Laura Doyle posted to Jim Walsh:
JW>  I'm certain between her and my son they
JW> can get the job done. I wonder who trained the first one?
LD> I think the term back then was "breaking" and that's what they did.
        Not necessarily true.  It's very possible the first one
was, indeed, trained.  Since that human (or those humans) didn't
have all the instruments of torture we have at our disposal, it
is highly unlikely that they resorted to the various and sundry
tools we more modern folk have resorted to for 'breaking' a
horse.
LD> I don't want any more broken horses, thank you.  I much prefer trained
LD> ones.
        Before you jump, I agree with you.  A green horse and a
green rider (trainer) can be a deadly combination.  Note
tho...that's only can be...People are capable (not that all of
them do it) of learning things from other people's experience...
and thus, they can learn from books.
        To Mr. Walsh: 3 years is a pitifully short time when it
comes to horses.  Unless in that 3 years your daughter has
handled hundreds of horses at various stages of training, she is
ill prepared to meet the challenge of training a young horse.
Personally, I couldn't recommend it.  If you insist, you should
realize that a horse is nOt like a dog.  Similar, yes, but...
They do not take training in the same way.  Perhaps if you think
about this:  Dogs are carnivores...and they are also fully
domesticated.  Horses are prey...and they are not fully
domesticated.
        I have to think about this a bit.  I've trained both.
There is something distinctly different about training each.
 -- SPEED 1.40 #1540: ... Always remember:  Wherever you go, there you are.
--- Maximus 2.02
---------------