Redefining “Natural” in Horsemanship: Are We Really Training Without Force?

Natural horsemanship. The phrase brings to mind images of quiet connection, harmony, and partnership—a horse that willingly engages, moves, and responds with enthusiasm and trust. For many of us, natural horsemanship represented a shift away from outdated methods of "breaking", control, dominance, and force. But somewhere along the way, the meaning of “natural” became blurred. In today’s world, what’s marketed as natural horsemanship doesn’t always reflect the true essence of what it should mean to connect with horses in a respectful, empathetic, and consent-based way.

As someone who deeply values the bond between horse and human, I want to start this conversation by saying that I have a great deal of respect for the many different approaches to horsemanship. Techniques like those used in natural horsemanship have helped countless people connect with their horses in meaningful ways, and I believe there is no 'one-size-fits-all' method that suits every horse or handler. My aim here isn’t to label any method as 'bad' or 'harmful,' but rather to explore a different avenue of connection—one that emphasises consent, mutual respect, and a sensitivity to the subtleties of energy and emotion in our interactions with horses.

In sharing these thoughts, I hope to spark a conversation about the complexities of horse training and partnership. True connection, in my view, is about more than achieving compliance; it’s about building a relationship that honours the horse’s autonomy and comfort. I invite you to read on with an open mind and to share your own experiences and perspectives on what it means to connect authentically with these incredible beings.

The Roots of Natural Horsemanship

Natural horsemanship emerged as an alternative to traditional “breaking” methods, focusing instead on building trust and understanding. The principles aimed to create a partnership between horse and rider that honoured the horse’s autonomy and their natural instincts. Early pioneers of this philosophy, such as Tom Dorrance and Ray Hunt, emphasised understanding the horse’s perspective, moving at the horse’s pace, and cultivating a relationship based on mutual respect.

However, as natural horsemanship gained popularity, its methods began to evolve—and sometimes stray from its founding ideals. With influential trainers such as Pat Parelli, Monty Roberts, and the Australian trainers Dan James and Dan Steers of Double Dan Horsemanship, we’ve seen the term “natural” be applied to methods that, upon closer inspection, can still involve a certain level of force, coercion, or emotional pressure.

---

💔

When “Natural” Becomes a Brand

In the hands of trainers such as Parelli, Roberts, and Double Dan Horsemanship, natural horsemanship has developed into a highly commercialised industry, filled with clinics, books, videos, and branded training tools. While there is much we can learn from each of these trainers, it’s important to question whether their methods truly align with the spirit of natural horsemanship.

For example, Pat Parelli’s approach often involves tools like the “carrot stick,” marketed as a gentle alternative to a whip. While the carrot stick may not seem aggressive, it can easily be used to apply significant pressure, sometimes leading horses to respond out of a sense of avoidance rather than genuine willingness. The stick, which is intended to signal and guide, can quickly become a tool of force when used improperly or with excessive pressure. There are also the widely known "seven games," a series of groundwork exercises designed to improve communication and obedience. These games can help foster a sense of play and interaction, but some critiques argue that they can lean heavily on pressure and control. For example, the "driving game" uses escalating pressure to encourage the horse to move away, which can feel coercive to the horse, particularly when repeated with intensity. Although it’s marketed as natural, this approach can leave the horse feeling more controlled than connected, potentially affecting their trust.

Similarly, Monty Roberts’ technique of “Join-Up” is widely celebrated for its ability to create a bond between horse and human, often with the horse eventually choosing to “join” the handler in the round pen. However, it’s worth examining the method closely. Join-Up involves the horse being “sent away” in the pen until they begin showing signs of submission, such as licking their lips or lowering their head. The handler then allows the horse to join them in a display of apparent acceptance. But is the horse’s choice to join truly free? Or is it influenced by an understanding that they’re unable to leave the space?

Dan James and Dan Steers of Double Dan Horsemanship are another prominent example. Known for their focus on "softness" and a more flexible approach to training. their methods still rely on tools like halters, ropes, and flag whips, which, while not inherently harmful, are used in ways that can increase a horse’s sense of pressure. This is particularly relevant when used on horses that may already be anxious or insecure, as these tools can inadvertently heighten the horse’s stress rather than alleviate it. Despite being marketed as natural, these techniques may miss the true essence of partnership when they prioritise compliance over connection.

The Subtle Forms of Force

One of the challenges in recognising force within natural horsemanship is that it can appear so subtle. Pressure-release techniques, for example, are commonly used to encourage desired behaviours. While this method can be effective and gentle, it can also lead to compliance rather than genuine connection if overused or used without attentiveness to the horse’s comfort and consent.

Force can also take the form of emotional pressure, as in situations where a horse is expected to "submit" or display certain submissive behaviours before being rewarded. While not overtly aggressive, these expectations can create an environment where the horse feels pressured to act a certain way to gain approval, leading them to suppress their natural reactions. Over time, this can erode the trust that natural horsemanship aims to build, as the horse may no longer feel safe expressing genuine emotions or boundaries.

The Role of Tools in Subtle Force

Another subtle form of force is the use of certain tools that, while marketed as "gentle," can be used in ways that compromise the horse's comfort. For example, a rope halter or flag whip may be seen as harmless, but when applied with repeated pressure or when used to reinforce submission, they can create stress and discomfort for the horse. This may cause the horse to respond out of habit or anxiety rather than true willingness and understanding.

---

True Partnership: What "Natural" Could Really Mean

In its purest form, natural horsemanship should be about genuine partnership—meeting the horse where they are emotionally and physically, and building a relationship based on mutual respect. This involves more than pressure and release; it requires patience, empathy, and, most importantly, consent.

For example, Equine Attunement or energy-based approaches focus less on teaching obedience and more on aligning with the horse’s natural rhythms. This can mean working with a horse’s emotions, giving them the space to express discomfort or boundaries, and fostering an environment where they feel safe enough to engage on their own terms.

True natural horsemanship could mean moving away from any approach that feels transactional—training based on an "if you do this, I’ll reward you" structure—and instead nurturing an environment that is reciprocal, respectful, and gentle.

Moving Towards Consent-Based Horsemanship

As lovers of horses, I feel that we have a responsibility to critically examine the methods we use and advocate for. Horses are incredibly perceptive creatures, sensitive to both physical, emotional and even spiritual cues. They deserve training that honours this sensitivity rather than taking advantage of it.

When natural horsemanship truly honours the horse’s comfort, boundaries, and unique personality, we can create an environment that prioritises trust over training outcomes. This shift allows for a deeper, more authentic bond—one where both horse and human are empowered and connected in a meaningful way.

If we’re truly committed to natural horsemanship, perhaps it’s time to rethink what "natural" means. Is it enough for a method to appear gentle, or should it genuinely prioritise the horse’s entire well-being over the need for quick results?

I feel it is important that as many of us as possible are moving towards a horsemanship that respects the horse’s spirit as much as their body—where partnership means mutual respect, and connection comes from patience, not pressure. Only then can we claim to be truly practicing a form of horsemanship that is as natural as it is kind.

Trust can be built, authentically

Releasing Judgement: Acknowledging the Journey

It’s important to approach the discussion of natural horsemanship with empathy and understanding, not judgement. These methods, while sometimes controversial, have their place and can be incredibly effective when used thoughtfully and with the horse’s welfare at heart. I’ll be the first to admit that I’ve used these techniques myself. Early in my journey, I didn’t always use them as effectively or compassionately as I strive to now. It’s part of the learning curve—one that I think many horse owners experience. We do what we know, until we know better.

The tools and methods associated with natural horsemanship, such as rope halters or pressure-release techniques, are not inherently harmful. In fact, they can be fantastic guides for horses when applied with care and intention. For instance, I use a rope halter with all my horses and even ride in them. However, the key lies in how these tools are used.

I ensure that my use of the halter is as soft as possible, applying only the lightest amount of pressure necessary to elicit a response. Over time, my horses have come to follow the feel of the halter—not because of fear or excessive pressure, but because of the consistency in my softness and the clarity of my cues. The result is a mutual understanding built on trust, not force.

Acknowledging this evolution in my own practice helps me release judgement—not just of others who use these methods, but also of my own past mistakes. Every horse and handler is on their own unique journey, and what truly matters is our willingness to reflect, learn, and strive for better communication and connection.

The journey with horses is always evolving, and so should our understanding of the tools we use. When applied with respect, empathy, and a focus on the horse’s experience, these methods can become valuable pathways to deeper trust and harmony.

There really is no easy or quick process fixes here. Truly natural horsemanship requires introspection, patience, and the willingness to see each horse as a unique individual. When we put connection before compliance, we open up a space for horses to willingly join us on this journey. And isn’t that what we’re all hoping for?

With love,

Jess 🐴