I thought about this and there really is a good point here. The basic point is not that 'horse people give inconsistent answers'. The basic point is that if you're writing about a 'typical' Western dude ranch, you're writing about a whole different tradition, than if you're writing about the race track, or about top international dressage horses owned by one of the top riders in the world. The horses are different, the jargon is different, the goal is different, the people are different, the training, equipment, everything is different. Of course BirdsDon'tCry and I have different versions of how horses are trained. We're from very different parts of the horse world. I would never saddle break a horse the way she described. I would never do the kind of ground work she describes. Ever. No matter what. With our taller horses, there's too much risk of harming their legs doing things like that. But even more than that, I don't want the horse to obey me in that fashion. We have a very different relationship with horses than her group does. And it really does make a difference to a story. There was an absurd article I read a month ago about the rarified world of top class international show jumpers. The journalist commenced to rattle off the names of the parts of the horse's saddle, and it came off badly. It just sounded like he was showing off. Except they were parts of a western saddle, not an English jumping saddle. It's really not that hard, to get it right. And the worst part is the article was in a horse magazine that catered to English competitive riding - show jumpers, dressage and eventing. Today, it's extremely common for horse magazines and websites to be a sideline, not a focus, for a company. Management assumes 'anyone can write about anything', but it just isn't true. And that means the writing on them can be very poor quality. It's better to ask a very (very) experienced person who's very familiar with the type of riding you're writing about. Just keep in mind that many people hang around horses for years, without learning much at all. A real expert is a valuable find.
Overall, I agree with you. Even within regions and disciplines, there are endless variations in method. My neighbor shows Saddlebreds, and my skin crawls at some of the things he does. Not that I've ever seen one beaten or bleeding, I just wouldn't do some of those things to my animals. If I were not to specify my character's methods as one sort over another, it would certainly change the flavor of the story. This does make me wonder, @theamorset, what exactly your background is? From your previous posts, I pictured you a Rocky Mountain cowboy, but now I'm confused. I am also curious what type of pre-saddle training you are used to, if not groundwork? I assume you are referring to my thread from a few weeks ago, but I never go into specifics of saddle-breaking, and the groundwork described is just basic walk, trot, canter. Have you seen horse's legs injured in this way? I am also intrigued by what sort of relationship you like to have with your mounts? I have always found understanding and communication to be the foundation of safety in the saddle (and, staying in the saddle). You are so right about true experts. People who THINK they know what's going on are far, far more dangerous (and obnoxious) than those who admit they will always be learning.
Ok... well, just because I wrote a scene using some natural horsemanship practices does NOT mean this is my only knowledge or experience. You opened the box by saying your would NEVER, EVER do things "my" way, but then won't explain what you mean by that? You say groundwork ruins horses legs??? Never heard such a thing, but hey, I willing to listen to your argument, if you have one. Please do not assume I am close-minded or overly emotional based on your own prejudice. If anything, your above comment proves that you are so, and I am not. If you actually posses the Equine knowledge you profess to, I would be interested in details, since you have decided "my" way has flaws.
Again, if you want to take this to private messages, I might be willing, if you stop accusing me of writing things I didn't write. This is a creative writing website, and I don't think the topic of NH vs non NH is top of mind for most people here. But yes, there are other completely legit and sensible ways of training horses than NH. In fact, most of us managed to bumble along pretty successfully for a very long time, without NH.
As did I, before learning about it, and as do I, in many things. I agree, NH vs non-NH likely isn't what most people here want to read about, but on a thread about horsemanship, it very well might be. Not to mention, you brought it up and plugged my name in, so naturally I took notice. I seem to have made an enemy here, and that was not my intention. As to "accusing you of writing thing your didn't write," I have done no such thing. I have only reacted in confusion to your referencing my else-where posted writing (partially incorrectly, I might add, then insinuating the methods I wrote about could be harmful), asking for explanation in reguards to this (thinking surely you would have a specific example for such a belief), and professing an interest in whatever varying background you might have as a matter of perspective. If this offends you, I suppose there is nothing I can do about that. In my years in the Equine world, it has been my experience that, while there are many, many variances in docterine, it is highly disrespectful and completely unhelpful to make from-the-hip assumptions of other's methods... and even less on a stranger's background based on one brief scene she wrote. No, I don't think I will PM you. I think this head-butting is going nowhere, so I am drawing the line, for my part. I cannot own your reaction. Hopefully, there will be no more comments from you painting me in an irresponsible light, either as a writer or an equestrian. I afford you the same. "Methinks thou doth protest too much."
