Liberty training, often perceived as a purely gentle and intimate method of working with horses, is a topic surrounded by misconceptions. While it conjures images of a deep, unhindered bond between human and equine, a closer examination reveals that the concept of “true liberty” in training is largely a myth. All forms of training, by definition, impose limitations on a horse’s freedom to act solely on its own will. What is commonly referred to as liberty training typically signifies the absence of traditional equipment like reins and halters, not an absence of control or direction.
The allure of liberty training often stems from its perceived gentleness and the special relationship it suggests between horse and human. However, it’s crucial to understand that all liberty training originates from non-liberty methods. Achieving a reasonable level of performance from a horse, beyond mere basic responses, initially requires techniques that involve some form of control or guidance. Without these foundational steps, training wild horses without any form of contact would be an impossible feat.
Videos showcasing liberty work often depict horses ridden bareback without headgear or performing ground exercises without ropes or halters. Trainers might use whips, flags, or treats to guide the animals, or sometimes rely solely on body language and voice commands. These demonstrations, whether in small arenas or large open spaces, and involving single horses or multiple animals, can range from intricate maneuvers like flying changes to synchronized galloping. The sheer variety of performances often leaves audiences in awe, marveling at the profound bond that must exist for a horse to execute such feats without overt equipment.
One of the most significant positives of liberty work is its ability to expose our training flaws. When mistakes are made in liberty training, they are glaringly obvious to everyone, particularly in the initial stages. As the training progresses, horses may become adept at following patterns and routines, sometimes masking the trainer’s errors. However, when a horse is still learning, even minor missteps by the trainer can quickly lead to the unraveling of the exercise.
Furthermore, liberty training is undeniably fun for the human involved. While it’s debatable whether it’s inherently more enjoyable for horses than traditional training, the enjoyment derived by the handler is a valid reason for pursuing it. After all, working with horses should ideally be a pleasurable experience. An additional, albeit minor, benefit is the reduced wear and tear on equipment and the associated costs. For those who don’t invest in expensive gear, this advantage might be less pronounced.
However, liberty work is not without its considerable downsides. In many observed instances, horses performing liberty exercises do not appear entirely content or well-managed. This observation is true even when some form of equipment is used, and it becomes even more pronounced when no gear is involved.
A primary reason for this can be attributed to the overemphasis on obedience in most training, including liberty work. Traditional training equipment often provides clarity to the horse. When this equipment is absent, two potential issues arise. Firstly, liberty training can lead to a drilling of obedience at the expense of the horse’s overall well-being or “okay-ness.” The inherent nature of liberty work demands a high level of obedience due to the lack of available physical control, often causing trainers to prioritize the movement itself over the horse’s emotional state during the exercise.
The second issue relates to the transparency of flaws in liberty training. While mistakes are evident, the absence of equipment makes correcting a horse’s errors more challenging and often far less subtle. The focus can become a meticulous micro-management of the horse’s physical movements and body shape, with little regard for facilitating a genuine change in the horse’s thought process or emotional response.
The common assertion that “the horse could run away if he didn’t like it” is a misleading simplification. It stems not from understanding a horse’s perspective but from a lack of critical thinking. Our ability to ride and train horses relies on their inherent trainability and a mind malleable enough to accept our direction. This includes the capacity to be convinced that they are just as contained during liberty work as they would be with the harshest bits, spurs, ropes, or fences. Horses are generally compliant and willing to go along with human intentions, which historically enabled their use as working animals and in military applications. They can be taught to feel confined and directed in liberty work just as effectively as when traditional equipment is used to impose our will.
It is important to state that not all liberty training is abusive, just as not all non-liberty training is abusive. However, there is nothing inherently special about liberty training that warrants unquestioning admiration. Poor training practices or riding should not be excused simply because they are performed at liberty. The purpose of liberty work is undermined if it is not held to the same rigorous standards applied to traditional training methods. A truly impressive trainer is one who can elicit a relaxed and balanced trot or canter from a horse, regardless of whether gear is present or absent. This is far more commendable than a trainer who can produce fancy movements, often accompanied by signs of worry and incorrect execution, solely because the horse lacks any equipment for control.
