The Dominance Hierarchy is a scientific term referring to the social interaction within a herd and how leadership is determined.
The word “dominance” infers cruelty. They think that it is cruel to “dominate” a horse, and prefer to think of a “partnership”. Yes, we do want a partnership with the horse. But one of us has to be in charge. One of us must be dominant. This is an animal many times larger than we are, and extremely fast moving and physically strong and if we are not dominant in the horse’s mind, we are in danger.
Dominance means leadership. Now, granted that there are cruel leaders. But there are also kind leaders, and that’s the role we must assume with the horse.
Yes, Hitler, Saddam Hussein, President Assad of Syria, etc. were dominant, and they were also cruel leaders (Tyrants and Dictators). But other leaders, powerfully dominant, were also kind (Love and Empathy). Think of Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King, George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson. Was there a more dominant individual in all human history than Jesus Christ?
So, now that we have made it clear that a leader can be absolutely dominant, but also supremely kind, let’s discuss the way we humans can dominate the horse.
Creatures that live in groups in a natural environment such as wild horses, elephants, wolves, chimpanzees, chickens, dolphins, and human beings, establish their Dominance Hierarchy in very different ways.
Horses do so by controlling the movement of their peers. They control the feet. Why? Probably because the primary defense of the horse is flight. Unlike the other species just named as examples in which flight is an alternate form of defense, for the wild horse flight is the first choice. Horses lack horns or tusks, fangs, or other weapons. For the horse, in its natural grasslands habitat, the best way to survive hungry predators is immediate flight.
Thus, the leader of a mustang band is usually an older mare because she has the experience as to when to run, how far to run, and where to run. She isn’t the strongest or largest or most athletic member of the group, but she constantly reminds them of her authority by using movements and expressions, which cause them to move. They respond by moving and with expressions of submissiveness to her such as lowering their heads and licking and chewing. This simulates grazing or drinking, and that’s when a wild equine is most susceptible to be charged by a predator. That’s when a horse is most vulnerable. Many species signal submission by assuming a position of greatest vulnerability for that specific species.
With these concepts in mind, we can now understand why, as long as the horse has been domesticated, we humans have used control of movement to establish our dominance over it. So we longe them, we propel them around a round pen, we hobble them, we lay them down, we immobilize them, we halter break them, move them in all directions, hitch them in harness next to a well broke horse, pony them from an experienced lead horse and tie them for prolonged periods of time. Movement can be controlled in two ways: By encouraging and directing it, or by preventing it. If we do this with horses, we obtain dominance.
Unfortunately, throughout history, these methods have been too often combined with excessive and usually unnecessary coercion. This includes whipping, spurring, and other methods of inflicting pain, aggressive and threatening language, posture and attitude.
Why? Why do we do this when rare horsemen throughout history have discovered and used and taught gentler, less intimidating, and more humane methods of obtaining dominance and responsiveness from the horse. They won leadership by controlling movement, but avoiding causing unnecessary fear.
Why have their methods not been used by most horseman until the present revolution in horsemanship began in the late 20th century?
The answer is because we are genetically programmed to use force to control our animals. After all, biologically speaking we are a predatory species. For hundreds of thousands of years we (mainly the males) hunted to subsist. Being a tool using species, we were the most effective predator in the world. So, it’s natural for us to use tools to be aggressive and forceful with our domestic animals.
But, we are also a reasoning species. That means we can be taught not to act like a predator when working with horses if we are willing to learn, and if we are attentive students. We can control movement in the horse without causing unnecessary fear. Our goal should always be 100% respect (dominance) but zero fear. The horse, a remarkable adaptable, forgiving, and compliant creature will serve us either way, but which way is more civilized and which celebrates our intelligence and our reasoning power? Which method expresses our primitive qualities and which expresses the most admirable of all human attributes; kindness and intelligence?
Robert M. Miller, DVM
