Two interesting articles

Donn, That article was part of a long drawn out series of round pen/ natural horsemanship techniques he goes through while training. With all the sessions and prep work you would expect the outcome to be much different than what was presented in that particular article. Several weeks ago we drove half a dozen horses that had never seen a harness before and didn’t have nearly as much commotionas he did with one that had all that prep work. None of them tried to run away or fall down. Our own horses that we raise just come up and from daily handling they just ease into the work program but on the other spectrum we have helped a few folks drive some that haven’t been messed with. Most of them come around pretty quick anyway unless they are passed 5yrs then they become set in their ways and non conforming. Again I shook my head while reading that last article. If that is how it goes after all that ground work then why bother??? I’m sure the folks that were actually following the progress found it a let down.

This speaks to a larger issue as far as I am concerned. We face it to some degree here, but it is different in one important way.

I have felt for years that these magazines walk a fine line between opening their pages to a community of people diverse experiences, and offering valuable resources. I know as much as anyone that there is no one way to do ant of this, and there are in fact many situations where things go horribly wrong, but there is something about the way these articles are presented that lends a certain level of credibility, without clarification, or without evaluation.

As Donn just found out that the article about training a green horse was part of a larger context. And there is very little opportunity for the broader community to way in on how things could/should have been done differently. Of course are discerning readers we should be able to put the information in its context, I am not sure that a picture of a poorly cared for harness, or a green horse in a pile, or a story about a runaway are always seen clearly, especially when presented in a magazine that has a reputation as a resource.

An example was an article I read years ago about a draft horse club mowing hay. There was a picture of a team standing while a few men worked on the cutter bar, while a child sat on the seat, the lines on the ground. It just is hard to see how this picture does anything good. Similarly I remember a picture of one of our preeminent work horse authorities demonstrating log skidding while standing on the live side of a log with lines in his hands.

Anyway on DAP, I feel that as a community we have a great opportunity to throw these things out in an interactive context, and not only can the author alter and describe his/her own point, but we can all participate in a process that shows very quickly how many perspectives there are. It doesn’t get us to a solid conclusion any faster, but at least it helps to create parameters to what are realistic expectations.

Carl

Dave’s series on starting a team of young horses began about two years ago and has had an installment in nearly every issue. In the caption for the photos showing the horse that had fallen, Dave wrote: “This is what it looked like a few minutes before the photo on the previous page was taken.” (The previous page photo shows the team standing quietly hooked to the wagon). “I had hooked Doc up to the neck yoke and was heading over to get Babe. Doc, not knowing this behavior was not allowed during hitching, decided to take a little walk. In doing so, he got himself into and out of a bad situation. Once he was standing again, I put him back where he was, and he stayed. I have included this little incident to point out that in the process of starting draft animals, unexpected stuff happens. Though it looks serious and it is sometimes exciting, it usually works out. In this case, the horse learned to be still while being hitched.”

I would argue that the fact that the horse remained basically calm through most of the incident covered in the photos, and was successfully hooked with its teammate a few minutes later for its first drive put to a rolling vehicle, Dave’s preparatory work WAS fruitful in that the outcome WAS a success.

Whether the stories have made it a long drawn out series, I guess I would leave that to the reader. I do know we have had a lot of positive comments on the series and have heard people say they appreciate the time Dave takes to tell his story and the room we give it in the magazine.

Breaking horses is not a simple or predictable process. It requires paying attention to safety and part of that is anticipating what might go wrong. I think the story and photos showed one of the things that might go wrong and how Dave’s method actually prevented a serious accident from developing.

At least that was our intent in running the story and photos.

Joe Mischka
Editor, Rural Heritage

Personally I wouldn’t hook one horse to the neck yoke and walk away first of all. Given all the time he spent with his preperational work the horse shouldn’t have been nervous enough to throw himself anyway. We have never in 20+ years had one throw themselves or go down in harness. I have seen some down and helped get a few up and untangled though. You might expect that from one that hadn’t been worked with but not from one with all that groundwork. The takeoff was a bit rocky according to the photos and the text, also you wouldn’t expect to happen with all that groundwork. Isn’t the point of groundwork and round pen training to avoid all this?
As far as being a drawn out series devoting an entire article to putting on a collar was a bit much for something that only takes a couple minutes with a rank beginner.
As far as breaking horses not being a simple or predictable process that may be true for the first few but after the first 30 or so you can read them and simplify the process. I understand the intention was an educational article for beginner horse trainers but I’m not sure his methods came full circle given the outcome portrayed.
Given the same opportunity I’m not sure I could put everything we do into print as some things we do are just habit. To some we may appear to skip steps but go forward based on the individual horse and their progress. Our outcome has produced some really good horses. I’m sure Dave tried his best to explain everything but this last article didn’t portray the original message very well. I’m sure he does get his horses trained and no real harm was done.
I appreciate your devotion to Rural Heritage promoting and keeping our way of life alive. I in no way want to start a disagreement but this isn’t the first discussion I’ve had with serious draft animal folks about this particular article.

Honestly, I appreciate the recognition that even the “best laid plans of mice and men” can go awry. It can be very discomforting when an article or program says ” do this and this and tah-dah! Your problem is solved.” Sometimes things don’t go according to plan.

An good example is all those building/woodworking “how-to” programs that tell you, “check for level and plumb” and theirs always is, so they proceed. But never what to do if it’s not “level and plumb”.

Anyway – my point is, while not wanting people/horses to fail, it is nice to know that things don’t work perfectly for others too.

Carl:

Did you see the story and photos? The horse was tied to a hitching post, a point that is clear in the photos and discussed in detail in the article.

When you write “If you do hook it into the neck yoke and walk off, and the horse isn’t ready, then you’ve left the animal in a situation where a whole lot more can go wrong,” I wonder what is this thing you call “the underlying truth” in your statement.

Are you suggesting that horses must always have someone heading them up? That whenever a horse gets itself in trouble, it’s because it wasn’t “ready” to be put in the particular situation–indicating an error on the teamster’s part? And that once it is “ready” for a particular procedure or practice, it will always proceed without mishap? Or do they regress in their training and become “not ready” again?

I am convinced this horse learned to behave better while being hitched as a result of this incident. The preparation Dave took in training the horse prior to this session, and his method of hooking at a hitching rail ensured the mishap could not get out of hand. The horse steps over the pole, tries to go around the hitching post, and falls down where it stays until Dave helps it get up. The horse learned to stand when being hooked.

So when you write “The problem was not that the horse actually moved, but that he was left in an unsafe situation that led to more than it needed to” you are making an evaluation of Dave’s training techniques which I believe to be unfair. Furthermore you suggest I was irresponsible in including the incident in the magazine, that it “tends to make it seem alright,” or that we were negligent in not giving a “back-story” to provide some kind of context, all of which makes me wonder if you actually read the story or looked at the photos.

Finally, since the story and photos ran in my magazine, which has several thousand subscribers who — by your and other’s accounts — have been misled or misinformed, perhaps dangerously, it would be appropriate to write a letter to the editor of the magazine to be published in an upcoming issue where these points can be made to these misled readers and perhaps debated by the original author.

As I said earlier, I appreciate the feedback this forum provides but I do not regret running the story or photos, believing the package to be accurate, useful and in the best interest of our readers. All the same, I welcome letters to the editor that may make an argument to the contrary.

Joe Mischka
Rural Heritage