in Scotland to remarkably little publicity and was much derided as being totally unecessary by the few commentators who noticed it.

My personal opinion of it is that it the ejusdem generis rule isn't taken account of - ie it covers certain matters but ignores others.  Its a nice idea but unfortunately part of this nanny state idea - horse welfare is an awful lot more than writing a nice essay on a piece of paper.  It is also a really badly drafted, amateurish code of practice.  

If you had actually read the Code, you would have noted the part in the Introduction which reads "Although the Code does not have legislative effect, it is intended to promote and give examples of good practice. "

I really don't think you have the competition record or training or coaching record to be advising anyone.  There isn't really an issue here, and if you were more involved with the competitive world, rather than just picking out piecemeal examples of bad practice in amongst all the good, I might just listen to you.  But no doubt there will be a load of novices out there who will follow you and a bit of a fuss might be created, which might earn you a bit of cash.  I have just spent 4 days at the Royal Highland Show, competing and spectating, and am hard pushed to recall any use of the whip by adult riders at all in the showjumping.

If you were really interested in horse welfare, you would be better advised to campaign for something like introducing a mandatory test of horsemanship for owning horses.  I am sure you mean well, but I do think people like you do the image of horse riders no good whatsoever.


----------



## macarthur (29 June 2009)

I am sorry that I have allowed an incorrect statement to slip into my last comment.  What I should have said is that the Scottish Governement in 2008 (and again ratified on 19th February 2009) issued a directive named the Code of Practice for the Welfare of Equidae.  The press have seen copies of all documentation - they are perfectly able to validate information.

It is not LEGAL to use the whip to punish equidae in Scotland.  

Might I draw your attention instead to Ellen Whittaker - who purposely punished her horse with spurs for non-performance, which is well covered elswhere on this site - she has just blown your arguement out of the water...

Punishment goes on - it simply is not acceptable in modern society and it should be banned with the maximum penalties delivered to the rider.  

I am not alone calling for this action, those that understand how horses learn, better than you and I... lead the arguement to have whips, spurs, tie downs and conflict riding banned when used to the detriment and punishment of horses.

It is not a singular arguement.


----------



## Fairynuff (29 June 2009)

After ploughing my way through most of this 'argument', all I have to say is this........God save the horse from the hands of these idiots 
	
	
		
		
	


	




. A smack in time helps your horse to avoid the 'project horse' ads! Mairi-pro whip n spurs.


----------



## Fairynuff (29 June 2009)

while you are at it Jo, why dont you try banning the use of bits? Bits can be instrumented in punishing the horse.A good sock or two in the gob from an angry rider or leader can more painful than a whack on the arse. Come to think of it, any bit in the hands of an inexperienced rider can be a form of torture for the horse.Shall you make this your next crusade? Mairi.


----------



## choffley (29 June 2009)

I'm a very experience horsewoman who grew up traditional / old fashioned eventing yards with a style of riding and training which involved some very well timed smacks with a whip when required.  

I've been using Andrew McLean's training techniques for the past 18 months on two very large sports horses both of whom have attitude and issues. I've had excellent results and both horses have become MUCH calmer and obedient.  

However, I fear that this thread may be leading people to the conclusion that he is another one of the new age namby pamby types. Andrew advocates using the appropriate 'stimulus' to get the horse to respond, and that means getting tough when necessary. Through progressive training the horse is then encouraged to respond to a lighter aid. 

He states that 'when [punishment] is used correctly, repetition of the behaviour becomes less likely.' However, he goes onto to state that it is problematic to ensure that the horse associates the punishment with the behaviour, therefore it is often devoid of training benefit.

It all comes back to good pragmatic horsemanship, being very consistent, not losing your temper and having excellent timing. A well timed smack may be the most appropriate action, provided that the horse is allowed to go forwards immediately and not forced to stand still while it is punished.

I had not heard about the Scottish code and was very interested to see  that it states that 'round pens should not be used to discipline animals! 

Does that mean that Natural Horsemanship is illegal in Scotland too?


----------



## Mithras (29 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
I am sorry that I have allowed an incorrect statement to slip into my last comment.  What I should have said is that the Scottish Governement in 2008 (and again ratified on 19th February 2009) issued a directive named the Code of Practice for the Welfare of Equidae.  The press have seen copies of all documentation - they are perfectly able to validate information.

It is not LEGAL to use the whip to punish equidae in Scotland.  

Might I draw your attention instead to Ellen Whittaker - who purposely punished her horse with spurs for non-performance, which is well covered elswhere on this site - she has just blown your arguement out of the water...

Punishment goes on - it simply is not acceptable in modern society and it should be banned with the maximum penalties delivered to the rider.  

I am not alone calling for this action, those that understand how horses learn, better than you and I... lead the arguement to have whips, spurs, tie downs and conflict riding banned when used to the detriment and punishment of horses.

It is not a singular arguement. 

[/ QUOTE ]

This is utterly unnacceptable - you are making false and misleading statements about the law in Scotland and are continuing to do so - I am going to complain to the BHS about this.  You have completely misunderstood the legislation and are not in a position to make statements about the law in other countries, but I am really concerned that people reading on here may be confused by what you are saying.

It doesn't really matter in this context when it was promulgated - you are just pasting something you don't understand.  It was not "again ratified on 19th February".

Let me reiterate.  I am a qualified solicitor, on the roll in Scotland.  I lecture in law at at a leading Scottish university.  The Scottish Code of Practice to which you refer is not a directive - Scottish law does not contain directives, but regulations.  The difference is important because directives can in the European context be directly effective.  This is not even a set of regulations - it is a voluntary, advisory Code of Practice which, at best, may be taken by a court as persuastive value pursuant to a court case under the primary legislation.  When I say "may be" - that is up to the judge.  Personally I think the Code of Practice simply confuses the issue and is muddled, and its perfectly possible a judge, using their discretion, may entirely ignore the Code of Practice and apply common sense instead.  At best a judge will interpret it, at worst the Code of Practice will be ignored because its far too short, muddled, too prescriptive and not impartial.

It is not illegal to use the whip as punishment in Scotland.  Utter, utter nonsense.  You don't understand the law, you don't understand how it works.

There are going to be a lot of people in Scotland really annoyed about what you are saying about Scots law and I really think you should stop before you get into trouble.  As I say, I am going to complain to the BHS, whom you appear to be a member of?  I don't have anything against you personally but I cannot stand by and see the law of the country I live in misrepresented for someone's personal publicity campaign.  I am also going to contact your local newspaper to ask them to print an apology for misrepresenting the law of Scotland.

Since you seem unable to understand the way in which the law works, despite it being explained to you, I doubt you are the best person to make subjective judgements about whether a whip is being used as punishment or as a training aid.  Mhairi, in her short post, makes a far better attempt at explaining it than you do.

I also think the press are not able to make up their own minds about this and again, anyone with any common sense would recognise this.  If someone representing themselves as an expert states a fact, local press will simply repeat it.  You have clearly mislead your own local press in order to gain benefit and publicity.  

Quite frankly, when you make reference to Ellen Whittaker's use of the spurs in this context of discussing whip use in such a childish manner, you don't yourself any favours.

I also jump BSJA and show to county level and have in the past been employed as a professional showjumping rider in Switzerland as well as a work rider in racing.  I am currently schooling a problem horse that most people would be terrified to ride.  I could probably set myself up as an expert and make a bit of money out of it, but I'm not doing so.  There are plenty more experienced people out there than me with the qualifications and better competition records who are entitled to do so.  However, I use myself as an analogy - I just don't think you have the competition experience to attempt to prescribe to the horse people of this country what they should and should not do.  You don't even understand how the present rules govern this. 

Can I stress again how extremely annoyed I am about this and how concerned I am that you are misleading people - I am going to do something about this.


----------



## Mithras (29 June 2009)

Again, reading through the link to the newspaper article, I see that the BHS have distanced themselves from your comments.

Does that not say it all?  Quite honestly, I cannot see the issue here.  There are very rare individual instances of whip abuse at competitions, which are dealt with strictly and appropriately.  Considering the number of competitors there are, it is extremely rare.  Racing bans jockeys guilty of whip abuse.  I myself have seen a well known rider called up to the box and banned from taking part in the remainder of a BSJA show for smacking 6 times after being eliminated - and rightly so.  He forfeited all his entries at that show and was reported to the BSJA, who no doubt, fined him.  That was a small show with little audience to impress - the system and rules both worked well and yes, it wasn't horrendous whip abuse, the horse would probably have forgotten about it that night and showed no signs of real distress.  But all those watching were sent a message.  Again, I saw the same happen with a lesser incident at a small BSJA show in Aberdeen - the rules are being strictly enforced.  Both these instances were long before the waste of time voluntary Code of Practice came into being.

So what is the issue?  If the systems and rules in place are working, why make a fuss about it?  Why not do it more quietly and contact the various constituent organisations of the disciplines, such as the BSJA, BE, BD, etc and encourage and work with them to enforce the perfectly adequate existing rules?

Of course, that would not gain you so much publicity and potential earning capacity I guess.

Lets take the instance of Ellen Whittaker, who arugably did not breach the rules on use of the whip by not raising it above shoulder level - the real issue was the use of her spurs and the timing of this, after elimination.  If she were not aware of the rules, her behaviour would probably have been much worse and involved whip use.  Should she disciplined by her governing body, the BSJA?  Probably yes.  And I suspect she will be and we will not see this again from her.  But the rules did probably prevent her from unacceptably using the whip as punishment.
But yes, interesting that the BHS has distanced itself from your comments with a very common sense retort.


----------



## Onyxia (29 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]

The so called evidence is as follows - Its called the Pannicus response, this is the muscle twitch of the body which shirks of a flys foot when it lands - the skin is sooooo sensitive to external stimuli.

[/ QUOTE ]
"So called". Do you doubt your own evidence?

The argument is rubbish.
I can also feel a fly landing on my skin,but need a fair amount of force used in a whack for it to _hurt_ .


----------



## Gonetofrance (29 June 2009)

Extremely well put, Headless one.


----------



## TarrSteps (29 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]

He states that 'when [punishment] is used correctly, repetition of the behaviour becomes less likely.' However, he goes onto to state that it is problematic to ensure that the horse associates the punishment with the behaviour, therefore it is often devoid of training benefit.

It all comes back to good pragmatic horsemanship, being very consistent, not losing your temper and having excellent timing. A well timed smack may be the most appropriate action, provided that the horse is allowed to go forwards immediately and not forced to stand still while it is punished.


[/ QUOTE ]

I fear this idea is going to get lost in the general shuffle but it bears repeating towards the wider concept of humane and EFFECTIVE training.  Punishing a horse for something that's done and over with, in a situation where the horse cannot "fix" the situation in order to "turn off" the punishment is simply not effective, quite apart from whether or not people feel it's "justified".


----------



## Oddysmum (29 June 2009)

At the moment we have a country full of youngsters that seem to have no respect for any kind of authority at all, be it teachers, police or parents.  All because (IMO) we have let them grow up in a society that has decided that smacking is cruel and that they should be reasoned with - Have you tried reasoning with a three year old that is continually trying to do something you know is going to be dangerous ie pulling away from you and running off near a road.  At the risk of being accused of being overly sentimental etc. (sorry can't remember the exact term when you humanise animals!) It is exactly the same with animals.  I don't advocate beating, but if a short sharp slap does the trick then I will use that with my horse same as I have my (well behaved grown up) sons!  For example, last week my horse was in one of his stubborn (he's a cob!) I am not going to listen to you, I am just going to forge ahead so that I can get home for my tea as quickly as possible moods!  About half way round we pulled over for a car to pass, no sooner was the car half way past than he decided he was going to step out and continue on his way. He had already tried this once already, so at this point I said that's enough, smacked him on the rump with the whip and told him to stop being so bloody obstinate and to start listening! I got mutionous body language back, but next time we stopped he waited until I gave him the signal to move of before he moved out!

Although I agree that horses don't have pre-conceived ideas as revenge etc. they do most undoubtably have personalities, and speaking for myself (I have had my boy for 5 years now so know him inside out!) he most definitly has a stubborn, mischevious streak that I really would for the most part hate to see him lose, but that, without a doubt needs bringing back into line every now and again.

So with the above taken into account, I really think you cannot make blanket decisons and each incident needs to be judged independently.


----------



## PapaFrita (30 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]

The so called evidence is as follows - Its called the Pannicus response, this is the muscle twitch of the body which shirks of a flys foot when it lands - the skin is sooooo sensitive to external stimuli. 

[/ QUOTE ]
I postulate that they can feel a fly because the fly moves the hairs, which 'tickle'. I can feel a fly as well, but only if it lands where I have hairs. If it lands on the back of my hand (where I happen to be bald), I can't feel a thing. Obviously I'm not a horse, but I don't believe a horse's skin IS as sensitive as mine.


----------



## PapaFrita (30 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
 while you are at it Jo, why dont you try banning the use of bits? Bits can be instrumented in punishing the horse.A good sock or two in the gob from an angry rider or leader can more painful than a whack on the arse. Come to think of it, any bit in the hands of an inexperienced rider can be a form of torture for the horse.Shall you make this your next crusade? Mairi. 

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, if we're banning bits, we should get rid of flash/crank/drop/grackle nosebands, martingales and DEFINITELY draw reins


----------



## martlin (30 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
 while you are at it Jo, why dont you try banning the use of bits? Bits can be instrumented in punishing the horse.A good sock or two in the gob from an angry rider or leader can more painful than a whack on the arse. Come to think of it, any bit in the hands of an inexperienced rider can be a form of torture for the horse.Shall you make this your next crusade? Mairi. 

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, if we're banning bits, we should get rid of flash/crank/drop/grackle nosebands, martingales and DEFINITELY draw reins 
	
	
		
		
	


	









[/ QUOTE ]

In fact, we should just go the whole hog and ban the riders


----------



## PapaFrita (30 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
 while you are at it Jo, why dont you try banning the use of bits? Bits can be instrumented in punishing the horse.A good sock or two in the gob from an angry rider or leader can more painful than a whack on the arse. Come to think of it, any bit in the hands of an inexperienced rider can be a form of torture for the horse.Shall you make this your next crusade? Mairi. 

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, if we're banning bits, we should get rid of flash/crank/drop/grackle nosebands, martingales and DEFINITELY draw reins 
	
	
		
		
	


	









[/ QUOTE ]

In fact, we should just go the whole hog and ban the riders 
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]
Yep, I think all our horses should be turned away to live as one with nature...


----------



## martlin (30 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
 while you are at it Jo, why dont you try banning the use of bits? Bits can be instrumented in punishing the horse.A good sock or two in the gob from an angry rider or leader can more painful than a whack on the arse. Come to think of it, any bit in the hands of an inexperienced rider can be a form of torture for the horse.Shall you make this your next crusade? Mairi. 

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, if we're banning bits, we should get rid of flash/crank/drop/grackle nosebands, martingales and DEFINITELY draw reins 
	
	
		
		
	


	









[/ QUOTE ]



In fact, we should just go the whole hog and ban the riders 
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]
Yep, I think all our horses should be turned away to live as one with nature...






[/ QUOTE ]

That would be lovely, I could spend the rest of my life lounging 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 Very tempting indeed


----------



## PapaFrita (30 June 2009)

BUT, there's a catch you see... whilst we wouldn't be allowed actually to RIDE our horses, we would be obliged (possibly by law) to provide regular worming, vaccinations, extra feed in winter, etc, etc...


----------



## Fairynuff (30 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
BUT, there's a catch you see... whilst we wouldn't be allowed actually to RIDE our horses, we would be obliged (possibly by law) to provide regular worming, vaccinations, extra feed in winter, etc, etc...






[/ QUOTE ]

But that would be going AGAINST nature!!!!!!!!!!! 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 Cant have that PF, can we 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 Mx


----------



## PapaFrita (30 June 2009)

It is somewhat ironic, isn't it? 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 Perhaps we might be allowed to ride our horses bareback and brideless providing we get the horse's permission... ?


----------



## brighthair (30 June 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(QR)
I still fail to see how a tap with the whip is abuse.
If a horse is out of line in the field the dominant horse will kick or bite it _intending_ to hurt.
We (I would hope) use a tap to shock as you would a smack to a small child so the unwanted behaviour stops before it becomes a problem.
Ou of curiousity once,some friends and I did use a whip on arms to get an idea of the force used.While whacking it as hard as you can hurt,a tap as it woud be used did not,and a horse will feel the impact much less then a human arm. 

[/ QUOTE ]


A horse would feel it alot more their skin is far more sensitive than ours. 

[/ QUOTE ]

Your evidence being?
S 
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]

so if their skin is more sensitive then why - when my horse grooms me when I scratch him, it bloody hurts! But horses love grooming each other, and use their teeth to do it!


----------



## isabella (3 July 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
without a whip i would not be able to ride my horse in an indoor arena 
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]

without a whip my mare would happily stand in the middle of the road and go to sleep unless we turned for home lol


----------

