Dominans?
Jag har beslutat mig för att försöka skriva ned min syn på det då väldigt många undrar hur jag ser på det och främst, varför?
Enligt teorin om att dominans existerar så menar man att flocken består utav en ledare som är den ranghögste hästen och får de andra att lyda utan problem. Den består också utav de mindre ranglåga vars uppgift är att bli dominerade?
Man menar också att alla vill vara ledare, vilket är anledningen till att man som människa måste vara ranghög så att inte hästen tar över, men att när hästen blivit tränad (?!) till att bli dominerad så trivs den med det för att de egentligen är ganska lata och gillar att bara följa med…
Jag har en helt annan syn om det. Om det faktiskt hade varit så att flocken består utav en ranghög ledare som får de andra ranglåga hästarna att lyda minst vink, varför skulle dem då leva i flock? Då skulle de väl egentligen vara ranghöga djur som lever enskilt? För till vilken nytta skall ledarhästen dominera de andra? Vad har dem då för nytta?
Nej, det måste handla om att alla hästarna samarbetar. Att alla har en roll och en uppgift.
Ett exempel kan vara spejaren som har till uppgift att upptäcka faror och varna flocken, en annan kan vara försvararen som försvarar flocken mot faror om spejaren "misslyckas" med sin uppgift. Det finns också minnesbärare, omhändertagare, fostrare osv. Nu har alla i flocken en mening och en chans att överleva, men dominansen då? Om det hade funnit dominans så hade det hindrat varje häst i flocken från dess uppgifter och de hade ej klarat att överleva. Man kan ju också se det ganska logiskt, vem dominerar sin vän?
Men vilka dominerar då?
Jo, de rädda och osäkra dominerar, dvs. vi människor.
Vi är rädda att misslyckas, eller ibland helt enkelt rädd för hästen, och därför väljer vi att dominera istället för att ta itu med problemet. För när vi dominerar så får vi våra viljor igenom, vi blir "bäst" och vi känner makt, - tror vi
/Madde
I through in some science now to help you out here, because your thoughts are going in a right direction.. (:
There is a BIG difference between nowadays domesticated horse herds and wild horses. Let's take wild horses first: wild horses had no leaders in the herd (no dominance), their herds consisted of 5-6 horses at tops and there were 1 stallion with his 3-4 mares and some yearlings (who were about to leave in a year or so...). The stallion was the protector and he was the one who kept the herd together, chased the young ones away when the time was right and didn't let any other stallion to mate with his mares. There was never an argument or dominance issues over the food (pecking order?) because there was an abundance of food! There was no "only a haybale a day" policy...everybody could eat as much as they liked to and they also had an abundance on ROOM, total freedom. The herds were formed based on LIKING...the horses that LIKED eachother, formed a herd. If someone who they didn't like tryed to join the herd, they chased her away and she found another herd - the place where she was liked. New herds formed quite early in ones life...as in they formed of young stallions and young mares and they were life-long herds with life-long trust and friendship. No dominance whatsoever. When one of the mares went first and others followed then it was nothing more than "i thought it would be nice to go that way" or "I think it safer there" and the herd was always keeping together. Now..the HUGE wild horse herds (mustangs and such) people are aware about were only the SUM of a lot of small herds. Small herds came together to form a big herd (which was actually not a herd but just a lot of horses all together)when there was a threat or danger - it is easier to be protected in a big herd. The foals were always kept in the middle of this herd, never on the edge. And if you see a video or photos of these kind of big herds, you can actually see, how all the mares in this "herd" are following ONLY to their own stallion. If a stallion is chasing his mares in one direction, the mares that do not belong to him, do not move and he doesn't care about them either, because they are strangers to him.
And now we come to domesticated horses. As I said..a conflict was a rare case in wild horses....and that is because they had long-time friendships, self-choosen herds, abundance of room and water and food and their own protector, the stallion. With domesticated horses, the situation, as you can imagine, is quite different. They do NOT have an abundance of room and food -source of conflict, immediatly. Also, the horses are put together by humans and they are forced to live together, even if they don't like wach other. When one is lucky, she gets horses she lieks around her, when one is not so lucky, she gets horses she can stay neutral with and when is extremly unlucky, she doesn't like other horses around her or they don't like him. Added to that tension, no life-long friendships can be formed really, because people tend to move their horses from one herd to another. And the pain of leaving a good friend behind can be devastating. Added to that: there are geldings in herds now - nothing that never excisted in wild horse herds and their role is....hazy. No one really knows what is their role and they themselves might even not know either. Plus ususally there is no stallions (no protector and noone to keep the herd together and look after the mares) in a mare-herd...and pore stallions, the ones who are the most caring and value the sense of family the most, are kept sepparately. So in this domesticated situation, of course, conflicts are in order. And even dominance...but not in a "i am dominant over you" but rather in a "i don't like you, i don't want you here, this is my food" kind of way..which is very unnatural to a horse, that is actually the most peace-loving creature ever created. And when you "notice" a leader in a herd...and older mare maybe? It is usually just someone who knows her way around in this world and who has gained the trust of some other horses with her confident behaviour, the so-called herd "leader" is someone other horses trust. So yeah......that is what is scientifically proven and came out of years and years of watching wild horse-herds and domesticated horses. Makes you think....
Thanks for an interesting comment! :)I agree with you on most things. Our domesticated horses are in "control" of humans, that we determine which horses are in a herd, what and how often they should eat and things like that. We often create an imbalance in the herd, unfortunately, but by trying to give them such a natural home as possible, both pasture, food and horses in the herd, can the horses come into balance! Hmm usually it is a defender who want to eat first, this is the horse that needs the food first because he/she must defend the other horses. In a wild horse herd had all been able to eat at the same time when they do not have to share one ball. Of course there is a difference between a wild and a tame herd, but I would still like to say that there is no hierarchy in the flock, but all horses are different tasks(?). If you want to and have the time so please read this, it explains it better: http://prancing.blogg.se/2011/july/rang.html
The same facts can tell different people different things. One video may be a "proof" of domians / rank , and for others can the same video be a proof that dominance / rank does not exist. So I can not say that I'm right but this is my belief and experience. The main thing is to try to listen to the horse and make the best of it! :)
I agree...that is what I said...that there is no hierarchy, only roles. (:
But I can't agree with "defender eats first". In wild horse herds the defender tries the food first (few bites), same with water (few sips) and then steps back and lets everyone else eat. The defender makes sure it is safe to drink/eat and then steps back..so actually not eating first... (:
But my knowledge of this does not come from a video...it comes from a person who has spent her life watching wild horse herds and working with domesticated horses in a natural way... But I agree..people tend to see what they WANT to see... that is true. And another thing people tend to do is to put human emotions and behavior (such as dominans) on horses.
