Two interesting articles

[Donn Hewes]

In the winter 2010 Rural Heritage Magazine there is an article by Dave Feltenberger about how he starts a new horse. The methods he describes are fairly common, though by no means the only way to start a green horse. The pictures he captures to visualize the process however, make one wonder what is really going on. Some of the commentary is quite cavalier about how it all may work out. I am not trying to suggest that I have not had horses fall down or jump on one and other, but I would not use those moments to represent how I go about starting a young animal. I truly do not care what method one uses to start an animal, but any method in the hands of a caring teamster will seek a calm horse and try to maintain that. Dave’s method probably does that too, but it was hard to tell from the article and pictures.

In the winter 2010 SFJ there is an article by Brandon Marshall about a run away he experienced. My wife wanted me to read this very carefully. Brandon was an apprentice learning to work with draft horses when a team ran away. We have taught several apprentices how to drive and teaching working with drafts is my passion in life. This article made me stop and consider two very important points. First, what training, situation, animal preparation have I done to reduce the risk of this happening here. Is there something more I could be doing? Second, If I have done everthing possible, are we (all of us) still aware of the risks we accept when others drive our animals and farm equipment on our farms. These questions are not new to us but they are important to be reminded of once and a while. I appreciated the SFJ’s willingness to publish a thoughtful article about an event we wish hadn’t happened.

I don’t mean any offense to anyone and Dave Feltenberger in particular. I just wanted to share my thoughts on these articles.

[Tim Harrigan]

Donn: I will take another look at that article, I skimmed through it quickly the first time and have not had a chance to revisit it. I did think that it was a little different take on training than you usually see. I think my impression was that there is value in letting new and learning teamsters see that training is not always as clean and problem-free as we are sometimes led to believe. Perhaps beginners who are struggling with some training issues find some comfort and encouragement in seeing that experienced folks have to deal with issues as well. I might change my opinion after the re-read.

[Plowboy]

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.

[Donn Hewes]

Well, I didn’t realize it was part of a regular column. If I had I wouldn’t have commented with out looking at them all. I think your own experience speaks to what I am saying. Regardless of the method used, seek to make an animal calm and relaxed, try to keep them that way. Thanks for letting me know.

[Carl Russell]

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

[mitchmaine]

carl, i felt the same way when i found this site. instant debate on any subject. and even though after the dust settles, and two or three stubborn teamsters are still allowed to think what they want, it makes me, anyway, rethink what i do think, and try and speak clearly and try and make the point when i choose to join in. thank you all, for the great ideas and courage to say so. mitch

[Uncle Joe]

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

[Carl Russell]

Thanks Joe, it is good to have your perspective. I hope that you will also see from these posts how these things can get interpreted from the outside looking in.

There is a certain amount of courage required to publish articles that reflect individual experiences, and I know that we all appreciate that. It is also important that we get real life information.

It’s just that at some point we all need to raise the bar, so that people are encouraged to take it to another level, clean their harnesses, fit them correctly, demonstrate safety, strive for improvement. As I said, it is great to know that we share so many experiences with others in our community of interest, but at the same time magazines like RH and SFJ have such impact on people that some editorial critique would be extremely valuable.

I realize that doesn’t sell magazines, but in the interest advancing the practical, safe, and professional use of draft animals it would be great to add something so that we don’t just acclimatize people to a low common denominator. I know that isn’t your, nor Lynn’s, intent, and I know you can’t control how people interpret the articles you print, regardless how much good info they have, but there is an element of this that happens.

Thanks, Carl

[Plowboy]

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.

[Uncle Joe]

As always, I appreciate the feedback.

Joe Mischka
Rural Heritage

[near horse]

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 Russell]

near horse;17099 wrote:

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

Geoff, I don’t think it is quite that simple. I mean, yes that is the message that is taken away from these articles, but what I am talking about is the underlying truth. Plowboy spoke to that when he pointed out that he would never leave a horse to stand hitched into a neck yoke. This was drilled into my head as well.

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.

There is always the chance that something will go wrong, but when it is presented like that, it tends to make it seem alright, and that it may be expected, when the real issue may be much deeper.

There are many people who may think it is alright to hitch a horse alone into a neck yoke, as it may help to keep the horse in place, but if you think you need something to keep your horse in place, then you shouldn’t be walking off from it. 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.

It is the underlying practices that seem to be culturally acceptable because they are published in an authoritative journal, that can cause problems.

Take for example the young man writing about the run-away. It was indeed a tradgedy, and it is awesome that noone was hurt. He took full responsibilty for what transpired, which was the point of his article…. learning to take more responsibility for his actions, but it was not OK that the horse was able to pull his bridle completely off.

I have had horses break a strap on a bridle.. once or twice in 23 years, but NEVER pull one off. I was not there, but it makes me wonder about the way the animal was fitted with the bridle. Which is what I think the article should really have been about, the responsibility of the owners to make sure that the animals were in good gear, and to be fully aware of the details as the apprentice was supposed to be under their supervision.

Obviously chance tragedies do occur, and these could truly be just that. It’s just that there usually is a back-story, and it isn’t always that obvious in a two dimensional display.

Carl

[Uncle Joe]

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

[Carl Russell]

No Joe, my comments were meant to be general, as examples of what there might be behind the story. I did not see the article. I was making comments that were more to the theory about how an article can reflect certain aspects that are not intended to be the focus.

A horse that is prepared to be hitched should be able to stand and wait to be hitched, without being tied or held. Tying them when they are partially hitched is asking for a tangle. In my mentoring this was driven home to me. It is no surprise to me that it ended up in a pile, and yes it may have worked out fine, but the bottom line is that the process, although practiced by many people, is unsafe, and could have led to much more serious injuries.

The back-story I refer to is not in the context of the writing, but in the cultural acceptance of certain procedures, like tying a hitched horse the first time you hook it up. There are thousands of people who think that it is OK. My opinion is that it is at best unnecessary, and at worst dangerous.

I never said that it was irresponsible for you to publish that. My point was that it serves to replicate a sense of acceptance for things that some of us think should be discouraged, and that over the years I have noticed this phenomenon in several magazines besides yours.

I realize that the product you sell is real life articles written by real life people, therefore the magazine is a reflection of what people are doing out there. In this way, it is not you who is leading people astray. I’m not sure that anyone is leading them astray, but some of us have had exposure to mentors who drove home a code that does not seem to be available to everybody.

I don’t know how to solve it. Most of the people looking to learn about working horses are not looking for a code, they are looking for exposure to working horses. It is a different culture than the one that bred the men I learned from.

My comments were not meant to demean anyone, or to try to rewrite anybodies work, only to express my concern over what I see and hear.

Thanks for your comments, Carl

[Donn Hewes]

Joe, Since I started this thread I will take this opportunity to add a few further thoughts. I would like to apologize to you and Dave for being somewhat cavalier in how I mixed these two media. I often think of DAP as a large community and as an ongoing conversation. I feel the printed word is part of that community as well, just not as easy to have a conversation. I kind of went from one classroom to the next to talk about the teacher. If I didn’t believe this is a community my apology would not be as important as it is. Please consider the following for publication if you so desire.

Dear Rural heritage, I appreciate the time and effort necassry to try and share with others what we have learned about starting animals to work. I believe the “old timers” are dwindling in numbers, just as many newcomers are asking for just such information in greater and greater numbers.

Having said that, I have a couple of suggestions regarding Dave Feltenberger’s article in the Winter 2010 issue. The caption that accompanies the series of photos (where the horse falls in a heap) on page 51 imply that Dave had done as he intended to and that “something unexpected happened”, and “the horse learned”. On page 53 however, Dave clearly states what he intended to do. Tie two horses up, put the lines on, and then hook up the neck yoke, then the trace chains. that is not what happened in the photo series.

I have no problem with a series of photos that show what happens when something goes wrong, but in this case it was important to make it clear to everyone that he knew what went wrong, what he had intended to do. While no damage was done, I think it goes a little to far to say the horse “learned” anything from being tossed in a heap.

In general this article has too much of a horse learning from falling down, learning from another horse biting its neck, and learning from a tractor. The net result of letting the horse do the training for you is a seven year old horse and a younger horse that say they don’t want to work together any more. Better to correct the young horse with the lines and leave the older horse alone. The best thing to look for in a breaking horse is one that will not question the “whoa” even when the beginner is unsure about stopping. I would leave everything else to the teamster.

When hooking to a wagon, the correct tension should always be taught, and always be used. I believe Dave is using a bolt-on neck yoke, but many are not. Letting a horse’s knees hit the neck yoke is also asking for the neck yoke to fall off the tongue. Trace chains with this style of harness should be adjusted by checking the britchen. Move the team back a step and the britchen is tight, move up a step and you should slip you fingers under the britchen easily, an inch of space perhaps, two hands of space and you are asking for trouble.

As a matter of small details, I know it is hard to always adjust the breaking harness fit each horse we work with but it might be worth pointing out the correct fit of a britchen. The final picture in the article makes me believe the lines are not adjusted to give a proper head spacing to the animals. I know pictures can be decieving in this regard, but I would look for ones that gave a better impression of what was wanted.

Again thanks for all your efforts to help educate the up and coming farmers of tomorrow. I know that preparing all this information is challenging, and we all have individual styles, but I think it is important that we let people know what we would have done differently. Thanks for this opportunity to voice my concerns, Sincerely, Donn Hewes, Northland Sheep Dairy, Marathon, New York

[Author]

Posts