Hi all, this is a call to those who have raised foals, or worked on foaling farms to discuss imprinting as a methodology, why? I am currently taking on online equine behavior course through my university which after I signed up I learned the text was by Paul McGreevy. On several occasions already into week 4 of the course I object to the interpretation of methodologies in this "scientific" text such as the discourse they have on imprinting by Dr Miller which leads fellow classmates to believe these are horrible experiences creating stress for the mare and foal, yet in my understanding of the process by reading Dr Millers original works and Montys chapter in My Hand to Yours there is an emphasis on making this a natural experience and reducing the impact of stressors later in training life for the foal. In referencing those sources as part of a discussion, the proctor of the course criticized my rebuttal as not using scientific articles rather than first hand experiences or accounts based on "opinion" in the discussion. has anyone here experienced this type of adamant adherence to ideology simply because it is in a scholastic text rather than experiential? This seems like they are perpetuating the fundamental fight Monty has been having for years by maligning the entire process versus the approach. Tell me about your imprinting experiences, good or bad or your perspectives...I feel like a lone voice in the wilderness in this other course.
Rewards
Subscribe to Equus Online University and become a part of Monty's worldwide mission to leave the world a better place for horses and for people too.
Students automatically gain access to special rewards, such as exclusive discounts at the Monty Roberts Online Shop. Visit Monty Roberts Online Shop.
We have an in-stall camera that goes directly into our home. So, as a consequence, we were present with every foaling but one, and that baby died, regretfully, after one day because of lack of oxygen after birthing.
The imprintation procedure that we use is a system of handling and messaging the foal ,before standing, all over its body while. we speak to the foal and the mother about the beauty that is laying before us and gratitude that we have for the creation process. This touching and speaking will probably go on for about 5 to 7 minutes before we stand and allow the mother and baby to take over. We also assist with the baby getting its
SEA LEGS in their first attempt to stand and nurse. During the time before the baby stands we will treat the naval with a low strength iodine to prevent infection.
When we first started out with this procedure, we were told by many people that doing all of these things prior to the baby standing would interfere with the natural bonding of the mother and baby,especially with Arabians because of their sensitvities. UNTRUE,THE ONE THING THAT YOU CAN COUNT ON IN THE HORSES INDUSTRY IS MISINFORMATION. We need to update our text books and areas of learning about the basic differences a domesticated animal and one that is born wild. When we bring a foal into this world, i personally feel that it is my responsibility to prepare that individual for their eventual interactions with humanity. THAT IS WHY WE IMPRINT.
The time that a foal is with their mother is between 4 to 6 months, sometimes longer. This time will greatly influence the foal also as does the weening procedure. The weening should be done incrementally so as to keep the separation anxiety to a minimum. This is when the stage should have set by us , the human, with imprintation
so the foal will have basis for interaction and relationship. See what Jo wrote about with her new foal. A VERY BAD BUT TOO OFTEN DONE SCENARIO. I digress, sorry. Back at the ranch and to my point.
Along with this I use a system of hoops during the first few weeks of life to handle the baby. That helps me reinforce their imprinting on an habitual basis. This procedure last about 3 to 5 minutes a session with 3 to 4 sessions a day I have found that this approach to raising young horses produces a very confident and self reliant individual. All of these horse will eventually go on to other farms and new people. What i am talking about here is the development and shaping of a young horse`s emotional conformation. I strongly believe that this helps the horse with a built-in-confidence with humans. The hoops that i mention above are much like the old hoola hoop only smaller by design [ one for the butt and one for the neck.] A GREAT TEACHING TOOL.
My hope is that you might be able to generate some discussion in your class room about this very important subject matter. Remember, change takes time and the chances of change happening starts with discussion and then with questioning.
Good luck
Bud
..
Wonderful discussion going on here, so much to share!
I've seen quite some foals, both ends of the spectrum, but what I first of all remember from reading Dr. Robert M.Miller's "Imprintng of the Newborn Foal" is, that he started the whole procedure after experiencing a huge difference between foals he'd had to interfere with as a veterinarian, due of health issues and those he hadn't touched, because there had been no need for it.
Whatever science is behind Paul Mc Greevy's research, still they had to deal with what Mother Nature had to offer, which is never the same, every foal, every birth, every dam is different.....
The Arabian foals I've worked with were all born in the stable, touched and handled from the first moment (though not imprinted!), given collostrum from a bottle before they could stand on their feet. This was not my choice, it was the way the owners handled their (expensive) babies.
On the other end of the spectrum are the Italian Maremma weanlings, born in freedom with their dams high in the Appennines, mostly found next morning and if all looked good, never touched until after weaning.
Of course there are huge differences between the 'sensitive' Arabian and the 'robust' Maremma horse, but I can see the effects of the early contact with humans and the deeply rooted trust, encountered with the stable born, early touched foals. There is no science needed to feel the sceptical attitude of the weanlings born in freedom.
As Bud suggests, since we know from the beginning that we'll ask these young horses to interact with the humans that will be part of their lives, why not be part of their world from day one?!
We'll ask them to yield to pressure the rest of their lives, why not start the principles in the early days?
Hope this adds to your position in the course, you're not alone!
Miriam
OK, get ready, this is a long post and has three parts to it! Part 1 is about my experience of imprinting. Part 2 is about Paul McGreevy and Part 3 is about the principles of academic study and how to get round using “non scientific” data.
Part 1
I have very little experience with foals but have has the privilege of working with three foals from the same parents. This is a rare experience if, like me, you are not involved in stud work. While the sample size is not big enough to be considered scientific nor was it in any way done under research conditions, I think you may find it useful. Part 3 will explain how to incorporate such things in your papers.
The first foal was not imprinted. He had been raised in traditional ways by an experienced horsewoman. I was asked to help when he was 7 months old and VERY difficult to handle. The owner said it was the first horse she has ever been scared of. After a few sessions he improved a lot and is now doing well.
I was then given the honour of being able to do my first ever imprint on the second foal – a filly. I was there at the birth and started the imprinting as per Monty's guidelines. The difference was amazing. She is adorable, well mannered, and easy to handle. The owner confirmed the difference (having had many other youngsters besides these two). The third one – a colt - I missed the birth by a few hours (after 2 false alarms!!) but did a 'lesser version' of an imprint a few hours after his birth. He was much better than the first foal, but not as easy as the second one but still great to handle etc. So what thoughts did I have about all this?
If I only has one and two to compare, I may have attributed some of the difference to sex (one male one female) but the third one (male) dis-spelled this somewhat
A result that is not talked about and I did not expect, was that the mare, who the owner confirmed can be very difficult to catch after she is turned out to the field with her foal, allowed me near her in the field with only minimal hesitation. While I was imprinting, she was licking the foal and licking my hands too so we were in effect, both 'imprinting' the foal, - an interesting aspect that needs much more research.
The owner having 'converted' from traditional methods with first foal to “Monty” methods of ongoing handling for foals two and three will undoubtedly have had an impact; it cannot be assigned entirely to the imprinting process however, the slight differences between 2 and 3 can possibly demonstrate the level of impact.
It is rare to have minimal variables for comparison i.e. same owner, same mare, same stallion, 3 foals in 4 years; but this is a basis for good research if done on a bigger scale rather than people spouting opinions.
I feel very lucky to have had this chance but please do not for one minute think I “know what I'm doing”. This is my one and only experience and I was clumsy and floundering at times and I am very grateful to the owner for allowing me to 'experiment'. There are people on here who have stacks and stacks of experience in foaling but I feel my small contribution may offer you something.
The authors of “Evidence Based Horsemanship” are Dr Stephen Peters (“scientist and neuropsychologist”) and Martin Black (a “horseman and clinician with decades of experience”) demonstrate how science and experience can work together. Sadly, when I asked them both (via email) about their thoughts on imprinting, the former didn't answer, the latter replied with two sentences stating it was nonsense and we should leave the foals as nature intended!
Part 2 – Paul McGreevy
To put it bluntly, Paul McGreevy detests the concept of Join Up and is very negative towards Monty's principles where any discussion of the horse's language takes place. If Debbie is reading this she will be able to add more detail. This is such a shame because Paul and Monty share the philosophy of non-violence and how to get the behaviours that you want. However, Paul is adamant about the “scientific approach” to animal training and ow it should be University/theoretically led. Now there's nothing wrong with this per se however I feel it is wrong to dismiss everything else because actually, many people use the “scientific methods” they either don't realise they are doing it, don't know the “correct” name for it, can't explain it, or just haven't got the 'right qualification'. The funny thing is that people tend to forget that Monty has academic qualifications in animal behaviour/welfare from prestigious Universities too! Paul uses a combination of negative reinforcement, positive reinforcement, shaping, operant conditioning, association, and classical (Pavlovian) conditioning and can explain what he is doing and which mehtod he is using at all times because he knows the theory and the language. This video outlines his work https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZsBjRwv04c0 . This is not really much different from Monty. In terms of the overall aim and desired outcome. Ah, I hear people shriek, Monty does not use food!! Well that's not strictly true – Monty says do not feed from the hand; he does not say “never use food”. He is not against rewarding a horse with a bowl of feed for coming to the yard! Hell, I use this all the time with mine, they hear the car, come straight to the yard and I reward them with food thrown on the floor; lot easier than trudging down the field to get them! But I NEVER hand feed. This is association and positive reinforcement working well; we just don't call it these things on a day to day basis outside formal academic settings. Interestingly, in this video, what Paul calls “lunging” is more akin to Parelli circling technique – he is using a Parelli rope too I notice! - rather than the typical understanding of what lunging is (cavesson and long rope etc.).
You will see videos on here by Andrew Maclean; he has worked (Debbie: does he still work with Paul?) with Paul and felt the same but he was able to engage with Monty and recognise that they are not worlds apart after all. These are really good videos and I emailed Andrew to tell him that and he was very gracious in his response. I copied Paul McGreevy into the email but he did not acknowledge it. Monty works with many scientists and specialists to test out his theories.
Arguing over METHOD is the most destructive aspect of animal training – a trap I admit I have fallen into at times! It is the PHILOSOPHY that matters; we should celebrate the similarities not despise the differences. There are things in Paul's videos that I am not keen on but it is not cruel, it is not stressful, and it works for him with no detriment to the horse – so be it. I am learning to “shut my mouth” and not be pedantic over method. I wish the “scientists” could be as open minded the other way. HOWEVER, (and it is a big however) onto my 3rd part.
Part 3- Academic study
While I want everyone to be open minded we must not let things 'run away with us'. Academic study is about science and testing hypotheses. But of course, not everything has been tested, and even if it has, it does not make it 'true'. Paul is responsible for the infamous Join Up research using the remote control car, the result of which he then uses to debunk Join Up. However, I (and others) can argue that the basis of his test was wrong, therefore the outcome is wrong. But that does not mean when writing essays you can glibly say what you like just because of people's experience; this is the stuff of folklore and “old wives tales” and risk massive confirmation bias. For example it is “widely believed because of thousand's of people's testimony and experience” that horses are deliberately playing us up because they are trying to dominate us. We know from scientific study that this is just not true but the belief persists. This is why we have to have an enquiring, scientific approach and why when writing academic essays you must back up your thoughts /views with evidence that supports your views. Otherwise, we may as well just say all horses are descended from Pegasus:-) . But we want to incorporate good work and other people's “scientifically untested” work in our essays right? So how do you get round it in academic language? Well, here are a few phrases that may help you out,
“There is a wealth of anecdotal evidence that suggests.........(whatever you are trying to prove).....however this has not been studied under research conditions.
“The extent of the belief warrants an undertaking of such research.... etc.!”
“In (whoever)'s opinion, …....... i.e. state that it is an opinion, you are not claiming it as fact. If you are talking about your opinion you would say “In the author's opinion....” - but use this with great caution! It's not a licence to spout our views :-)
Phew........I think I've written enough!!! I don't know if any of this is useful to you, I hope it is, and I apologise to all for taking up so much space but you all know me by now!
I am in the same boat as you as being at University, for me Equine Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation and I hate the methods of handling they use to control and force the horses. I already rehabilitate horses at liberty so they have freedom of movement, but chiffney, shambon etc I just cannot agree with and hate how it gives the horse no choice to express themselves. I have refused to handle the horse with some of the 'traditional' ways at University, which has affected my ground handling grades, but still passed lol.
Getting the degree is important to what I need to do in rehabilitating horses, but I do not agree with handling methods. They think I am weird at Uni :/
Foal handling does not have to be done the traditional way, it is invasive and does invoke stress for both the foal and the mares. I have handled foals and trained foals at liberty now since 2013 and a gentle hand has always been my way. If the foal behaves boisterous such as rearing when with me, they get sent away until they show the signs of join up and wanting to come back, only have to do this once for them to understand no rearing around people. Everything else we do completely at liberty based on trust building. Training foals starts soon after they have fully integrated with the herd and in small steps, a little training here and there for just 1 - 2 minutes and every moment we are with her she is learning from us, it is amazing how much they learn and imitate us. Exercise is always with the mum and they learn from the mum too.
One learning session you might like was Raisin imitating sitting on an exercise ball. All that happened was she watched me sit on it. The ball had just been sitting in the field and apart from them sniffing it, it just was a thing in the field. Once Raisin saw me sit on it, she came over and asked me to get off. then did this. https://youtu.be/lRVG8P9X2iA
All the best
Bud
LMSedgwick - the horses are the best teachers, keep watching and learning from them they know who they are and they know who we are, once we show we are willing to work with them and not just tell them all the time what to do, the partnership is formed.
Mel
x