Lindsy Murray is an IAABC Certified Horse Behaviour Consultant and an Associate Certified Dog Behaviour Consultant in Cheshire, UK. Lindsy’s knowledge of equine behaviour, alongside her experience of working with rescued horses for over 25 years has enabled her to provide clients with a wealth of information and guidance to help them understand and resolve their horse’s problematic behaviours.

Lindsy’s work focuses on optimising the horse’s 24 hour day. She emphasises the importance of understanding the horse’s basic yet essential needs and encourages clients to have an overall holistic approach rather than concentrating on isolated behaviour problems associated with training or management. Her goal is to provide her clients with positive and gratifying ways to regain a trusting, happy and confident relationship with their horse.

Lindsy has been involved in various equine welfare organisations and is co-founder of “The Graze Trust for Horses’ in the UK. This small ‘not for profit’ organisation focuses on the rehabilitation of rescued equines and their integration into a permanent, well socialised and stable herd.

Alongside behavioural science, Lindsy’s main interest lies in integrative health and complementary therapy. Her own experience of bringing severely traumatised animals back to full health has allowed her to see first hand the impact mental and emotional stress can have on the physical body. Secondary to veterinary care, Lindsy uses herbs, oils, homeopathy and vibrational remedies to treat all her own animals.

In addition to her work as a behaviourist Lindsy is one of the few Bach Flower Registered Practitioners in the UK. She works alongside a homeopathic vet and believes that the inclusion of complementary therapies is hugely beneficial for horses and other animals.

www.lindsymurray.co.uk

lindsy@lindsymurray.co.uk

Sharon Madere has spent over 20 years immersed in the science of animal behavior. She offers equine training and behavior modification, as well as private instruction and group educational events through her business, EquiLightenment. Based in Virginia and Florida, she serves clients throughout the mid-Atlantic, South East and occasionally the North East. Sharon also breeds Andalusian and Lusitano horses (Silver Moon Iberians), and is a serious student of artistic Classical riding.

Sharon is profoundly thankful for her good fortune to have been mentored by reknown Veterinary Behaviorist, Dr. R.K. Anderson. She is passionately devoted to on-going learning, conducting her own reading and research, and participating in continuing education courses each year. Her equestrian background includes eventing, dressage, competitive trail (obstacles), and pleasure trail riding with gaited horses. She continues her advanced riding education under the training of Sr. Bruno Gonzalez. Sharon enjoys instructing riders in the foundations of correct historic Classical principles, and finds great fulfillment in helping horses with severe behavior issues, including aggression, under saddle problems, and extreme fear reactions.

For more information visit www.EquiLightenment.com and www.SilverMoonIberians.com.

Date of first in-person consultation: March 1, 2014

Subject: Maestoso

Aurorra II, “Shark”

Breed: Lipizzan

Gender/Breeding

Status: Gelding (castrated at age 6, never bred)

YOB & Age: June 2004, 9.5 yrs old

Height: 15.1 h

Color: Grey

Equine Body Condition Score: 5

Primary Presenting Behavioral Complaint: Aggression towards people (including biting), especially around food (hence the nickname “Shark”)

Additional Behavioral Complaint(s): Striking, kicking and bolting when lunged; bucking and bolting under saddle

Owner: Candice Piraino

Address: Camden, SC (recently moved to Southern Pines, NC)

Acquisition Details: Purchased in March 2011, age 7

Purpose: Pleasure riding, dressage, companion

Current Environment: Small private boarding facility (NOTE: I later learned that Shark had been in at least four different boarding facilities over the past few years)

Stabling Facilities: Run-in shed in turn out paddock

Turn Out: 60m x 60m paddock, short dormant grass, 3 board fencing, 10 ft. gate, water trough, several trees; paddock opened into larger pasture (1+acre) with jumps, gate remained open for full access

Conspecifics: 5 geldings on property, visual & auditory contact when in nearby paddocks

Management Schedule: Turn out 24/7

Diet: Pasture grass short and dormant (non-sufficient), orchard/alfalfa hay, Coolstance Copra feed

Feeding Schedule: 2-3 flakes hay, 1 lb. Coolstsance 2x daily; 10:00 am & between 5:00 pm – 6:00 pm

Medical History: Treated for possible ulcers early 2013, 28 days Gastro Guard; 28 days again in summer 2013; behavior seemed to improve slightly after the first round of medication

Current Medications: Allergy shots

Farrier Concerns/Comments: none

Veterinarian Concerns/Comments: Current veterinarian confirmed treatment for suspicion of ulcers (owner opted not to scope), reported slight improvement in behavior (slightly reduced intensity of aggressive displays and “grumpiness”), but still felt behavior was of significant concern.

Owner’s Report of Primary Problem Behavior:

Description: Severe food aggression, jaws open, teeth bared, ears pinned, attempts to bite. Owner reports at least 5 people (including owner) bitten on multiple occasions, total of over 30 bites

Date and conditions of onset: Behavior exhibited from time of acquisition; got worse when in full-time training and stalled 18 hours a day

Frequency: Multiple times each day

Time of day and duration: Feeding times, whenever person goes into stall or field, when being tacked

Context: At feeding times, then seemed to have generalized to other times, including tacking up

Location: In stall, field, cross-ties, etc.

People: Behavior exhibited towards all handlers

Animals: n/a

Owner’s Report of Additional Problem Behaviors:

Description: Striking, kicking and bolting (when handler on ground), bucking and bolting (when being ridden)

Prior Interventions:

• Owner – When feeding, she would try to place the feed down quickly and get out the way as fast as possible.
• Boarding Facility Staff – It was reported that the staff would try to make Shark move to the back of the stall or away from the fence by using voice, waving arms and/or ropes and/or whips; then they would set the food down and quickly leave the stall or paddock.
• Trainer 1 – “Natural Horsemanship” – Shark was sent to another facility for approximately three months in 2011. Training techniques included round penning (chasing), and long-lining. Owner reported that Shark grew dramatically worse, and came home “frustrated and angry.”
• Trainer 2 – Dressage trainer – Owner moved Shark to a new boarding and training facility, where he was in training for approximately 12 months in 2012-2013, during which time the owner also took lessons from time to time on Shark. The goal was to be able to compete in Training Level dressage. When Shark tried to bite staff while being bridled, he would occasionally be hit in the face – but the biting behavior continued. Despite gaining a basic foundation of walk/trot/canter, there was no significant improvement in Shark’s general rideability – he continued to buck with trainer and owner, unseating both on numerous occasions. As a result of some of the falls, the owner sustained mild concussions and fractured coccyx.

Initial Observations:

I arrived on day 1, approximately 1 hour before afternoon feeding time. Shark was in turn out paddock, trying to nibble on what minimal grass was there (short and dormant, not a meaningful forage source). I toldthe horse owner I wanted to observe the normal feeding routine. Feeding was done by the barn manager, male aged 60+. As feeding time approached, Shark became mildly agitated and paced along the fence nearest to the barn. The manager carried shallow feeding pan with Coolstance along the fence line, then squeezed between the boards of the fence adjacent to the run-in shed, while holding the pan out in front of him and away from his body. Shark walked directly towards manager, neck & head stretched horizontally forward, ears pinned fully below topline of neck, eyes wide with whites showing, nostrils pulled back, lips open and teeth bared. Manager quickly placed the pan on the ground near the run in shed, then backed away and exited through the fence. Shark lowered his head and began to eat. While Shark was eating from the pan, the manager entered the paddock again carrying aprrox. 2 flakes of hay,
which he placed in the middle of the paddock (approx. 30 yards from Shark), then exited. When Shark finished eating the Coolstance, he walked immediately over to the hay and began eating at a rapid rate.

Functional Analysis

Immediate Antecedent: Person approaches with food

Behavior: Shark walks toward person with head and neck thrust forward, ears pinned and teeth bared

Consequence: Person sets down food and exits

Assessment: I felt there were numerous interwoven factors that most likely contributed to the initiation, maintenance and increasing intensity of this behavior. My hypothesis as to the development of the problem included:

• Extended periods of time without access to forage (both past and present) led to discomfort in the gut (and possibly painful ulcers), and overall emotional agitation due to feelings of hunger.
• As feeding times approached, anticipatory agitation would increase.
• When the person came to deliver the food, Shark’s hunger likely caused him to become pushy and/or grabby in attempts to get at the food.
• When Shark became pushy/grabby, the person would attempt to make him back away, most likely through swinging a hand, rope or whip towards him.
• Shark’s sense of deprivation would cause him to try harder to quickly get at the food.
• The person might become stronger in chasing or hitting to try to make Shark back off.
• The person might attempt to deliver the food faster.
• The combination of hunger, frustration, pain and fear led to an increase in the aggressive behaviors.
• The predictable and consistent delivery of food (positive reinforcement) was highly reinforcing and led to the maintenance of these behaviors.
• The predictable and consistent withdrawal of the human (negative reinforcement) most likely also played a role in maintaining the behaviors.

At the time of my first in-person consult (March 2014), it was apparent that Shark had strong negative emotions associated with the approach of a human, and especially one bringing food. Given that the food itself should produce positive emotions, it seemed to me that this set up a strong internal conflict. I determined the best approach would be a combination of:

• changes in management/feeding (free choice access to forage, 24/7)
• counter-conditioning (positive association of humans combined with the food)
• reinforcement of behavior and body language (possibly underlying emotion) incompatible with aggressive behaviors.

Negative Indications:

• The aggressive behavior had been ongoing for at least several years, and was reinforced daily each time Shark was fed
• The aggression had escalated to more than 30 actual bite incidents
• Prior attempts to address the problem seemed to have worsened both the behavior and the underlying emotional basis (misguided and ineffective attempts to punish using physical aversive such as hitting with hand or whip)
• The horse was at a boarding facility, which could make human compliance unreliable both in feeding and handling guidelines
• Long-standing history of forage deprivation contributed to generalized state of agitation
• Previous suspected ulcers could be again emerging
• The aggression occurred in multiple contexts, and also involved striking and kicking

Positive Indications:

• The owner was extremely committed and willing to make whatever changes were recommended for the welfare of her horse

Modification Plan & Training Day 1: After watching the feeding routine, I told the owner that we needed to give Shark at least 30 minutes to eat hay before beginning behavior modification. While we waited, I explained to her about the ethological and physiological needs of horses for forage, that the ideal would be 24/7 access, and how this would be one component to help address some of the underlying causes supporting the aggressive behavior (hunger, frustration, anticipation). She agreed to place several hay nets at various locations in the paddock, which would guarantee Shark unlimited access to forage. I also explained the process I would be using: positive reinforcement with a sound marker (tongue-click followed by piece of carrot) to help change the underlying emotions from unhappy to happy, and to shape and teach specific behaviors. I considered two possible options for the first intervention: 1) Using protective contact with a fence or other barrier between me and Shark; or 2) Working in the paddock with Shark at liberty. (I did not consider using a remote treat delivery device, as the only ones I am aware of are suitable for dogs or cats, but not adequate for horses.) I did have some concerns for my safety when considering going in to the paddock with Shark at liberty. However, after carefully observing Shark’s behavior before, during and after the barn manager brought in the pan of feed, I that working at liberty would yield better results than restricting him with a barrier, as that restriction might intensify his frustration.

I entered the paddock with a pouch full of small carrot pieces, and approached Shark from the front as he was standing over his hay. When I reached about 10 yards distance from him, he flattened his ears, snarled his nostrils, bared his teeth, and extended his head & neck horizontally towards me (threat display). However, he did not charge or move his feet towards me. I continued to walk slowly towards him, my left arm fully extended with a handful of carrot pieces. As I came within reach, Shark took one or two steps towards me, made a small thrusting gesture with his mouth open and teeth showing, and I immediately shoved the handful of carrots directly against his teeth. He pushed his teeth against my hand and roughly took the carrots, but did not actually bite me. As fast as he took the carrots, I used my right hand to place more pieces into the palm of my left hand, which I left directly under and next to Shark’s mouth so that he would not have to reach to have access to the carrots. My goal with this non-contingent feeding was to pair the unrestricted access to a high value food with my continued neutral presence, without reacting to his aggressive display – neither swinging/hitting at him, nor backing away.

I continued to “shovel” pieces of carrots for about 30 seconds, at which point there was a very slight softening of Shark’s ears. They were still pinned back, but no longer below the crest of his neck. He continued to roughly grab at the carrots that were continually offered, and though his teeth made contact with my palm each time, he still did not bite. After about 1 minute his ears flicked momentarily to a more neutral position, and his expression appeared to be one of slight curiosity (this was not what he expected). After another 30 seconds or so his expression continued to soften, and I began using a tongue-click immediately prior to placing carrot pieces in my palm for him to eat. I continued to use this 2-handed approach, quickly taking carrot pieces from the pouch with my right hand, clicking, and placing them on my left palm. This was because I wanted to keep the rate of reinforcement rapid (1 per second), with virtually no pauses in between and no withdrawal of my feeding hand, in order not to give Shark opportunity to lunge and bite at me.

His expression softened slightly more (though still showed moments of strong aggressive display). At one point he actually flicked his ears forward, and I ended this first mini-session with an especially big handful of carrots, then backed away keeping myself facing forward to watch him. He lowered his head and resumed eating his hay. Note that in this first mini-session, the delivery of carrots was completely non-contingent on Shark’s behavior. I continued to feed regardless of how much or little aggressive behavior was shown. When introducing the tongue click, I was simply using it prior to delivery of the carrot to form an association – the clicks were not contingent on any specific behavior.

The owner and her friend (a veterinary technician) were quite amazed at this first mini-session, and the owner had tears in her eyes – she said she had not believed anything like this could be possible.

After a several minute break, I returned to Shark. When I approached he again gave a threat display, though slightly less intense than before. I continued the rapid non-contingent feeding, pairing a tongue click with delivery of carrot. His expression moved slightly more towards neutral. After a couple minutes I took another break for a minute or so, then returned for another session. On the next session, he kept his ears forward as I approached. When I got within a few feet, I clicked (before his ears could go back) and offered the carrot in outstretched hand as I continued to walk towards him. I then began waiting for his ears to be in a neutral position before clicking, and reinforcing a gradually more relaxed expression. By the end of the fifth mini-session, he stood with ears softly forward for approximately 10 seconds, during which I continued to click and give carrots.

We ended the first day’s training, and placed enough hay in various places of the paddock to make sure Shark would have plenty of forage throughout the night and until we came back in the morning. That evening at dinner I gave Shark’s owner and the vet-tech a brief crash course in the basics of learning theory and behavior modification, with emphasis on the power of positive reinforcement.

Training Day 2: The goals for the second day were to continue reinforcing Shark for more relaxed body language while in proximity to a person with food,to teach him simple targeting behavior, and to coach the owner in the use of the techniques.

We began in the morning, and Shark appeared to be less agitated than he had been the prior afternoon. I attributed this to him having had access to hay throughout the night. Over the course of the morning I worked directly with Shark, then coached his owner in various observation and handling skills. I used short sessions (1 – 3 minutes) with brief breaks between (30 seconds to several minutes). I also took occasional longer breaks to allow Shark to eat hay, and to discuss the process with the owner. The majority of sessions were conducted with Shark at liberty in his paddock (no halter or rope). Later in the morning we brought Shark into the barn (using halter and rope) for additional husbandry training (primarily cooperative hoof handling).

In the first session I began with non-contingent feeding. In subsequent sessions I used tongue-click sound followed by carrot pieces to mark and reinforce softer body language (ears, eyes, nostrils, lips, etc.), and later to shape specific behaviors.

Progression of reinforcement:

1) Softening of various aspects of body language while standing next to or in front of me

2) Softening of various aspects of body language while being approached by me

3) Softening of various aspects of body language while walking towards me

4) Targeting object with nose

In the first sessions Shark again showed clear aggressive body language (ears back, bared teeth, etc), though it was markedly reduced in intensity and in duration as compared to the first day. By the 5^th or 6^th mini-session he was showing a significant decrease in aggressive displays and increase in calm body language.

Because I knew I would be leaving that afternoon and would not be able to return for at least a month, I intentionally structured some of the sessions to test the limits of his threshold – i.e, what aspects of poor timing, missed reinforcement opportunities, erratic movements, etc. might re-trigger the aggression and potential biting. I felt this was ethically required, because I needed to be able to caution the owner about her interactions with Shark in my absence.

One interesting item of concern became apparent about mid-morning: I was working in the paddock, with Shark at liberty, standing about 15 feet from the perimeter fence. I had just finished a mini-session, and turned to walk towards the fence in order to exit. Shark walked quickly beside and then in front of me to block my access to the fence/exit. His expression was not that of the previous extreme aggression, but was consistent with body language associated with moderate resource guarding. I pointed this out to the owner, and immediately initiated a different “exiting” protocol to insure safety. This included working much closer to the point of exit, and ending the session by placing a large handful of carrots on the ground away from the direction of exit.This approach proved successful, and there were no further blocking incidents that day. During extended break periods in my sessions with Shark, I spent time working with the owner on basic mechanical skills, observation and timing exercises WITHOUT the horse. After the owner demonstrated sufficient proficiency, we then brought her into the paddock and repeated the above progression of reinforcement with Shark.

Initially I had the owner begin with non-contingent feeding. Then I had her perform only one aspect of the training components:

Examples:

• I would observe Shark’s body language & click, then the owner would give the carrot (at first I would guide her hand)
• Owner would present the target (at first I would guide her hand), I would observe, click and give the carrot.
• I would present the target, owner would observe & click (I would also click so that she could compare her timing with mine, and also so that we could be careful not to frustrate Shark), I would give the carrot.

Fortunately, this owner demonstrated exceptional aptitude, and achieved a functional level of skill in a very short period of time. By the end of the morning the owner was able to successfully perform all aspects of the cue-observe-click-reinforce sequence. In this particular case it was imperative to have the owner work with the horse that day, since I was located 7 hours away and she would need to take over the process immediately. However, even if I had been available to work with this horse for several days or weeks, I believe it would have been important to involve the owner as soon as possible, as this helps the horse to more effectively generalize the new relaxed behavior with multiple people.

Later in the barn with Shark wearing a halter we worked on:

• Calm acceptance of touching/handling various body parts
• Lifting of hooves for cleaning

We continued to use the sound marker and carrots as reinforcement for calm cooperation.

At the close of our training time on Day 2, Shark’s general demeanor was greatly improved, with increased relaxation and acceptance, and minimal signs of mild aggression.

I provided the owner with specific instructions for daily routine, including 24/7 access to suitable forage, continued use of the sound marker/carrots to reinforce calm and pleasant behavior. I also cautioned her to cease any attempts at lunging or riding for at least one month until I could return and re-assess the situation.

Follow-Ups

I spoke via phone with the owner daily for the next week, asking for descriptions of Shark’s behavior each day, answering her questions, and offering suggestions for minor adjustments to the routine. Following this I remained available to answer questions via phone or email as needed for the next several weeks.

Return Visit 1

I returned approximately one month later. The owner had relocated, renting a property where she could live and have facilities to care for Shark herself. She also had two miniature-horse mares on site, pastured in an adjacent field. I was delighted to find that the owner had done a very good job implementing all aspects of the feeding, management and behavior modification protocol, and Shark’s aggressive behavior was virtually non-existent in the new routine. The change of location most likely also played a role, in that there were no bad associations for him in the new environment. The protocol I had advised was focused on improving the trust and pleasant interactions between Shark and his owner, and thus specifically avoided asking Shark to do anything beyond the bare minimum that one would expect of a pasture horse.

Therefore when I returned I wanted to press Shark a little bit to find the thresholds that might begin to re-trigger any aggressive behavior. Again, I felt this to be vitally important in order to be able to advise the owner about safety concerns. For example, during this visit I attempted to cue Shark to back-up with a very light touch/pressure of the palm of my hand on the point of his shoulder – at which point he attempted to strike me with his near foreleg. My response was to leave the paddock for a few moments, then return and ask for an easier, recently reinforced behavior (targeting). Shark was successful and displayed no additional aggression. I again attempted to cue backing, this time with slight pressure on the lead-rope/halter. Shark did not strike, but was resistant and did not back up, so I discontinued these attempts and returned to asking for the easily reinforced behavior of targeting.

Mid-way through our work in this new paddock, Shark again attempted to block my exit at the end of one of our mini-sessions. Unfortunately I had forgotten the previous “exiting” protocol from my initial visit. I asked the owner if she had experienced this with him, and she replied that she had not had this problem, despite the fact that she, too, had not been consistent in the exiting protocol. My theory is that Shark may have found my interactions with him more intensely reinforcing vs. his interactions with the owner – possibly a combination of my very high rate of reinforcement and no prior history of aversive experiences with me? I immediately went back to the exiting protocol, and advised the owner to do the same each time in order to prevent the possible reoccurrence or escalation of this blocking behavior.

(TO BE CONTINUED –

I continued to return for follow up consultations and training, reintroducing Shark and his owner to lunge work and riding. The intervention and outcome was highly successful, and the details of the issues and problem-solving techniques to come in future installments.)

Status and/or Resolution I was able to return several more times in the following months, always delighted to see the great progress of Shark and his owner. The owner decided to host a full-day Equine Behavior and Positive Reinforcement Training Workshop, and thus was able to advance her own learning and understanding of the science. She was so encouraged with Shark’s progress that she wanted to bring him to an event at the end of the summer, and I offered to
advise and coach her participation in The Baroque Equestrian Games. The transformation of trust and mutual enjoyment in their relationship was profound – so much so that within 3 months of re-establishing saddle work through the use of positive reinforcement, Shark and his owner WON the Musical Presentation (Initiate) Section! (This in a class of seven competitors, three of whom were full-time professional trainers/instructors.)

There are still challenges ahead – specifically in canter work – but with her growing understanding of the science of learning and positive reinforcement techniques, as well as more exposure to correct Classical riding principles, this owner and her horse are headed for a very happy ending.

Owner Compliance

As previously stated, this owner was exceptional, and eagerly followed all suggestions and instructions. Although she was new to the concepts and techniques of positive reinforcement training, she did have a good basic
understanding and experience level in general horsemanship.

Discussion

Shark’s aggression issues around food are a great example of how a lack of understanding of the basic ethological and physiological needs of the horse, combined with escalating yet ineffective use of aversives (positive punishment and negative reinforcement), can backfire in a big, BIG way. His problems on the lunge line can be directly attributed to the pseudo-science of popular “natural horsemanship” mythology. His dangerous behavior under saddle was a clear response to less-than-enlightened and/or improperly implemented modern dressage training philosophies which all too often put the horse in conflict and works against his natural bio-mechanics.

References

• American Association of Equine Practitioners, Body Condition Scoring System
• de la Gueriniere, Francois Robichon (1730) Ecole de Cavalerie (School of Horsemanship)
• Foley, Sharon (2007) Getting to Yes: Clicker Training for Improved Horsemanship
• Gonzalez, Bruno – Personal conversations, demonstrations and training with Classical cavesson
• McGreevy, Paul (2012) Equine Behavior: A Guide for Veterinarians and Equine Scientists
• Pryor, Karen (2006) Don’t Shoot the Dog (revised)
• Ramirez, Ken (1999) Animal Training: Successful Animal Management Through Positive Reinforcement

Robin is an IAABC Certified Horse Behavior Consultant and an ABS Certified Applied Animal Behaviorist. Animals have always been the defining element of Robin’s life and work. She holds a BS in Biology and Psychology and a PhD in Animal Behavior, and for 20 years as a Professor at the University of Puget Sound she taught courses in animal learning, behavior, and communication, behavioral genetics, and research methods. Robin retired from full-time teaching in 2011 to start Adaptive Animals, which offers behavior consulting and training for horses and dogs in the Seattle area. She is currently a Research Professor of Psychology at the University of Puget Sound and Affiliate Professor at the University of Washington, as well as Chair of the Applied Animal Behavior Committee for the Animal Behavior Society.

Robin’s research includes work on selection and retention of therapy horses, and on temperament and conflict-related behaviors in horses, and has been published and presented at major scientific conferences. Her current research compares different equine training techniques with the goal of minimizing stress and improving long-term outcomes. Horses play a big role in Robin’s personal life, too. She started riding 50 years ago by falling off a pony named Peanuts, and still saddles up nearly every day for pleasure and health.

Justine Harrison is an IAABC Certified Horse Behaviour Consultant and trainer based in the North West of England. She is also a member of the IAABC application review committee. Justine provides horse behaviour consultations, trains horses and mentors students. She uses the science of behaviour and learning to help horse owners and trainers throughout the UK solve a wide range of behaviour problems including separation anxiety, aggression, phobias and stereotypies. Justine has been employed as an expert consultant in legal disputes and court cases involving equine behaviour. She is also co-founder of a network of local equestrian information websites.Justine is passionate about horses and has ridden for most of her life. She has competed successfully in a number of disciplines including show jumping and dressage. Justine has many years of professional experience riding, competing and handling horses. She has also managed a busy livery yard.

Justine writes for a variety of horse publications about equine behaviour, training and what’s new in equine science. She is the behaviour expert for Horse magazine in the UK and has also contributed to a number of other publications including Horse & Rider magazine (US), Bit magazine (Netherlands) and Horses & People magazine (Australia).For more information see Justine’s website www.equinebehaviourist.co.uk, Facebook page www.facebook.com/justine.harrison.equine.behaviourist and Twitter feed https://twitter.com/justineharrison.

Lauren Fraser is a Certified Horse Behavior Consultant with the IAABC, and is the organization’s Horse Chair and a member of the Application Review Committee. She has operated her business, Good Horsemanship, since 2006 in Squamish, BC, Canada. Lauren helps horse owners resolve behavior and training problems, teaches riding and horsemanship, and presents educational events and workshops for horse owners and equine professionals. Lauren’s career experience with animals has been diverse. She has worked as a mixed practice veterinary assistant, as shelter manager and executive director of a non-profit animal shelter, as an animal control officer, boarding facility owner, and certified riding instructor. Currently completing both a Diploma in Equine Studies and an Equine Welfare certificate from the University of Guelph, Lauren enjoys keeping up-to-date with current research into equine behavior, management, and training. Lauren has written educational pieces for a variety of publications and organizations, including: co-authored a chapter on the physiologic connection between horse and rider in a human sports medicine textbook, (Malalignment Syndrome, Elsevier, 2013); wrote media releases summarizing current scientific research findings for the 2013 International Society of Equitation Science conference; educational blog contributor and Facebook chat presenter for the IAABC; educational articles for a local horse charity, Circle F http://www.circlef.ca. She also writes regularly on horse behavior and training topics for her own blogFacebook page, and twitter.

Five personal horses keep Lauren busy, and with them she has tried her hand at an eclectic mix of disciplines and activities, such as working cow horse, classical dressage, endurance, bridleless riding, in-hand and liberty training, and garrocha. Lauren grew up riding English, but traded jodhpurs for jeans, and now rides predominantly Western. She is particularly interested in bringing modern and humane training methods to the old Vaquero traditions of bridle horse development.

For more information, visit Good Horsemanship.

As we touched upon in the first two parts of this three-part blog series ‘The Horse’s Manifesto’, friends and forage are two of the top three species-specific needs of the horse. This last post will cover what I like to refer to as the third of those three ‘F’s’ –freedom. I hope to introduce the idea that these three needs are actually hard to isolate individually, and could instead be looked at as one very important, intertwined need of the horse. Each need – friends, forage, and freedom – is like a cog, turning the wheels of a machine. Take one away, and the machine won’t operate as intended. The same could be said for the horse; horses need friends, forage, and freedom to operate and live happily and healthily. Removing one will have a negative effect on how the whole horse operates.

Freedom, Defined

Freedom isn’t just a lack of fences; freedom is defined as ‘a state in which somebody is able to act and live as he or she chooses, without being subject to any undue restraints or restrictions’. In their natural state, horses have the freedom to choose how involved they want to be with herd mates, they have the freedom to graze as desired, and they also have freedom to move as they wish (roll, play, rest, mate, mutually groom, wander etc.) Freedom entails personal choice; when examining best practices for caring for horses, it is important that we look at what his species-specific personal choices would be, and not just impose ours on him.

Wild at Heart, and in Body

Unlike many of our modern day dog companions, even the most well-bred and highly trained equine athlete still retains the same instincts and needs of his wild cousins. The horse’s instincts and need for freedom have not been bred out of him. At heart, the horse is still a prey animal, who prefers wide open spaces where he can keep an eye open for potential danger and be able to put distance between himself and any threats. His physical build is also designed for avoiding danger:

• The shape of his head, with eyes placed high, and on either side of his face, allows him a full view of his surroundings while he grazes
• He lacks horns or sharp teeth with which to protect himself, and instead, relies on his powers of perception and fast responses to sudden movement as his first line of defense
• His lower legs lack muscling, in part to allow his limbs to move swiftly through space, and faster propel his great muscular bulk and heavy fermentation chamber of a GI system

And also, unlike many of our modern day dog companions, most horses would survive just fine tomorrow if we opened the gates and set them free – contrary to what some owners would believe.

Horses are nomadic wanderers by trade. They do not stay in the same area, depleting the resources present, before moving on. Horses are designed to eat a few bites, and take a few steps, eat a few bites, and take a few steps. They are not territorial animals, and don’t generally enter into conflict with other bands of horses over territory. Territory of feral horses will often overlap, and any conflict seen within that overlapping territory usually has more to do with maintaining the integrity of the herd.

Feral horses wander between 10-30 miles a day, depending on resources available within their territory. By comparison, Australian researchers found that confined domesticated horses averaged only 4.5 miles of travel, even when living in a 39.5 acre pasture. Stalled horses turned out in a paddock moved even less – just 0.6 miles on average. Gulp! From a health perspective, this lack of movement has serious consequences for the horse, both mentally and physically.

Physical and Behavioral Implications Of A Lack Of Freedom

From his GI system down to his hooves, the horse relies on freedom of movement to stay healthy. Unfortunately, many modern horse-keeping practices impose confinement on the horse, and limit the amount of movement and freedom available to him. Physical issues that can result from lack of adequate movement and over-confinement can include: hoof pathology, colic, laminitis, respiratory illness, obesity, ill health relating to elevated cortisol levels and more.

As stated earlier, freedom doesn’t just entail movement: lack of freedom to choose to interact socially, or eat ad lib can result in both physical and behavioral issues. Lack of free-choice access to forage is a common cause of gastric ulcers, and oral stereotypic behavior such as cribbing. As we learned in part two of this series, Forage, the horse has evolved to process cellulose rich forage for the majority of his day. Being denied the freedom to do so is just one possible cause to predispose a horse to crib. Stereotypic behaviors are behaviors which are repetitive, and seemingly serve no purpose. They can be oral, such as cribbing, or locomotory, such as weaving or stall walking; they are generally an indicator that the horse’s 3 F needs are not being met in some way. Stall walking and weaving stereotypies can develop when horses are denied the freedom to interact socially or to move as desired. Stallions denied the freedom of normal social interactions and movement, may resort to stereotypic self-mutilation.

What Other Practices Can Limit Or Hinder Freedom?

Training practices and tack can also restrict freedom to move as their bodies evolved. Tack, bits, and gadgets abound that impose rigid planes of movement (e.g., tie downs, standing martingales), or force a frame or way of moving onto a horse that may not be either normal or bio-mechanically correct (e.g. draw reins, side reins, lunging systems, weighted shoes). Devices and gadgets are also sold to prevent horses from displaying stereotypies (e.g. cribbing collars, shock collars, shock mats), which removes their freedom to express stress levels they may be experiencing, without actually addressing the root cause.

Training methods that rely heavily on punishing unwanted behaviors rather than reinforcing wanted ones, limit the freedom the horse may feel to participate in training. It has been shown in numerous studies that training that relies on punishment actually suppresses learning, and animals often end up not trying to seek the answer to the training question. To further confuse caring horse owners, a number of heavily marketed horse training ‘systems’ rely on the use of punishment, while describing it in terms that lead owners to believe the methods involve love, are humane, or are natural to the horse. This is where understanding the basics of what’s known as learning theory, can help horse owners decide if a training program truly allows the horse freedom while learning.

Finally, horses may also suffer from what’s known as learned helplessness – a state where an animal learns that nothing he can do will relieve pain or aversive pressure (physical or mental) that he experiences. Lacking the freedom to avoid the pressure, the horse ends up learning that his situation is unchangeable or inescapable. This is commonly seen in riding school horses, subjected, among other things, to novice riders using the reins to balance. The horse cannot escape the pain of the bit when the rider loses their balance, and eventually may appear unresponsive to the rider’s requests. Sadly, those horses may then be labeled ‘lazy’ or ‘dull’, placing blame on the horse himself.

Full Circle

Coming full circle, I hope you have a new appreciation for the horse’s manifesto and his three F’s: Friends, Forage, and Freedom. While we focused on each 'F' individually in this series, it’s important to remember that all three overlap, and are integral to maintaining a mentally happy and physically healthy horse. Friends, forage, and freedom for a happy and healthy horse.

Lauren Fraser is a Certified Horse Behavior Consultant with the IAABC, and operates Good Horsemanship in Squamish, BC, Canada. She offers horse behavior consultations, foundation training, horsemanship clinics, and educational presentations.

Head and oral cavity

The horse’s keen sense of smell helps him to recognize grasses he prefers from past grazing experiences, or ones he desires today. His lips are mobile, making it easy for him to choose the grasses he wishes to pull into his mouth, the starting point for digestion. His incisors are designed to shear off the stalks of tough grasses and twigs, which his 12 inch long tongue then passes back to his constantly erupting premolars and molars. The horse’s jaw muscles are strong, and provide the power to the molars to start grinding the grasses. Only when chewing happens does saliva start to flow into the horse’s mouth from three pairs of salivary glands. The horse produces up to 10 gallons of saliva a day, and its role is two-fold – it contains a buffering agent which helps neutralize stomach acid, and an enzyme that starts to break down the plant matter he eats.

The esophagus

Once the grasses are chewed, they start the one-way journey into the rest of the horse’s digestive system; horses cannot vomit, or burp, which can lead to problems when they consume things they shouldn’t. Swallowing is a complex action, and it moves the food from the mouth to the esophagus, a tube designed to take the food to the stomach. Problems can occur here if something becomes lodged that the horse can’t dislodge, i.e. a piece of hard food such as an apple or carrot.

The stomach

Given his large size, the horse’s stomach is relatively small – only about 8-16 quarts – and food stays here a short period of time. The lower 2/3rds of horse’s stomach is protected from acid by a shielding layer, and consequently it functions best when it is almost continuously processing food. Horses produce about 1.5 quarts of stomach acid every hour of the day, but remember, they only produce acid-buffering saliva when they chew. In addition to breaking down the proteins in his food, the acid has another positive purpose: it slows the fermentation of the foods he eats, preventing gas buildup in the stomach of an animal who can’t belch. But if the horse is subjected to periods of fasting, for example when he is fed only 2-3 times a day, this acid can act against the horse, causing stomach ulcers, especially in the unlined top 1/3 of the horse’s stomach. Gastric ulcers are very common in horses subjected to fasting, intensely managed horses, and those who perform sport frequently or at high levels. Undiagnosed or untreated ulcers are a common cause of many problems, such as cribbing, bucking, poor performance potential, and being a “hard-keeper.

The small intestine

Leaving the stomach, the food enters the small intestine, where up to 60% of carbohydrate digestion happens; almost all of the vitamins and amino acids from the food he eats are utilized here too, and absorbed along its 70ft length. The small intestine generally processes food in 30-90 minutes, and the slower the passage, the more nutrients are taken from the foods he eats. Constant access to hay or grass ensures that food passes slowly through the small intestine, therefore maximizing the nutrition available to the horse. Feeding ground or pre-chopped forage hastens food’s time through the small intestine, therefore limiting nutrient absorption.

The large intestine

The partially digested food leaves the small intestine, and enters the cecum of the large intestine. The cecum is an oddly shaped part of the large intestine, about 1 ft in diameter and 4 ft long, that acts as the starting fermentation chamber in the digestive process. The fermentation action of billions of bacteria and microbes break down tough plant fibers such as cellulose that we humans are unable to digest. Food stays in the cecum, fermenting, for up to 7 hours.

Next, the food enters the large colon, where nutrients made accessible through fermentation are now absorbed. The large colon is about 12 ft long and 10 inches in diameter, and contains a series of oddly shaped pouches designed to effectively digest the fibrous foodstuffs the horse eats naturally.

After passing through the large colon, the material that flows into the small colon has been processed as much as possible by the horse, and is now relatively just waste material. The small colon’s last job is to pull out any excess moisture remaining, and form the material into the familiar “road apples” every horse owner knows.

Management practices that work for the horse

As we can see, the horse is designed by nature to graze constantly. We can run into problems with the horse when we deny him this very basic need, and subject him to periods of fasting, or feed him things, such as excess grains, he isn’t designed to process. When an animal’s physical needs aren’t met, his emotional needs also suffer; mind and body are linked, and horses who are denied constant access to forage can exhibit many behavior problems.

Many horse-keeping traditions dictate the horse be confined (more on that in part 3, Freedom, next month!), and subjected to set feedings 2-3 times daily. As you’ve just learned, this is physically and therefore emotionally detrimental to the horse. So how can we meet this primary need, especially when we don’t have access to large pastures? One way is through the use of what are known as slow-feeders – specially designed nets or boxes that hold hay, and restrict the volume of hay he can pull through at one time. Slow feeders slow down how quickly the horse can eat his hay, and thereby provide many of the benefits of grazing.

A simple Google search for slow feeders will result in many pages of both premade designs, and how-to plans that are easily made with common items. As with any product, when considering slow feeders there are things to be aware of:

1. Designs should ensure the horse’s safety above all else. The normal position for feeding is at ground level, and some designs may not be safe to do this with shod horses.
2. Horse owners need to take into consideration that some designs may cause certain horses frustration. Holes that are too small, and prohibit the horse from readily accessing food may cause stress to some horses. Some horses need help in figuring out how to get the hay out initially.
3. Designs with netting made of very small diameter rope may pose a risk if horses get the thin strands caught between teeth. Choosing a feeder with webbing or some such other material instead of thin rope may decrease the chance of this happening.
4. Although owners may shudder at the thought of free-feeding their easy keepers, increasing the horse’s exercise is a healthier option than decreasing his amount of food. Switching a portion of his hay to one with a lower nutritional profile will allow him to forage, while keeping an eye on his caloric intake. Soaking hay is another way to remove some of the sugars, while still providing the roughage – and many slow feeders designs make this a snap.

Slow feeders are an excellent addition to the lives of horses unable to forage for themselves ad lib. The increased time chewing produces more saliva, which buffers more acid, and the steady volume of food keeps the horse’s GI system working as it should. The many benefits they provide make them a “must have” recommendation to my own clients for meeting the horse’s second “F” need, Forage.

Lauren Fraser is a Certified Horse Behavior Consultant with the IAABC, and operates Good Horsemanship in Squamish, BC, Canada. She offers horse behavior consultations, foundation training, horsemanship clinics, and educational presentations.

• 1. Friends
• 2. Forage
• 3. Freedom

But, if you asked the average horse owner to answer for their horse, the list might be different, perhaps:

• 1. His own personal stall, complete with warm blankets, fresh shavings, lights, and a radio playing in the background.
• 2. Grain and supplements, twice a day, in addition to his twice daily feed of hay.
• 3. A safe paddock, without other horses to bother him, to spend half his day in before retiring back to his stall for bedtime.

There’s a great phrase, "anthropomorphism by omission", that describes what happens when we fail to consider that other animals (don’t forget, we too are animals) have a different perception of the world than we. Without even realizing it, we can attribute human traits, needs, or ways of perceiving to other species simply by failing to realize that how they perceive the world is probably completely different than how we perceive the world.  As it applies to this blog, what we think the horse wants or needs might not be what he wants or needs. I believe that most horse owners want their horses to be happy. So in the interest of keeping our horses happy, this three part blog will examine his top three demands, starting with friends.

Friends

Horses are a highly social prey animal, and they have a complex and subtle communication system that utilizes body language, in part to avoid detection by predators. Being predominantly gestural communicators, they are in near constant visual contact with other horses so that they may transmit non-verbal messages back and forth to one another. They have an intricate social structure, and form strong bonds with other horses called pair bonds. Horses rely on being in visual and near physical contact with others to detect food and predators, for play, for procreation, for mutual grooming, and for safety. It’s vitally important for horse owners to understand that even the most pampered or selectively bred horse still retains these instincts and needs. Horses need other horses, period.

How do people isolate horses socially? Two traditional ways are stalling or paddocking them alone, in facilities designed to minimize physical and/or visual contact with other horses. And here are a few commonly cited reasons as to why that I hear from clients:

• 1. Doing so will prevent the horse from becoming overly attached to other horses, and therefore will minimize behavior problems such as being herd bound.
• 2. The belief that isolating horses keeps them safe from injury or cosmetic damage incurred during "horseplay".
• 3. The belief that their horse does not appreciate the company of other horses.
• 4. Monetary or perceived worth.
• 5. And so on…

Let’s briefly address these concerns:

• 1. Horses need other horses. Isolating horses can actually create the very behavior problems people are trying to avoid (i.e. herd bound), in addition to creating anxiety, chronic stress, or other behavior problems for the horse when his social needs aren’t being met (i.e. weaving, stall walking).
• 2. While socially isolated horses may receive fewer bites or kicks, in most cases the consequences of isolation are more damaging physically and psychologically than allowing them to simply be part of a stable herd. Horses need to have the chance to form pair bonds, and express normal social behaviors such as mutual grooming, play, and simply being near other horses. Horses find the company of others comforting and pleasurable. The minor scuffs and scrapes incurred during social interactions could be thought of as being similar to when we gain a skinned knee or bruise such as would occur during a team sport we enjoy – the odd injury is well worth the many benefits gained.
• 3. In my experience, the horse that does not enjoy the company of others might be hanging out with the unicorns –he’s that rare of a creature. Those few horses that don’t enjoy social interactions are often the result of inadequate or inappropriate socialization during early development. This belief may come about when people fail to appreciate that just like us, horses prefer certain horses, and that may not be the one he or she is turned out with; if careful thought isn’t given to herd dynamics, or if the herd members are constantly changing, the horses in the herd will likely display signs of stress, and will not display normal social behaviors as a result of what, to the horse, are abnormal living conditions.

Going to back to seeing things from the horse’s perspective, what would be the ideal way to meet the horse’s needs for socialization? Of course, this would always depend on each individual horse, but most horses are happiest with constant visual contact, in addition to having the choice for physical contact (or not), with one or more compatible companions in an established herd. Horses desire to see other horses, and have adequate space in which they can choose to interact physically with, or simply remain near their companions. Perhaps most important in the above description is the word "choice" – having the choice to be near, mutually groom, play, stand watch while another sleeps, and simply stand close together is important to the horse. Having the space, as in paddock/pasture size, or facility design to allow this choice is important. If we are going to pasture our horse with other horses it is important to consider the social dynamics of the group to ensure that no one herd member is bullied and all have equal access to resources such as hay piles, salt and water. If it is necessary to confine our horses (see more on this topic in part three of this blog series, "Freedom"), we should consider how the confinement affects the horse: Can he see other horses? Is he housed next to another horse that he would choose to be near when turned out?

Does he have the choice to avoid being seen by other horses? For example, is his area designed in such a way that he can choose to not be seen when eating if housed next to a less-than-friendly neighbor? On the flip side, if he wants to remain in visual contact at all times, can he eat while observing other horses?

Behavior problems are often just "the tip of the iceberg", and resolving them can require a holistic look at how each horse perceives his current living and working situation. Part of this examination is a close look at the horse’s top three demands – friends, forage and freedom. If the horse’s social needs aren’t being met, it can affect his life in more ways than people often fully appreciate.

In the next blog in this series, we will look at the horse’s needs and requirements for the second “F” - Forage.

Lauren Fraser is a Certified Horse Behavior Consultant with the IAABC, and operates Good Horsemanship in Squamish, BC, Canada. She offers horse behavior consultations, foundation training, horsemanship clinics, and educational presentations.]]> Articles, 2012-09-11T22:21:02+00:00 http://iaabc.org/horse/dead-sided-and-hard-mouthed-horses http://iaabc.org/horse/dead-sided-and-hard-mouthed-horses#When:01:16:47Z Lauren Fraser Humans and horses, in wildly varying states of cooperation and mutual respect, have worked together for almost 10,000 years. Capitalizing on both their willingness to coexist peacefully and their receptiveness to training, humans have borrowed the horse’s power, endurance and strength for such things as transportation, crop production, and to gain an advantage over opponents in battle. Over the millennia, horse folk have struggled to find a balance between harnessing the horse’s innate sensitivity and responsiveness while tempering his instinct for rapid flight and reaction, or desensitizing him to common stimuli while not creating unresponsive "dull" horses.

A cue is a conditioned event that prompts a learned response from the horse. All riders would probably agree that they desire to have a horse respond instantly to their cues when applied. The basic responses generally trained under saddle include go forward, transition between gaits, stop, turn, move the hindquarters, move the forequarters, go sideways, and back up. A common cue to initiate forward movement is two legs squeezed simultaneously at the girth line; one leg used at a time (either side) in front or behind the girth cues the horse to move his hindquarters or forequarters independently away from the pressure. A common cue for turning is pressure applied to a single rein, away from the horse’s body and in the direction of the desired turn. Most horse folk desire an instant, appropriate response to whatever cue is given, but none are immune to creating the undesired behaviors commonly referred to as dead-sided or hard-mouthed. From the human’s perspective, dead-sided horses fail to respond appropriately to light leg cues, while hard-mouthed horses fail to respond appropriately to light rein cues; the rider is therefore required to apply a strong amount of either rein or leg pressure to achieve the desired response from the horse. From the horse’s perspective, it’s a different story.

Horses, as prey animals, desire to be free of pain and discomfort, or the threat of such – a fact which is capitalized upon when training them. When learning, horses make connections between the cue applied and the response they offer – this is called associative learning. Initial horse training is usually accomplished through what is called operant conditioning and the use of negative reinforcement (-R). Negative doesn’t mean bad - it’s more like math: something is removed to reinforce the desired response. For example: when teaching a young horse to go forward, the rider applies light leg pressure at the girth line, and in an effort to gain relief from the pressure the horse moves forward, and the rider instantly releases the pressure. Timing is critical - the removal of pressure at the moment the horse offers the desired response reinforces the response. If subsequent training sessions occur in such a manner that the horse is reliably and instantly released of the pressure whenever he steps forward, the cue to go forward (legs squeezed) will be an operant response - a response the horse chooses to offer.

Unfortunately, dead-sided and hard-mouthed behaviors are examples of what’s known as habituation - the horse becomes desensitized to the rider’s leg or rein aid - and have a number of known causes. For example: riders may unknowingly habituate the horse to leg or rein pressure through constant application of either without a release of pressure when the horse offers the appropriate response; novice riders, initially focused solely on simply staying on the horse, may rely on squeezing with their legs or hanging on the reins to maintain their balance, or they fail to appreciate the need to release leg or rein pressure when the horse offers the desired behavior. Unfortunately, such habituation to pressure may also lead to what are called conflict behaviors or even the state of learned helplessness, where the horse habituates to constant or painful stimuli and learns that no response he offers will relieve the discomfort or pain. The detrimental welfare implications to such a horse are clear.

Prevention

Re-schooling of horses that have been habituated to excessive pressures of leg and rein is not impossible, but as much in life, prevention is easier and preferred to retraining. Some ways of preventing habituation to leg and rein pressure may include: educating all riders on the proper application of learning theory; the use of motorized riding simulators to allow novice riders to gain their balance before riding a horse; allowing only knowledgeable riders to school green horses to ensure only the desired behaviors are reinforced; training and using only one cue at a time to avoid overshadowing, where the horse responds only to the stronger of the two cues (i.e., stop and go cues never used together); trainers ensuring that horses do not habituate to training signals, which brings prevention back full-circle to ensuring riders/trainers have an adequate grasp on training and learning theory. Sadly, many aspects of modern horse training are still steeped in tradition, without humans actually understanding why they achieve the results they get in training. This can lead to riders and trainers perceiving unwelcome or abnormal behaviors to be the fault of the horse. Perhaps most importantly, prevention of this problem requires a paradigm-shift in thinking by the human to accept responsibility for some of the horse’s unwelcome behaviors rather than placing blame on the horse. Such a shift may be hard to swallow initially, but it can result in fewer problems when working with horses.

Re-schooling

One way of re-schooling the horse habituated to leg and rein pressure is done by systematically retraining the cues of go, stop, turn, move hindquarters and forequarters using negative reinforcement and the judicious use of escalating levels of pressure from the leg or rein. The good trainer will begin where they want to end, meaning they will consistently start with the smallest amount of pressure, releasing the pressure instantly when the desired behavior is offered. Critical to success is rewarding early on what many trainers call the "slightest try" – this is technically known as shaping, or rewarding successive approximations of the desired behavior until the desired behavior is the one being consistently offered. There are innumerable behaviors the trainer can say "No" to, but only one that will generate a "Yes". When training or retraining horses, it is important that one finds many opportunities to say "Yes" to the horse, particularly when using -R. Skilled and thoughtful trainers will initially look for the horse’s thought to go in the desired direction, and release the pressure then, rather than waiting for the body to move, or releasing the pressure after the desired movement has occurred. Given that the average horse weighs 1000lbs, it makes sense to look for opportunities to direct the horse’s thoughts, which weigh nothing, rather than attempting to simply control the body of the horse. This requires trainers to have a level of awareness and understanding of the concept that horses communicate predominantly via gesture and body language, and recognizing that their movements (or lack of) can indicate their thoughts and feelings. Consistently reinforcing the desired behavior of an immediate response to light leg or rein pressure will ensure new neural pathways can be created, and the cue given will once again be under control.

In summary, offering the horse clarity, consistency, respect, and fairness in his training enhances his emotional and physical well-being and also his relationship with us. Given all he has done for us as a species, don’t we at least owe him that?

Lauren Fraser is an Associate Certified Horse Behavior Consultant with the IAABC, and operates Good Horsemanship in Squamish, BC, Canada. She offers horse behavior consultations, foundation training, horsemanship clinics, and educational presentations.]]> Articles, 2012-07-24T01:16:47+00:00