Owning a horse is one of the most rewarding relationships a person can experience. Horses have an undeniable influence on human emotional states in a way that no other species can compare to. But at one point or another, every horse owner faces a time when their horse seems to push boundaries and has to ask themselves how to respond to this situation. In the horse training industry, there are those who follow tradition, those who have learned the art of Natural Horsemanship, and then there are those who have an understanding of the science behind all of it.
Positive reinforcement focused training methods are gaining popularity in the animal training industry. We are the people who take a hard look at what research tells us will motivate an animal to behave the way they do. Only recently have these methods crossed over into the horse world where a handful of trainers have taken on the responsibility of spreading that philosophy. This topic is important to me because I strongly believe it is time to normalize more humane practices that allow horses to thrive in their learning environments. I know positive reinforcement based training is the most efficient and effective way to improve horse-human relationships while keeping a horse’s welfare a top priority.
Many horse owners might claim they don’t have a reason for switching methods because pressure and release in conjunction with punishment has been working for them and their horses for decades. It is important to remember that these horses are individuals and considering their needs is a crucial component to their success as our partner. However, explaining how to use positive reinforcement to these owners today might elicit a response claiming it takes more time than they have or that learned helplessness is a requirement for horses to survive in the human world. Indeed, negative reinforcement and positive punishment are quicker because the handler does not have to wait for the horse to offer the correct behavior, they can provoke it with pressure. Although this is true, just because Traditional and Natural Horsemanship methods worked with horses they have trained in the past doesn’t mean it was ethical.
Traditional, or cowboy/vaquero style training methods stem from early domestication of the horse and military use of equine. It relies heavily on positive punishment (inflicting pain) and is still common in European Riding Schools and western communities in the United States. Many trainers with this philosophy will talk about “breaking” a horse’s spirit in order to achieve the result they are looking for. This involves subjecting a horse to cruelty until the horse shows submission. Sometimes, this includes forcing a horse to lay down on the ground through the use of ropes and whips so that the trainer can assert their dominance by literally standing on top of them. These trainers are mistaking learned helplessness for trust while claiming it is an essential tool for teaching relaxation. For clarification, learned helplessness is when the animal no longer tries to escape from stressful stimuli and gives up leading to cognitive and emotional deterioration. So when the horse has no option other than to stop trying to escape the pain or threatening stimuli, they remain motionless until the trainer retreats. The trainer is then able to ride or use them for other kinds of work while the horse complies in fear.
For the sake of mutual understanding, I use the term Natural Horsemanship to describe negative reinforcement (pressure and release) based training methods. These trainers claim to value the horse’s relationship with the handler above all else, yet still rely on outdated ideas of dominance theory and behaviors exhibited by the horse through the threat of punishment. They openly admit to using force, but state they do not use fear as a motivator. This can be caused by a trainer using non-contingent punishment when they believe the horse’s fight or flight response is exhibited on purpose and the horse “knows” it did something wrong. These trainers also have a tendency to use flooding as a method of desensitization instead of the much more effective approach of systematic desensitization and counter-conditioning. Flooding is when an animal is forcibly subjected to an aversive stimuli while not being allowed to escape and is not recommended by experts in the field, whereas DSCC is a more gradual, progressive approach allowing the horse time to overcome the fear on his own terms. Even some of the best Natural Horsemanship trainers are uneducated on what horse body language really means. There are countless videos online of these professionals talking about creating a positive experience between rider and horse, yet these horses in the videos show clear signs of frustration, stress, and discomfort. However, I believe these trainers aim to do less harm than the trainers who use Traditional methods, so it is a step in the right direction.
In contrast, positive reinforcement is when a trainer provides an appetitive stimulus (food or scratches) after a horse exhibits a desired behavior instead of relying on correction when the horse makes the wrong move. An example of positive reinforcement is giving your horse a treat for touching his nose to a cone or lifting his feet when you put your hand on his leg, whereas negative reinforcement can range from using your body to drive a horse forward in the round pen to pulling back on the reins to get them to halt. Using positive reinforcement does take more effort than other methods because handlers need to be aware of each individual horses’ needs, preferences, and their ability to cope with stress, plus the trainer has to be patient while setting the horse up for success and shaping behaviors.
There are plenty of trainers, past and present, who have been very successful despite relying solely on negative reinforcement and positive punishment. Some of these trainers include internationally known names like Clinton Anderson, Pat Parelli, Monty Roberts, Buck Brannaman, and Ray Hunt among others. Not all corrections are bad, there is a place for mild and well timed negative reinforcement, but the science shows it should not be the focus while in a training situation. Humane negative reinforcement is possible, but the handler must understand what is causing the horse to learn – an immediate release of pressure the moment the horse does the desired behavior. It is also important to acknowledge that the release of pressure is not a reward.
Positive Reinforcement does work for every horse because it is backed by science. Any horse with any personality and any history will respond to an added appetitive stimulus. A horse working to earn something is going to act very differently than a horse working to avoid something. Instead of doing what is the quickest, most straightforward way for us to achieve our goals, we should be doing what is the least stressful and aversive for the horse. Think, “No more whips, ropes, spurs, or harsh bits because rewarding [your horse] for doing the correct thing instead of always telling your horse ‘No!’ is much more effective than constantly picking a fight with them” says Adele Shaw in The Power of Positive Reinforcement. For clarification, positive reinforcement (+R) is the addition of an appetitive stimulus, like food or scratches, to increase the likelihood of a behavior happening again and negative reinforcement (-R) is the removal of an aversive stimulus to increase the likelihood of a behavior happening again while positive punishment (+P) is the addition of an aversive stimulus to decrease the likelihood of a behavior happening again and negative punishment (-P) is the removal of an appetitive stimulus to decrease the likelihood of a behavior happening again. So even though using only 100% positive reinforcement without incorporating any of the other quadrants is impossible, we strive to be as close to that as we can during every interaction with our horses.
First and foremost, a handler must determine what stimulus is reinforcing for the horse. Typically horses will find food to be reinforcing unless they have previously been punished for taking food from a human’s hand, in which case trainers must be patient while the horse disassociates this outcome. Some horses may find scratches reinforcing whereas horses with a history of physical abuse can find touch to be an aversive stimulus. In addition to the appetitive stimulus presented to the learner on purpose, the trainer must also consider the horse’s state of arousal which can additionally affect the horse’s ability to learn in a given situation. Owners looking to move forward with positive reinforcement must also take the time to undo learned helplessness caused by previous interactions with humans using Traditional or Natural Horsemanship philosophies.
It is important to keep in mind that an animal experiences associative and non-associative learning. Associative learning is when a horse will consciously link two events with each other to impact a horse’s behavior or emotions whereas non-associative learning includes sensitization and habituation to new stimuli so that a horse can determine whether or not they should ignore something. In other words, every interaction promotes categorization of a stimulus into something they should pay attention to or not. For example, if a handler relies on a lunge whip to get their horse to move forward in the round pen because the noise it makes is scary and elicits a flight response, that handler should not also try to desensitize the horse to it or they won’t be able to round pen their horse. Associative learning is where clicker training comes in. This is when a horse links the “click” sound with the appearance of food. As long as the click is followed by food every time, a horse will begin to anticipate the food reward the second the trainer makes the click. This is imperative to training with positive reinforcement so that the horse learns to have good manners around food and can still be taught when food can’t be given immediately after a behavior is expressed, like while riding or teaching a liberty circle.
You will have a stronger relationship with your horse when you strengthen your communication skills and don’t use fear tactics. There’s no dominance required and you don’t have to earn the “respect” of your horse. Giving your horse the ability to choose allows them to develop a desire to work with their human instead of just putting up with us. The environment is now fun and exciting and they will look forward to seeing you. Permitting the horse to choose whether or not they want to interact with you requires working at liberty. This means interacting with the horse without tying them up in a pen big enough for them to walk away when they feel uncomfortable. This new context may yield completely different results. Changing the motivator from fear allows training to occur outside of an avoidance based mindset. Having the horse work towards something for entertainment value and a reward instead of escaping pressure completely changes the horse’s emotional response to being with the handler and their willingness to engage in training sessions. Dominance theory is still prevalent in the horse community today despite the number of studies disproving it currently available. It is important to throw out these previously believed notions in order to progress in a more ethologically advanced relationship with the horse. Round penning and “Join Up” also need to be examined and an owner should consider changing the way round penning is implemented in their training sessions or throwing it out completely.
Using positive reinforcement changes the way the owner behaves and views their horse. It forces us to have a better understanding of our horses’ emotions because we concentrate on their threshold for fear and anxiety. Rather than becoming frustrated with a horse for not doing what we want, now we can understand why and change the way we ask for behavior. We don’t have to turn everything into a fight because their body language & facial expressions help owners determine how their horse is really feeling. After recent studies were published, we know that animals treated and trained in this way are not only healthier, but are safer to be around, live longer and most crucially for us, actually want to cooperate with their trainers.
These signs include but are not limited to a raised head-neck position, tail swishing, pawing, triangulated eyes, clenched lips, round nostrils, and being easily startled. Most people tend to overlook the more subtle signals, but they are the first indication that your horse is not feeling confident about a situation. Many horse owners also have a tendency to use labels as an excuse for their horse’s behavior. Mares are labeled “sassy” or “stubborn”, “pushy” or “disrespectful” allowing their handlers an excuse to use negative reinforcement or positive punishment. It would be better for both parties if people looked into the reason behind this attitude instead of slapping a label on them and moving on. Being patient and kind cultivates a better relationship based on understanding and communication which coincides with improved welfare.
Positive reinforcement through clicker training is the most efficient and effective way to improve horse-human relationships across the board. No matter what discipline you ride in, your experience level, or your horse’s athletic ability, this method should be everyone’s first choice. The result being a horse who prefers to be engaged with training sessions is worth its weight in gold. That is why I have made it my mission to educate horse owners and assist them in their journey to finding a mutually beneficial relationship with their horse. Even if I can’t change the minds of every horse owner, changing the mind of one will change the world for that horse.
Comments