What on Earth is "Consent-Based Training"?

[Kirikou]

I keep seeing the term “consent-based training” pop up on social media, and I have to admit, I’m a bit confused by it. From what I gather, it seems to be about taking a horse’s “opinions” into account. But isn’t that just part of good horsemanship? Being able to read your horse, understand its body language, and adjust accordingly? It doesn’t seem like a completely new approach.

Can this “consent” idea go too far? Could it potentially lead to dangerous situations? I mean, perhaps Pony doesn’t want to be caught/led quietly on a windy/cold day, but I also don’t want to lead a 1000lbs kite back to the barn…

Also, I feel “work” is part of the deal - that’s the reason we keep horses/animals, isn’t it? My neighbors have cows for their milk and my horses need to learn to work with people, whether it’s a kid figuring out their position in a lesson or pulling a cart to the grocery store. From what I see online, it often feels like “consent-based training” translates to “If Pony doesn’t feel like doing it, I won’t make him.” But if that’s the case, is that really training? Or is it just letting the horse doing whatever they want because they’re not in the mood? As much as I too sometimes wish I could skip a workday and not go into the office (don’t we all?), I still have to work…

And finally, can a non-human animal actually “consent” (it’s a bit of a loaded word anyway) in the way humans understand it? Horses are great at communicating what they like or don’t like, but does that equate to consent ? To me, consent involves understanding the action and its long-term consequences. Can Pony truly consent to being dewormed because he understands that it’s “good for him”? This seems deeply questionable…

So, I’m wondering—what am I missing here? Is there more nuance to this that I’m not seeing?

[paintedpennypony]

I don’t have social media besides this and Reddit, so I’m not exposed to all the super special trainers and horse whisperers on IG/TT/FB etc. So in my limited experience with this type, I have seen mostly the crowd that’s afraid of riding their horse being in the mind of “only R+ all the time” and “consent-based training.” Ultimately I think it’s a minor fad with a very specific and niche group of people that will go the same way Parelli style natural horsemanship has gone.

[Texarkana]

I have never seen the term “consent-based training,” but the idea kind of reminds me of protected contact with exotic animals. Protected contact makes a lot of sense when it’s a dangerous animal, not so much sense when you are mandating it for the sake of “animal choice.”

[sascha]

@Kirikou

Can this “consent” idea go too far? Could it potentially lead to dangerous situations?

Yup!

If you do a forum search for “consent based” (leave out the hyphen) you’ll get a few titbits in the dressage section. There will be some wading to do, but iirc, there are posts written by others that hit the mark better than I could.

All I have to add is do you wait for a kindergarten-aged kid to consent to going to school or do you pack their little asses off and know that they will be ok, they will learn valuable lessons, and they will become better people for all the things they learn whether social or scholastic?

[Demerara_Stables]

I’ve only read a little bit about “consent based training” on social media so I’m not an expert by any means, but…

@Kirikou

Can this “consent” idea go too far? Could it potentially lead to dangerous situations? I mean, perhaps Pony doesn’t want to be caught/led quietly on a windy/cold day, but I also don’t want to lead a 1000lbs kite back to the barn…

Also, I feel “work” is part of the deal - that’s the reason we keep horses/animals, isn’t it? My neighbors have cows for their milk and my horses need to learn to work with people, whether it’s a kid figuring out their position in a lesson or pulling a cart to the grocery store. From what I see online, it often feels like “consent-based training” translates to “If Pony doesn’t feel like doing it, I won’t make him.” But if that’s the case, is that really training? Or is it just letting the horse doing whatever they want because they’re not in the mood ? As much as I too sometimes wish I could skip a workday and not go into the office (don’t we all?), I still have to work…

Yes to all of this. It’s definitely important to listen to your horse and if they are really objecting to something, figure out why, but sometimes (both in the context of safety and in the context of being worked), they just need to hold up their end of the bargain and do what you want them to do within reason.

I have certainly gone to catch my horse in the field and had her walk away from me which is very abnormal behavior. I don’t have any huge goals with her so at this point I respect that she isn’t feeling it that day and I leave her be. However, when she was in rehab and needed to be walked daily to recover from an injury, there was no “getting out of it” because it was what she needed to be healthy again.

If a horse does not want to be led somewhere or doesn’t want to get on a trailer, both of those can be safety issues so they don’t get a say that scenario.

[JB]

I’ve seen the consent-based ideas, and like everything, I think there’s some basis of merit but ALSO, a lot of big wiggle room for poor interpretation, poor implementation, and poor signal reading.

There’s definitely been the big push for “consent-based blanketing”. Sorry ponies, I know it’s 65* right now at 8pm and you honestly don’t want a blanket, but I’m not getting up at 3am ahead of t-storms and a 30* drop and find you shivering at 8am

I DO think there’s value in allowing a horse to relax into and accept the idea of “now we’re going to trim your feet”, but you have to actively participate in creating that, don’t just barge into his stall, yank him out, grab a foot, and go. Generate a little raport.

I do believe there’s value in allowing a horse to relax into and accept the idea of taking a bit into his mouth instead of just cramming a thumb in there to force his mouth open. If you ask, and he says “bug off lady” and you walk away, you’re teaching him to ignore you and even push you around

And yes, he can consent, with training, to have a syringe put into his mouth - deworming, medications, etc

So yes, poorly implemented, it can absolutely create a dangerous situation. Any sort of training can.

IMVHO, the term was coined by someone along the way trying to make what’s old, new again, and make it sound like something fancy. It SHOULD mean - work with the horse to put him into a state of mind to be most receptive to not only learning, but enjoying the process. And it takes the person starting the conversation, and guiding it, not waiting like a lump for the horse to say “ok”

[luvmyhackney]

I do a tiny bit of consent based of whatever you want to call it.

I let my horse pick what foot I start picking up, he prefers I start on his rear right. He likes to choose the saddle pad, he always picks sheepskin over fake sheepskin. He lines up himself at the mounting block, but if something is bothering him; like a boot is loose or the saddle is shifted, he waits until I fix his discomfort and then lines right up to the mounting block.

There are non-optional things and then there are things I can let him choose for his comfort. He is much safer and less rabbits and anxiety since I started it. No bucks, spins, or scoots since I started.

[Alterration]

I think it’s an awareness thing, like anything else, that can be taken too far.

I pay attention to consent as a sign to investigate. If I approach my horse, and he leaves, what is going on? Was I rude? Did I scare him? Was he overworked and now he’s saying “screw you”? Is he sore and trying to communicate? If he falters when headed into the washrack or the trailer, which steps did I miss? What don’t I know?

Oh - and I don’t leave with them…leaving. I always take it somewhere where they are engaged. If my initial ask was wrong, we go do something else for a bit and try again with me learning from the ask. I think that’s something a lot of people get wrong.

They do let me know when they don’t want blankets on etc, but I have something they don’t, which is a big brain that can read and access to weather apps. So sometimes, I have to tell them, hey guys, I know you’re ok for right now, but weather is coming and you’re not going to like it. They seem to understand that. I mean - I don’t use my words like that, although sometimes I do because I talk to them - but I think they understand through my feelings and body language that I know they don’t want the blanket on right now but there’s something I know that they don’t.

By respecting their individual choices when I can, I think they give me a little more leeway when I can’t. Can I prove that? Not really lol But it seems to work out that way.

It’s been my experience that horses rarely say no for “no reason”. There’s always a reason, even if it’s just something like “you’re not making work fun enough for me to leave my herd”. So what piece am I missing of the motivation puzzle? I usually pair R- with R+ although there are occasions when I use R+ alone, but mine all seem really happy to work to get their positive praise and treats when fed.

My horses all volunteer to be worked and ridden. They will literally line up at the arena fence when I’ve got one of them in there, and they wait their turn - it’s wild. They all want to be close to me in the pasture and will all check in on me if I’m just hanging out there with them. I think those are good signs that I’m doing things well with them.

I do draw a line though, and install “you must” in all of them. There are times - fire, injury, etc. where they just HAVE to ignore their own instincts and listen. But I do that through the slow progression of trust. When I install forward, I do make that non-negotiable but I do that with the same “I mean business” body language as I might have in an emergency. I only trot that out when I need it, just like using my sons’ middle names.

Is it good horsemanship? Yeah, the best traditional horsemen knew how to do these things. But it doesn’t hurt to call peoples’ attention to the idea that perhaps working with horses takes tact and understanding body language. I think a lot of people miss the subtler signals that horses give that they are uncomfortable because they aren’t the big ones. So - while it’s not new and magical, it’s worth paying some attention to.

[Texarkana]

@Alterration

I think it’s an awareness thing, like anything else, that can be taken too far.

I pay attention to consent as a sign to investigate. If I approach my horse, and he leaves, what is going on? Was I rude? Did I scare him? Was he overworked and now he’s saying “screw you”? Is he sore and trying to communicate? If he falters when headed into the washrack or the trailer, which steps did I miss? What don’t I know?

Oh - and I don’t leave with them…leaving. I always take it somewhere where they are engaged. If my initial ask was wrong, we go do something else for a bit and try again with me learning from the ask. I think that’s something a lot of people get wrong.

They do let me know when they don’t want blankets on etc, but I have something they don’t, which is a big brain that can read and access to weather apps. So sometimes, I have to tell them, hey guys, I know you’re ok for right now, but weather is coming and you’re not going to like it. They seem to understand that. I mean - I don’t use my words like that, although sometimes I do because I talk to them - but I think they understand through my feelings and body language that I know they don’t want the blanket on right now but there’s something I know that they don’t.

By respecting their individual choices when I can, I think they give me a little more leeway when I can’t. Can I prove that? Not really lol But it seems to work out that way.

It’s been my experience that horses rarely say no for “no reason”. There’s always a reason, even if it’s just something like “you’re not making work fun enough for me to leave my herd”. So what piece am I missing of the motivation puzzle? I usually pair R- with R+ although there are occasions when I use R+ alone, but mine all seem really happy to work to get their positive praise and treats when fed.

My horses all volunteer to be worked and ridden. They will literally line up at the arena fence when I’ve got one of them in there, and they wait their turn - it’s wild. They all want to be close to me in the pasture and will all check in on me if I’m just hanging out there with them. I think those are good signs that I’m doing things well with them.

I do draw a line though, and install “you must” in all of them. There are times - fire, injury, etc. where they just HAVE to ignore their own instincts and listen. But I do that through the slow progression of trust. When I install forward, I do make that non-negotiable but I do that with the same “I mean business” body language as I might have in an emergency. I only trot that out when I need it, just like using my sons’ middle names.

Is it good horsemanship? Yeah, the best traditional horsemen knew how to do these things. But it doesn’t hurt to call peoples’ attention to the idea that perhaps working with horses takes tact and understanding body language. I think a lot of people miss the subtler signals that horses give that they are uncomfortable because they aren’t the big ones. So - while it’s not new and magical, it’s worth paying some attention to.

I very much agree with all this.

Especially the part about it being more of an awareness thing and also the part about times when consent goes out the window (emergencies, etc).

I dislike the connotation of the word “consent,” though. Going back to @Kirikou’s initial question, I don’t believe a non-human animal can truly “consent” the way we mean it with human-human interactions. I mean, if human children aren’t seen as fit to consent in the eyes of the law, why are we using that word for interactions between us and different species? Using “consent” to describe interactions with domestic animals devalues the meaning of the word while anthropomorphizing our relationships with animals.

[Alterration]

@Texarkana

I dislike the connotation of the word “consent,” though. Going back to @Kirikou’s initial question, I don’t believe a non-human animal can truly “consent” the way we mean it with human-human interactions. I mean, if human children aren’t seen as fit to consent in the eyes of the law, why are we using that word for interactions between us and different species? Using “consent” to describe interactions with domestic animals devalues the meaning of the word while anthropomorphizing our relationships with animals.

I think we run a risk of anthropomorphizing when we use the term, and the risk of underestimating their capabilities when we don’t.

There used to be a school of thought that horses didn’t really have any self-awareness or agency and that they were reacting to stimulus in an automatic way so training was just a matter of hitting the right stimulus.

But we now know they are much more intelligent than we thought they were, and that they can think and learn in more ways than we used to think they could.

So words that provide allegory to human concepts like consent are somewhat useful there from a “we need some word to describe a horse being given permission to initially say no” because that’s too long to use every time we mean it lol

[mombc24]

In human research we use the word informed “assent” for children or other people unable to give “consent”, and it has different criteria.

[Alterration]

That’s a good term!

[Texarkana]

@Alterration

@Texarkana

I dislike the connotation of the word “consent,” though. Going back to @Kirikou’s initial question, I don’t believe a non-human animal can truly “consent” the way we mean it with human-human interactions. I mean, if human children aren’t seen as fit to consent in the eyes of the law, why are we using that word for interactions between us and different species? Using “consent” to describe interactions with domestic animals devalues the meaning of the word while anthropomorphizing our relationships with animals.

I think we run a risk of anthropomorphizing when we use the term, and the risk of underestimating their capabilities when we don’t.

There used to be a school of thought that horses didn’t really have any self-awareness or agency and that they were reacting to stimulus in an automatic way so training was just a matter of hitting the right stimulus.

But we now know they are much more intelligent than we thought they were, and that they can think and learn in more ways than we used to think they could.

So words that provide allegory to human concepts like consent are somewhat useful there from a “we need some word to describe a horse being given permission to initially say no” because that’s too long to use every time we mean it lol

But children are also intelligent beings with agency and self-awareness, but we collectively agree they cannot consent without a parent/guardian.

I am completely with you that horses need permission to say no. That is something I didn’t learn until later in life and it completely transformed my horsemanship.

But I think we get into dangerous territory describing the act of an animal not say no as “consent.” Call it choice-based training or option-based training, not consent.

[Alterration]

@Texarkana

But I think we get into dangerous territory describing the act of an animal not say no as “consent.” Call it choice-based training or option-based training, not consent.

Ooh those are good too.

I see what you’re saying - I think there’s consent as a legal definition and consent as a general notion of agreement. Looking at it from the legal definition I agree with you. But the general word just means agreement. Which is what I was thinking of.

Either way - I think keeping the notion of agreement in it is useful, and it’s likely that whomever named it was piggybacking on the general cultural interest in consent as a term (with the attention paid to things like metoo).

[Texarkana]

@Alterration

But the general word just means agreement. Which is what I was thinking of.

Maybe mutual agreement-based training.

Because I’ll be the first to admit that even the words “option” or “choice” don’t convey the entire spirit. A lot of traditional “make ‘em do it no matter what” type training uses those words. The problem is, receiving a punishment v. not receiving a punishment isn’t really giving a horse options. And for clarity; I’m not talking about R-, I’m talking about the people who do things like repeatedly whip a horse until they go over a fence, etc.

[S1969]

@Texarkana

I dislike the connotation of the word “consent,” though. Going back to @Kirikou’s initial question, I don’t believe a non-human animal can truly “consent” the way we mean it with human-human interactions.

Agreed. Why on earth is there any need to create a new term for developing a good working relationship when training an animal? I think most horses would prefer not to be ridden if you asked them at the time of initial backing. “No thanks, I’m good.”

So, what are we really saying? Be compassionate as a trainer. Your horse is a living being, not a bicycle.

@paintedpennypony

I have seen mostly the crowd that’s afraid of riding their horse being in the mind of “only R+ all the time”

I’ve never understood this. R- is not cruelty. It’s just a different form of training. I think these people all need to take a real psychology class instead of the social media Cliff notes version. (Can you imagine sitting on a horse and requesting it to trot without R-? (2 years later, rider is able to get the horse to trot around a round pen. Amazing.)

I don’t think it’s necessary to train dogs with R+ only, either. And people get rabid about that. A leash is R-. I think most people really don’t understand R+ v R-.

[Kirikou]

@S1969

So, what are we really saying? Be compassionate as a trainer. Your horse is a living being, not a bicycle.

Love this!

Thanks all for sharing. My main hang-up is probably the word itself, plus the whole anthropomorphizing aspect… I made the mistake of going down a bit of a Google rabbit hole after posting—big mistake! I really did not need to know that much about bestiality. Yikes. —definitely a lesson in ‘Google at your own risk’!

I also found out ‘consent-based’ training is also a big thing in some toddler parenting groups. Apparently, it means if little Timmy doesn’t feel like going to preschool, well, I guess he just doesn’t have to! Who knew? (I mean I understand and fully applaud not forcing little kids to be hugged, etc - but that’s a bit different than not making them brush their teeth or take a bath…).

And I guess in the end my initial cavalry training is showing, I mean if it meant my horse could just ‘opt out’ of work like a stubborn preschooler, we’d never get anything done!

[FjordBCRF]

@JB

IMVHO, the term was coined by someone along the way trying to make what’s old, new again, and make it sound like something fancy. It SHOULD mean - work with the horse to put him into a state of mind to be most receptive to not only learning, but enjoying the process. And it takes the person starting the conversation, and guiding it, not waiting like a lump for the horse to say “ok”

Very much agree with above and the other sentiments shared here. Terms aside, (I also don’t particularly like “consent-based”) this is where I am at with my guy now with his neck issues/rehab/PT type stuff. I look at it more in terms of heightening our communication and it’s been an absolutely beyond rewarding for me (and I’d like to assume him too).

Last night for example, was more of a PT night. We had set up 12 poles to walk over and as soon as I turned him out in the indoor with them, he walked through the whole gauntlet on his own. I was thinking I’d have to put his lead on, but we was content walking next to me, or letting me send him through. That shows me that he’s engaged and is willing to participate. If he didnt do it on his own, I would have clipped the lead on and walked with him the whole time.

I’ve had times where we are going to ride, and I am on the ground talking to someone. He has walked himself over to and parked at the mounting block and stared at me like, “are we doing this or not C’MON!”. He apparently talks to our caretaker too…but he also knows how to listen

Another example; he had been on a full pill of Equioxx and the vet wanted me to see how he did on a half dose. Last Sunday riding, he had a knee buckle for the first time in 2 months. We wrapped things up after that even though he was still willing to work. The Monday after we started back on the full pill, and when I brought him out for groundwork/free lunging…I could tell he wasn’t feeling it so I didn’t push it. By Wednesday he was considerably more engaged and seemed about back to normal yesterday.

In my mind, I would call this Horse-First training or horsemanship I think.

[beowulf]

@Texarkana

I dislike the connotation of the word “consent,” though. Going back to @Kirikou’s initial question, I don’t believe a non-human animal can truly “consent” the way we mean it with human-human interactions. I mean, if human children aren’t seen as fit to consent in the eyes of the law, why are we using that word for interactions between us and different species? Using “consent” to describe interactions with domestic animals devalues the meaning of the word while anthropomorphizing our relationships with animals.

How about “buy in” or “engagement based”? I agree, I don’t love seeing that word thrown around for horse training. But I understand the principle of wanting a willing partner.

I’m with y’all, like everything with horses the answer is probably somewhere in the middle and mileage varies based on individuals.

On that subject, while I don’t necessarily prescribe to the school of thought the OP is asking about, I have used clicker training on horses who I felt were emotionally shut down and it’s been my experience that just teaching a few simple tricks really changes the horse’s perspective of training and interacting with their human.

[Alterration]

Just on the nomenclature topic…the word enthusiastic keeps rattling around in my head. That’s what I’m aiming for - I want my horse to come to me enthusiastically in the pasture, I want them to feel enthusiastic (although maybe not exuberant - we can keep that toned down a bit lol) about working and learning.

@Kirikou

Thanks all for sharing. My main hang-up is probably the word itself, plus the whole anthropomorphizing aspect… I made the mistake of going down a bit of a Google rabbit hole after posting—big mistake! I really did not need to know that much about bestiality. Yikes. —definitely a lesson in ‘Google at your own risk’!

Yikes!!

@Kirikou

I also found out ‘consent-based’ training is also a big thing in some toddler parenting groups. Apparently, it means if little Timmy doesn’t feel like going to preschool, well, I guess he just doesn’t have to! Who knew? (I mean I understand and fully applaud not forcing little kids to be hugged, etc - but that’s a bit different than not making them brush their teeth or take a bath…).

Ugh, people are so weird sometimes.

I do think all of this is a backlash against what they feel are “traditional” methods that rely on P+. But I think some of that is that early in your horse career, when you first take lessons, you really are only given sort of P- and P+ tools in your arsenal, because you don’t really have the timing or the knowledge to apply R+ or R- effectively. And lesson horses, who deal with a lot of people with terrible timing, balance and ability to understand pressure, kind of zone people out and shut down.

Knowing when to release pressure takes time and tact, and knowing when to reward in order to not overstimulate is tricky. I think a lot of folks that get a little culty about the R+ movement didn’t get to the understanding of all 4 training quadrants. They are in the “peak of mount stupid” sort of place - post-beginner, but pre “I’ve had a lot of horses to train” - but the challenge is that they have a microphone and it’s really hard to contrast balanced methods with the videos we’ve been seeing of top riders and trainers beating horses.

I don’t know if you can teach a beginner to use R+ and R- until they’ve learned equine body language. And if you start with the thesis that they have to be an expert in equine body language before they ever mount up or ride, I’m not sure that we’d have many learners/riders (who was that dude that also wanted you to be a judo expert? Hempfling?).

Now I’m just wandering a little - but to get back to the original topic - I think some of the videos where they bring out a saddle and the horse walks away and so they conclude that the horse doesn’t want to be ridden today are off anyway. The horse’s body language in some of them is just one of “eh, you’re not interesting right now”. So…be more interesting. shrug