Youngster that is completely offended by a slight correction of the whip

[cheektwocheek]

I’m at a loss, my youngster is starting to get the best of me.

Five yr old, super athletic wb with some true fitness setting in. I can tap as a reminder to move off my leg, but never anything more. No double taps or slightly wacking him, I’d get launched.

Example of my frustration include… maybe a naughty face while passing left to left. I growl, close my legs & keep moving forward. If I were to tap for that he kicks out or tries to buck. How do I correctly discipline a guy that hates this type of correction? Any suggestions are more than welcome! I want to raise a solid citizen, not a jerk.

His mom was very whip sensitive as well, weird thing for him to have inherited.

[pluvinel]

I would do a lot of work in hand where understanding and obedience to the whip is developed.

The whip is an extension of your hand and can be
(a) an aid to explain;
(b) an aid to correct;
© a tool to punish unsafe behavior.

It is the mark of horsemanship and equestrian tact to know what aid to use and how hard to use it.

[mvp]

My .02.

Your young’n just doesn’t know several things:

1. He may get to “feel his feelings” (more on that below), but he doesn’t get to cross certain physical lines in expressing his displeasure.

On the ground, that means we would never accept kicking or biting as we know that they know that those are acts of aggression. Your horse just doesn’t yet know that certain ways of using his strong, now-fit body to express things are verboten. He’s kicking out at the whip because that’s a natural, horse way of saying “I don’t like it.” And he’s doing that now because his stronger body gives him the confidence that he can perhaps “win” in a challenge with you. When he was weaker and less coordinated, he wisely “turned the other cheek” and lived to see another day. And at the same time, you are probably putting a bit more pressure on him now. You guys are just getting off a plateau and your training is going “up” on the learn curve again.

2. He doesn’t know that his rider is his “biggest problem”-- not what’s going on outside the arena, not the horse passing too close, etc. He also doesn’t know that he can find peace and safety if he keeps his focus on you.

So when the other horse passes too close and you growl, he thinks that he now has two sources of threat, not one. And you are merely on par with that other horse. So when you get mad at him about threatening the other horse, he thinks that you are nuts and untrustworthy-- there was a threat to his body and you had no solution for him. You job (generally and long term) is to make not paying attention to you worse and paying attention to you great— you should be extremely predictable and fair, relevant and rewarding to him.

In this spot, see if you can ride him so that you are taking more of his attention when he happens to be near the other horse. Do something like transitions or a shoulder fore or lateral work away from the direction of the other horse and keep his attention on the job at hand. If he gives starts to give the horse a naughty look, give him a warning word with your voice, but don’t change your ride. What you are really saying is “I see your mind wandering… bring it back here… the job has not changed.”

If I had a horse like this, I’d get someone to ride with me who I could direct a bit. I’d want to determine how close we got, which side, which horse turned away and when, whether they were coming toward us or following us, whether I was “trapped” between the horse and the rail or not. And I’d just ride my baby in various situations with that other horse where the horse was far enough away that I could keep baby’s attention. Gradually, the space between us, or how that horse was approaching would lessen because I taught the general “solution” of keeping his mind on me. But I would position the other horse such that I saw my horse’s attention go there (with an ear and raised head and tension, or that nasty face) and the bring his attention back to me. If that means the horse is very far away at first, that’s fine. You just need to give your horse the experience of getting his head back in the game after a distraction. Make the distraction minor enough that he can afford to pay attention to you. Let him succeed at that-- find peace in returning his mind to you-- before you make the distracting threat of the other horse mare intense.

3. On those feelings-- baby horses don’t yet know that they don’t get to tell Management just how unreasonable and unjust they are. So when your young horse thinks you are putting him at risk or want him to do something hard like go off your leg when he’s a tired, and you use the whip to say “I’m not asking, I’m telling you-- you must respond to my leg” he feels the injustice of it all. In this case, I would ignore his complaint and keep riding. With an older, relatively unspoiled horse, I’d punish kicking out at the whip. Those horses do know that there is a hierarchy and they would be testing it. But your horse honest-to-God doesn’t know how much he needs to submit to you yet. You get to be like the impassive judge with the attorney who makes objection after objection and you say, “Noted” in an impassive way, and keep on with what you are doing.

4. You say his momma was also reactive to the whip (meaning that for whatever reason, she couldn’t accept it as a correction from her boss and get back in line. Rather, it sparked her moral indignation). And maybe Baby, therefore, was also raised in a Union home, a politically-engaged home, and he, too, won’t submit to the whip. Most of the time, these horses are sensitive, physically and mentally, and they are surprised by the whip. You want the physical sensitivity, but you also want them to learn to trust you enough that when you add the harsher correction of the whip, they accept it as part of being ridden.

Meh. His accepting the whip per se isn’t important. And I also bet that later on, when he understands and accepts his position in the hierarchy with you, he will accept and correctly respond to the fairly applied whip. My mare, who reminds me lots of your horse, has progressed this way without me making a special effort to tell her about the whip. Rather, as she has accepted her job and come to trust me as a fair and predictable boss, she has been able to accept more pressure (in this case the whip) from me.

But don’t focus on how he responds to the whip. Rather, teach him constantly how much attention he should be paying to you, and how much focus and “try” your ride requires. The whip is just the very last, worst, coarsest aid you apply when others have failed. Teach him to look for and respond to those earlier aids.

4. The mention of your frustration is interesting. You get to be frustrated by a behavior of your young horse that you don’t know how to fix. At least you get to do that with us. But you don’t get to do that under saddle. There is only room for one of you to be angry and stuck at a time. You can get “angry” in a controlled, purposeful way, when you can turn that on and off at will to make a training point. But angry and stuck-- that’s what frustration is (and maybe a pinch of self-pity thrown in) isn’t productive. That’s why we want to teach horses how to find their way back to trying when they get frustrated. So we have to think about offering them a way out of their emotional cul-de-sac.

In your case, while you are pissed, I’ll bet he’s pissed. So you, with the bigger brain, has to figure the way out. Decide what would count as a praise-worthy response from him. Ride him to get that. Sure, wait him out and keep the same ride if he, say, stays tense and snarky after you use the whip. But be sure to look for a moment where he softens so that you can be “good cop” in that moment. This is how you teach them that the solution to their emotional problem is to stop paying attention to that emotional problem and start getting their head back in the game of trying to figure out how to earn a softer ride or even a walk break from their rider.

Hope this helps. Ask questions if I have been confusing.

[cheektwocheek]

@mvp

My .02.

Your young’n just doesn’t know several things:

1. He may get to “feel his feelings” (more on that below), but he doesn’t get to cross certain physical lines in expressing his displeasure.

On the ground, that means we would never accept kicking or biting as we know that they know that those are acts of aggression. Your horse just doesn’t yet know that certain ways of using his strong, now-fit body to express things are verboten. He’s kicking out at the whip because that’s a natural, horse way of saying “I don’t like it.”

2. He doesn’t know that his rider is his “biggest problem”-- not what’s going on outside the arena, not the horse passing too close, etc. He also doesn’t know that he can find peace and safety if he keeps his focus on you.

So when the other horse passes too close and you growl, he thinks that he now has two sources of threat, not one. And you are merely on par with that other horse. So when you get mad at him about threatening the other horse, he thinks that you are nuts and untrustworthy-- there was a threat to his body and you had no solution for him. You job (generally and long term) is to make not paying attention to you worse and paying attention to you great— you should be extremely predictable and fair, relevant and rewarding to him.

In this spot, see if you can ride him so that you are taking more of his attention when he happens to be near the other horse. Do something like transitions or a shoulder fore or lateral work away from the direction of the other horse and keep his attention on the job at hand. If he gives starts to give the horse a naughty look, give him a warning word with your voice, but don’t change your ride. What you are really saying is “I see your mind wandering… bring it back here… the job has not changed.”

If I had a horse like this, I’d get someone to ride with me who I could direct a bit. I’d want to determine how close we got, which side, which horse turned away and when, whether they were coming toward us or following us, whether I was “trapped” between the horse and the rail or not. And I’d just ride my baby in various situations with that other horse where the horse was far enough away that I could keep baby’s attention. Gradually, the space between us, or how that horse was approaching would lessen because I taught the general “solution” of keeping his mind on me. But I would position the other horse such that I saw my horse’s attention go there (with an ear and raised head and tension, or that nasty face) and the bring his attention back to me. If that means the horse is very far away at first, that’s fine. You just need to give your horse the experience of getting his head back in the game after a distraction. Make the distraction minor enough that he can afford to pay attention to you. Let him succeed at that-- find peace in returning his mind to you-- before you make the distracting threat of the other horse mare intense.

3. On those feelings-- baby horses don’t yet know that they don’t get to tell Management just how unreasonable and unjust they are. So when your young horse thinks you are putting him at risk or want him to do something hard like go off your leg when he’s a tired, and you use the whip to say “I’m not asking, I’m telling you-- you must respond to my leg” he feels the injustice of it all. In this case, I would ignore his complaint and keep riding. With an older, relatively unspoiled horse, I’d punish kicking out at the whip. Those horses do know that there is a hierarchy and they would be testing it. But your horse honest-to-God doesn’t know how much he needs to submit to you yet. You get to be like the impassive judge with the attorney who makes objection after objection and you say, “Noted” in an impassive way, and keep on with what you are doing.

4. You say his momma was also reactive to the whip (meaning that for whatever reason, she couldn’t accept it as a correction from her boss and get back in line. Rather, it sparked her moral indignation). And maybe Baby, therefore, was also raised in a Union home, a politically-engaged home, and he, too, won’t submit to the whip. Most of the time, these horses are sensitive, physically and mentally, and they are surprised by the whip. You want the physical sensitivity, but you also want them to learn to trust you enough that when you add the harsher correction of the whip, they accept it as part of being ridden.

Meh. His accepting the whip per se isn’t important. And I also bet that later on, when he understands and accepts his position in the hierarchy with you, he will accept and correctly respond to the fairly applied whip. My mare, who reminds me lots of your horse, has progressed this way without me making a special effort to tell her about the whip. Rather, as she has accepted her job and come to trust me as a fair and predictable boss, she has been able to accept more pressure (in this case the whip) from me.

But don’t focus on how he responds to the whip. Rather, teach him constantly how much attention he should be paying to you, and how much focus and “try” your ride requires. The whip is just the very last, worst, coarsest aid you apply when others have failed. Teach him to look for and respond to those earlier aids.

4. The mention of your frustration is interesting. You get to be frustrated by a behavior of your young horse that you don’t know how to fix. At least you get to do that with us. But you don’t get to do that under saddle. There is only room for one of you to be angry and stuck at a time. You can get “angry” in a controlled, purposeful way, when you can turn that on and off at will to make a training point. But angry and stuck-- that’s what frustration is (and maybe a pinch of self-pity thrown in) isn’t productive. That’s why we want to teach horses how to find their way back to trying when they get frustrated. So we have to think about offering them a way out of their emotional cul-de-sac.

In your case, while you are pissed, I’ll bet he’s pissed. So you, with the bigger brain, has to figure the way out. Decide what would count as a praise-worthy response from him. Ride him to get that. Sure, wait him out and keep the same ride if he, say, stays tense and snarky after you use the whip. But be sure to look for a moment where he softens so that you can be “good cop” in that moment. This is how you teach them that the solution to their emotional problem is to stop paying attention to that emotional problem and start getting their head back in the game of trying to figure out how to earn a softer ride or even a walk break from their rider.

Hope this helps. Ask questions if I have been confusing.

Awesome advice! Thank you for giving me some good homework to work on.
Redirecting his attention has been a priority when he tries to get out of doing his job. I’ll start incorporating it more when fussy/naughty times are occurring.

[Arlomine]

Good advise above, and I would add that this reaction to the other horses has its root in defensiveness, even if you feel that it is an aggressive behavior. If you « punish » a behavior which has it’s roots in defensiveness, you will reinforce the concept that another horse approaching is a bad thing. I think it’s a dangerous thing to pursue making the horse more afraid of you than other stuff. Most people devolve into emotional/angry use of the aids when they think that way.

It will spiral. Much the same as the way that « punishing » a horse for spooking will be a dismal failure of leadership, resulting in more tension. You are supposed to be the leader, and the provider of safety. If a horse is schooled, you can take acception to them blowing off your aids, but you can’t punish emotion without suffering a negative consequence.
Redirecting attention is much better, and better yet is creating a different concept of security in the leadership of the rider, and in fostering a sense of inner security in the horse.

I am willing to bet that your horse does not perceive that your growling or whip tap is supposed to change his « naughty face ». Just thinking of it as naughty skews your perception and therefore your timing and use of the Aids. It is more likely that he associates the approach of the horse (which already makes him uncomfortable), with further discomfort from you (growling/whip use).

i think checking out Tristan Tucker’s work may be a useful resource

[Rerider54]

MVP had a very thoughtful and correct response. Horses can feel a fly landing on them. There are days when my mare lays her ears at a correction. If she is having a day I can tap my boot with the whip and get a better response. That is more of a call to attention instead of a punishment. Sometimes a tap on the shoulder works as well.

[Dressagelvr]

I would just add that you may want to get some professional help before this becomes a bigger issue.

[merrygoround]

@cheektwocheek

I’m at a loss, my youngster is starting to get the best of me.

Five yr old, super athletic wb with some true fitness setting in. I can tap as a reminder to move off my leg, but never anything more. No double taps or slightly wacking him, I’d get launched.

Example of my frustration include… maybe a naughty face while passing left to left. I growl, close my legs & keep moving forward. If I were to tap for that he kicks out or tries to buck. How do I correctly discipline a guy that hates this type of correction? Any suggestions are more than welcome! I want to raise a solid citizen, not a jerk.

His mom was very whip sensitive as well, weird thing for him to have inherited.

the response to most undersaddle disobedience is to do something to distract, not go to the whip. If he’s focusing on LY. or S/1 then he can’t focus on another horse.

If he is responsive to a tiny tap, why ask for more.

Whip overuse is a rider error.

[sascha]

Not knowing your horse I can’t say what’s wrong or why, but I can say a few general things about young horses and crowding and responses to it. Most horses are indeed worried when crowded by other horses. Some (I own one now) are extremely aggressive when “their personal space” is “invaded.” #1 rule is to take “their personal space” away when you are riding them. Ride in close quarters with a seasoned horse as often as possible. Play at having each horse push the other (yes, physically) in stirrup to stirrup leg yielding at walk. This will make a huge difference for both kinds of horse. It puts power into the fearful and shows the aggressive kind that power can be taken away.

For ear pinning, neck wringing, tail swishing, back tightening, side eye giving, and so on, I prefer a very sharp verbal reprimand and a smack with an open hand on the neck hard enough that it hurts my hand and makes a noise. It’s enough to surprise just about any horse and delivered in lightning fast timing, will quickly shut down crappy behaviour. Then carry on as though nothing happened.

Best thing ever is getting a horse into a drill practice (fake or for real, but with other horses that are used to being ridding literally stirrup to stirrup with other horses), group lessons (doesn’t even matter if they are dressage lessons, it’s about learning to chill in a group), and riding as often as possible with a trusted btdt horse who is happy to play bumper cars (leg yielding game) and leap frog and chicken. lol Chicken just means helping the youngster realize there are rules for passing head to head and no-one is going to die even though the youngster might think so at first.

Good luck!

[Denali6298]

In my experience with horses who get offended with a whip is they view the correction as too harsh. Figure out what is “fair” as punishment and you’re golden. A whip should never be seen as a punishment but rather reinforcement of the aides.

[CanteringCarrot]

I have a horse that can be a queen. He prefers to have his own private arena, but that’s not always the case. I just make sure he is focused and forward. Occasionally I will have to growl or make a stern verbal comment, but for the most part teaching them to focus on the rider is key.

I’ve also dealt with objections to leg and/or whip. It takes some courage but if a horse kicks out when I use the whip (which usually comes after they’ve ignored my leg aid for whatever reason), I use the whip again with a little more force behind it and take whatever forward the horse gives me and show the horse that forward is right. He may break into the canter from the trot, but that’s fine. I may have also had easy horses as that’s all it ever took.

[GraceLikeRain]

@CanteringCarrot

I’ve also dealt with objections to leg and/or whip. It takes some courage but if a horse kicks out when I use the whip (which usually comes after they’ve ignored my leg aid for whatever reason), I use the whip again with a little more force behind it and take whatever forward the horse gives me and show the horse that forward is right. He may break into the canter from the trot, but that’s fine. I may have also had easy horses as that’s all it ever took.

This. A phenomenal trainer I deeply admire once road a crop, buck, crop, buck, crop, buck, crop… an entire lap around a regulation dressage arena. The horse was not terrified but defiant to the crop and had learned that a buck meant the correction disappeared. I watched her ride this out to a lesser degree on countless horses. She never touched the mouth, never cropped out of emotion, and the second a horse went forward the forward was joyfully rewarded.

Calling a bluff on a horse that has learned “no” requires more timing and skill than many professionals even have. After a few explosive rodeo broncs even an experienced rider will often lose their seat, lose their cool, or catch a horse in the mouth.

When done properly it doesn’t breed resentment or fry a horse because it is 100% fair, completely black and white with an instant reward for the correct response. Leg is to be respected. A leg that is not respected requires reinforcement. Reinforcement must be maintained until a horse goes forward or you teach them to ignore escalating aids. That all being said, I’m happy to hand the reins over to a pro to fix this if I encounter it. I know my limits.

[pluvinel]

@GraceLikeRain

…

Calling a bluff on a horse that has learned “no” requires more timing and skill than many professionals even have. After a few explosive rodeo broncs even an experienced rider will often lose their seat, lose their cool, or catch a horse in the mouth.

When done properly it doesn’t breed resentment or fry a horse because it is 100% fair, completely black and white with an instant reward for the correct response. Leg is to be respected. A leg that is not respected requires reinforcement. Reinforcement must be maintained until a horse goes forward or you teach them to ignore escalating aids. That all being said, I’m happy to hand the reins over to a pro to fix this if I encounter it. I know my limits.

I also know my limits which is why I recommended doing the work in hand.

If the horse won’t respect the whip on the ground, it certainly won’t respect it under saddle. Starting to develop understanding and obedience to the whip via in-hand work puts both rider and horse in a postion for success and poses less danger to the handler.

Not to say you won’t get an explosion in-hand…but better in-hand than under saddle.

[DressageLin]

I had this exact situation last year – extremely athletic and sensitive 5 year old WB who overreacted to the whip. He was so forward and lovely I could ride without whip or spurs and so he began training me.

I rode with a well-respected trainer who advised to nip that in the bid. She had me trot a 20M circle and touch him lightly with the whip every stride. He could kick out, buck, throw himself around, but I would just very lightly touch him each stride.

Admittedly, it was helpful to have the trainer cheerleading me through it. At home, it was harder to be as brave, but I made myself work on it, and he now is completely normal about allowing me to touch.tap him with the whip. He will also be one that needs a light hand, but he now accepts it for an aid and does not over-react.

[Xanthoria]

@mvp

1. He may get to “feel his feelings” (more on that below), but he doesn’t get to cross certain physical lines in expressing his displeasure.

On the ground, that means we would never accept kicking or biting as we know that they know that those are acts of aggression. Your horse just doesn’t yet know that certain ways of using his strong, now-fit body to express things are verboten. He’s kicking out at the whip because that’s a natural, horse way of saying “I don’t like it.” And he’s doing that now because his stronger body gives him the confidence that he can perhaps “win” in a challenge with you. When he was weaker and less coordinated, he wisely “turned the other cheek” and lived to see another day. And at the same time, you are probably putting a bit more pressure on him now. You guys are just getting off a plateau and your training is going “up” on the learn curve again.

I have edited out a lot - above are the parts relevant to me.

I think if a horse is physically aggressive (not scared, startled etc) on the ground, we do not ignore it: its absolutely not OK to kick, bite etc people. In the moment there may be a strong correction, and later more round pen work may ensue to cement a respectful attitude.

How is it so very different under saddle? I’m not advocating all out war and beatings, but just redirecting when a horse has an aggressive reaction to a correction probably saves your skin in the short term, but may not do much to tell the horse long term that bucking is not OK.

@mvp

2. He doesn’t know that his rider is his “biggest problem”-- not what’s going on outside the arena, not the horse passing too close, etc. He also doesn’t know that he can find peace and safety if he keeps his focus on you.

So when the other horse passes too close and you growl, he thinks that he now has two sources of threat, not one. And you are merely on par with that other horse. So when you get mad at him about threatening the other horse, he thinks that you are nuts and untrustworthy-- there was a threat to his body and you had no solution for him. You job (generally and long term) is to make not paying attention to you worse and paying attention to you great— you should be extremely predictable and fair, relevant and rewarding to him.

For this I rather think that if you want the horse to be more focused on you than another horse/perceived threat, and his behavior is to be aggressive towards another horse, you’d better do something quick sharp to sort it out. He’s not going to think you’re nuts because of some perceived notion that between two threats your reaction is untrustworthy - he’s not that complex. He’s going to say “x behavior was punished - probably won’t try that again” and then, hopefully, horse is kept plenty busy next time so the aggressive idea is less apt to spring to mind.

@mvp

3. On those feelings-- baby horses don’t yet know that they don’t get to tell Management just how unreasonable and unjust they are. So when your young horse thinks you are putting him at risk or want him to do something hard like go off your leg when he’s a tired, and you use the whip to say “I’m not asking, I’m telling you-- you must respond to my leg” he feels the injustice of it all. In this case, I would ignore his complaint and keep riding. With an older, relatively unspoiled horse, I’d punish kicking out at the whip. Those horses do know that there is a hierarchy and they would be testing it.

I can’t see ignoring aggressive behavior. Even a growl is better than nothing here - there has to be a consequence for threatening acts, and if you don’t do anything the horse will never learn that it’s not OK. I can’t make the leap here - no reaction to a serious threat but somehow eventually they learn not to buck?

Again I’m not talking a total dressing down: a youngster is gonna try something. You’re going to need to say “not OK” somehow - depending on the horse - so he has a frame of reference for next time.

I completely agree with setting a horse up for success, and certainly what light pressure means to one horse can = a huge threat to another. But operant conditioning requires inputs from the trainer, and total passivity results in no (or incorrect) learning.

[Bogey2]

5 is a tough age, my horse was very naughty 4.5 to 6. He was also a wreck when horses came towards him. I would stop and supple him when we had to pass another horse, not reprimand him. He finally got over it. I also turned him over to my trainer for 3 weeks when he was 5 because he bucked me off three times in one week (he was a born curler)…I knew I was over faced because my timing was not as good as hers! It took her three weeks to fix the problem and I never had to turn him over to her again!

[mvp]

Hi! I assume these are genuine questions for me. And I wish I could include the parts of my first post that you are responding to in your question. I’ll summarize those, as I think you read them, and then answer what you asked. I’m in bold, interspersed with your text.

@Xanthoria

I have edited out a lot - above are the parts relevant to me.

I think if a horse is physically aggressive (not scared, startled etc) on the ground, we do not ignore it: its absolutely not OK to kick, bite etc people. In the moment there may be a strong correction, and later more round pen work may ensue to cement a respectful attitude.

How is it so very different under saddle? I’m not advocating all out war and beatings, but just redirecting when a horse has an aggressive reaction to a correction probably saves your skin in the short term, but may not do much to tell the horse long term that bucking is not OK.

[B]I see two differences:

1. I am unwilling to die just to make a training point to a horse. And I have a much greater chance of doing that if I’m sitting on him as opposed to next to him on the ground. To be clear, you can get quite hurt by a horse on the ground. But if you are already decent at reading a horse and you are smart about it, at least you can get your body out of harm’s way faster and farther if things go sideways.

2. The key part of my interpretation of this situation with the young horse is that he doesn’t know. So on the ground, where horses with their mom or in their herds regularly negotiate power by negotiating space and who chases whom, AND where the horse can step down from a challenge by moving away, we can assume the horse knows a bit more about when he’s being obedient, defensive or downright aggressive. And so, for this second, better reason (better because it’s about the horse’s understanding, not me wanting to protect myself), you can more readily get a little tougher on a horse on the ground. [/B]

For this I rather think that if you want the horse to be more focused on you than another horse/perceived threat, and his behavior is to be aggressive towards another horse, you’d better do something quick sharp to sort it out. He’s not going to think you’re nuts because of some perceived notion that between two threats your reaction is untrustworthy - he’s not that complex. He’s going to say “x behavior was punished - probably won’t try that again” and then, hopefully, horse is kept plenty busy next time so the aggressive idea is less apt to spring to mind.

[B]Yes, but every time you take this horse’s nasty faces toward the other horse or the use of the whip as “aggression,” I’d call it “defensiveness.” If you put yourself in the horse’s shoes, you’ll immediately see how different those motives are! Getting back to the horse’s mind-- he doesn’t know that what he thinks is defensiveness-- of his space from the other horse, from harsh treatment from that “alpha mare” that he has on his very back and really touching his body all over-- he doesn’t know that we consider his level of behaving in a self-preserving way also “aggressive toward us.”

See how we are always attributing emotional states and motivations to horses? That’s risky; we might be wrong. With a young, athletic and sensitive horse (whether that’s emotionally-- she’s a little insecure, as my mare is, or physically sensitive), we take a much bigger risk of screwing things up bad if we attribute knowing aggression where really there’s the more innocent motive of defensiveness. That’s because, as I wrote, the horse who is scared can’t choose to dial that back down and feel safe. The herd animal who dialed up his aggression, on the other hand, knows that he can step back down in order to feel safe. That’s a huge difference in terms of how the horse can possibly get back to peace and safety.

So you can say, “I don’t care why you put your ears back at that horse or kicked out at my whip. I’ll give you a quick, negative response to that and (i presume) you will choose not to do that again.” But if you were scared and you “did the wrong thing” because you thought you had to, would you simply choose not to do the wrong thing again, or would you feel intense pressure because you now had two, equally compelling things to be afraid of?

But it is somewhere between untenable and unethical to put an animal in a situation where his fear has no solution and to just hold him there, expecting him to change. IME, when this gets done to a horse, they get very screwed up (at best) and so violently defensive and untrusting (at worst) that they are unreadable and therefore dangerous.[/B]

I can’t see ignoring aggressive behavior. Even a growl is better than nothing here - there has to be a consequence for threatening acts, and if you don’t do anything the horse will never learn that it’s not OK. I can’t make the leap here - no reaction to a serious threat but somehow eventually they learn not to buck?

Again I’m not talking a total dressing down: a youngster is gonna try something. You’re going to need to say “not OK” somehow - depending on the horse - so he has a frame of reference for next time.

[B]I never said to ignore aggressive behavior. Heck, if a horse came at me that way, I’d go balls-out-aggressive back toward him, probably on the ground. But here’s the interesting thing: I’d do that out of the same sense of self-preservation and defensiveness of my body that I think the OP’s young horse has! Ironic that what would look like aggression on my part has defensiveness at its core.

What I did say about teaching this young horse was about making the threat of the other horse low enough (via distance between them), that the horse’s fear level goes down enough that he merely feels “annoyed” or “uncertain” about the other horse. When this is true, he can afford to choose between paying attention to his rider and paying attention to the threat. And in this lower-stakes situation, you can train the horse to keep his mind on his rider, his leader, his job.[/B]

I completely agree with setting a horse up for success, and certainly what light pressure means to one horse can = a huge threat to another. But operant conditioning requires inputs from the trainer, and total passivity results in no (or incorrect) learning.

[Xanthoria]

It’s tricky to get these quotes straight, but hope this works!

@mvp

I see two differences:

1. I am unwilling to die just to make a training point to a horse. And I have a much greater chance of doing that if I’m sitting on him as opposed to next to him on the ground. To be clear, you can get quite hurt by a horse on the ground. But if you are already decent at reading a horse and you are smart about it, at least you can get your body out of harm’s way faster and farther if things go sideways.

I agree it’s easier to correct on the ground, and that round pen etc work can head off many of these issue completely, and it can translate to under saddle work well.

And I agree - no need to die! But sometimes, by not doing anything, you’re rewarding a negative behavior by not correcting it. I think that’s part of the reason youngsters are not for everyone - they aren’t ready/willing to confront scary under saddle antics, which can then escalate quickly.

@mvp

2. The key part of my interpretation of this situation with the young horse is that he doesn’t know. So on the ground, where horses with their mom or in their herds regularly negotiate power by negotiating space and who chases whom, AND where the horse can step down from a challenge by moving away, we can assume the horse knows a bit more about when he’s being obedient, defensive or downright aggressive. And so, for this second, better reason (better because it’s about the horse’s understanding, not me wanting to protect myself), you can more readily get a little tougher on a horse on the ground.

Yes, again I think this is where babies aren’t for everyone: separating out “he doesn’t know” from “he knows and he’s being a brat” can be difficult. As is “he’s being defensive” and “he’s being aggressive” or “he spooked” from “it’s spring and he feels bouncy!”

@mvp

Yes, but every time you take this horse’s nasty faces toward the other horse or the use of the whip as “aggression,” I’d call it “defensiveness.” If you put yourself in the horse’s shoes, you’ll immediately see how different those motives are! Getting back to the horse’s mind-- he doesn’t know that what he thinks is defensiveness-- of his space from the other horse, from harsh treatment from that “alpha mare” that he has on his very back and really touching his body all over-- he doesn’t know that we consider his level of behaving in a self-preserving way also “aggressive toward us.”

See how we are always attributing emotional states and motivations to horses? That’s risky; we might be wrong. With a young, athletic and sensitive horse (whether that’s emotionally-- she’s a little insecure, as my mare is, or physically sensitive), we take a much bigger risk of screwing things up bad if we attribute knowing aggression where really there’s the more innocent motive of defensiveness. That’s because, as I wrote, the horse who is scared can’t choose to dial that back down and feel safe. The herd animal who dialed up his aggression, on the other hand, knows that he can step back down in order to feel safe. That’s a huge difference in terms of how the horse can possibly get back to peace and safety.

So you can say, “I don’t care why you put your ears back at that horse or kicked out at my whip. I’ll give you a quick, negative response to that and (i presume) you will choose not to do that again.” But if you were scared and you “did the wrong thing” because you thought you had to, would you simply choose not to do the wrong thing again, or would you feel intense pressure because you now had two, equally compelling things to be afraid of?

But it is somewhere between untenable and unethical to put an animal in a situation where his fear has no solution and to just hold him there, expecting him to change. IME, when this gets done to a horse, they get very screwed up (at best) and so violently defensive and untrusting (at worst) that they are unreadable and therefore dangerous.

I do agree on the difference between aggressive and defensive, but corrections needn’t be so huge that they cause a horse to feel violently penned in by two different threats. If the trainer finds out the horse is reacting aggressively to another horse coming at them in the arena, say, it’s their duty to go away and help that horse gain confidence with that situation. In the moment though, having a quick "hey now!’ marks the moment and doesn’t reward aggression. It needn’t be enough to scar the animal mentally.

Also re his behavior towards another horse: would you allow him to haul off and attack another horse in hand? No - you’d correct it. Same under saddle. He needs to stay focused on you.

If we’re just talking ears back I’d ignore that. But take note of it: I’ve seen that escalate to a ridden horse actually charging my horse, or stopping and backing into us to kick. Rider allowed (and laughed at) ears back all the time on her very angry mare.

@mvp

I never said to ignore aggressive behavior. Heck, if a horse came at me that way, I’d go balls-out-aggressive back toward him, probably on the ground. But here’s the interesting thing: I’d do that out of the same sense of self-preservation and defensiveness of my body that I think the OP’s young horse has! Ironic that what would look like aggression on my part has defensiveness at its core.

What I did say about teaching this young horse was about making the threat of the other horse low enough (via distance between them), that the horse’s fear level goes down enough that he merely feels “annoyed” or “uncertain” about the other horse. When this is true, he can afford to choose between paying attention to his rider and paying attention to the threat. And in this lower-stakes situation, you can train the horse to keep his mind on his rider, his leader, his job.

Yeah - and again I think this is where someone really needs to understand the difference between a horse being aggressive, or being defensive.

Sidebar: I wonder how much this particular issue is compounded by the general horse owning population’s preference for keeping horses stalled and only turned out individually? Some of it seems like lack of socialization. H’m.

[mvp]

@Xanthoria

Also re his behavior towards another horse: would you allow him to haul off and attack another horse in hand? No - you’d correct it. Same under saddle. He needs to stay focused on you.

If we’re just talking ears back I’d ignore that. But take note of it: I’ve seen that escalate to a ridden horse actually charging my horse, or stopping and backing into us to kick. Rider allowed (and laughed at) ears back all the time on her very angry mare.

Yeah - and again I think this is where someone really needs to understand the difference between a horse being aggressive, or being defensive.

Sidebar: I wonder how much this particular issue is compounded by the general horse owning population’s preference for keeping horses stalled and only turned out individually? Some of it seems like lack of socialization. H’m.

Yes, but nothing in the behavior the OP describes suggests that the horse was obviously aggressive, as in he was closing the distance between himself and the other horse. Rather, he was “making nasty faces.” I assume he stayed on his path because the OP asked him to. That’s why I suggested the alternative hypothesis that he was merely defensive.

[Xanthoria]

Fair enough! :encouragement: