Bonjour !
Si tu apprends à un cheval à baisser la tête par une demande/pression d'une rêne, alors le cheval peut baisser sa tête sans utiliser son reflexe d'opposition (en utilisant le même procede que lors du travail à une rêne décrit dans ce forum).
Mais si tu veux que ton cheval baisse la tête jusqu'au sol, alors (selon John Lyons) tu dois utiliser son reflexe d'opposition au début de l'apprentissage, et d'ailleurs cela me gêne profondément, car tu lui apprends à tirer et donc je tire, car il faut être deux pour tirer; Voici le texte en anglais : "Add more pressure to the rein. The horse will learn to "pull". When pressure is added and the horse learns to pull, you are turning the cue into a demand cue". (JL)
Ici encore : "The action of taking the head down will be a slight pulling action away from the give. The horse will pull against the pressure from the rein and pull down towards the ground".
JL parle aussi d'une action de rêne qui à la fin (plus de pression) agace le cheval ("annoy the horse") de telle sorte que le cheval s'appui sur le mors ("Will really pull on the bit")
A la lecture de cette lesson, et uniquement dans ce cadre là, à savoir demander au cheval de baisser sa tête, le cheval apprend à répondre à une augmentation rapide de pression en baissant (presque immédiatement) sa tête au sol.
Pourquoi cette demande ? L'on dit quand un cheval a la tête basse il est décontracté (le cheval qui broute, ou qui se repose). Les dernieres recherches ne permettent pas d'affirmer qu'un cheval ayant la tête basse est décontracté.
"The use of head lowering in horses as a method of inducing calmness". 75
Warren-Smith AK and McGreevy PD
Abstract
Globally, millions of horses are used for a range of purposes by humans with
varying levels of skill in horse handling. Inappropriate handling techniques,
especially those that cause flight responses or conflict behaviour, account for
much of the wastage rates among horses as well as the majority of the deaths
and injuries among handlers. In contrast, some techniques help to calm horses
and thus facilitate training. Anecdotal evidence suggests that one such
technique is lowering the height of a horse’s head position. To determine the
effect of head lowering, 20 horses were paired for age, sex and breed before
one from each pair was allocated to Group 1 (treatment group: stimulus for head
lowering applied during testing period) and the other placed into Group 2 (control
group: no experimental stimulus applied during testing period). The stimulus for
head lowering was downward pressure on the headcollar via the lead rope until
the horse lowered its head such that its lips were approximately at mid-cannon
height; as soon as this occurred the pressure was released. The testing period
was 15 consecutive minutes divided into three 5-minute phases: Phase 1, in
which neither group had experimental stimuli applied; Phase 2, in which Group 1
had the stimulus for head lowering applied and Group 2 had no stimuli applied;
and Phase 3 that repeated the Phase 1 treatment. Behavioural responses of the
head, neck and legs and the physiological responses of heart rate and heart rate
variability were measured and analysed with one-way analysis of covariance.
There were no significant differences between groups with any of the other
responses measured, except for sniffing the ground (P=0.039), probably due to
the nature of the treatment. These results indicate that, under these conditions,
head lowering does not result in increased calmness in horses.
Introduction
Large numbers of horses are used worldwide for a range of leisure, working and
competitive activities (Hobbs et al., 1994; Paix, 1999; Gordon, 2001). Training
horses is one of the most important aspects (Marinier et al., 1988) of the humanhorse
relationship, but inappropriate training techniques result in unnecessary
wastage of both horses (Ödberg and Bouissou, 1999) and humans (e.g. Cripps,
2000). Training problems result in horses exhibiting conflict behaviour which
ultimately has welfare implications for the horse (McLean, 2004). This could be
overcome by more appropriate training methods (Mills, 1998; Rushen et al.,
1999) which could lead to calmness in the horse (McLean, 2004). Anecdotal
evidence suggests that lowering the height of the horse’s head results in calming
the horse. This is supported by some associated observations that relate to
postural tonus in the horse (Kiley-Worthington, 1987). Specifically, Waring
(2003) and McGreevy (2004) concur that a lowered head position is the opposite
of the main signal of alertness, which is that of the head raised.
There are a number of possible reasons why head lowering may induce
calmness. It can significantly decrease mean arterial blood pressure (Parry et
al., 1980); it replicates the position of resting (Feist and McCullough, 1976),
grazing (Harman et al., 1999) and it enables the horse to have the binocular field
of vision directed towards the ground and the lateral monocular fields in position
to scan the lateral horizon (Harman et al., 1999). Hall et al. (2003) found that
horses’ performance in a visual discrimination trial was improved when the head
was lowered and the stimulus presented at ground level compared to
presentation of the stimulus at a height of 70 cm. The horses in this trial were
reinforced for a correct choice by being given a food reward. For some
commentators, lowering of the head is regarded as a sign of submission
(Sighieri et al., 2003) along with licking lips and chewing (Miller, 1995).
However, these behavioural responses have not been recorded in scientific
literature (Goodwin, 1999) as measures of calmness, whereas increases in heart
rate and heart rate variability have been reported to be physiological measures
of distress (Bachman et al., 2003).
Discussion
The horses that underwent head lowering were more likely to sniff the ground.
This could be attributed to the nature of the treatment whereby these horses had
their muzzles closer to the ground and therefore, since olfactory stimuli on the
ground would have been closer, the likelihood of sniffing as an opportunistic
behaviour would have increased (Hall et al., 2003).
Heart rate and heart rate variability did not differ between treatments, indicating
that the horses were not calmed by the use of head lowering. Parry et al. (1980)
found that lowering the height of a horse’s head significantly reduced mean
arterial blood pressure. The horse’s heads were held in position using halter
pressure and the horses were also given food rewards to keep their heads in
position. Unfortunately, Parry et al. (1980) did not measure heart rate or
behavioural responses as we did in this study. Perhaps the influence of giving
food rewards had some influence on the mean arterial blood pressure.
Likewise, the horses in this trial showed no increase in licking and chewing in
association with head lowering. As we were unable to achieve an objective
measure of calmness in this trial, we cannot deduce that head lowering induces
calmness, or that licking and chewing are signs of calmness. Perhaps the
licking and chewing we observed here could be indicative of anticipation of food
(Houpt et al., 1978), or being in a vulnerable position such as when grazing
(Miller, 1995; Sighieri et al., 2003).
Conclusion
It cannot be concluded that, under the experimental conditions used in this
study, head lowering resulted in calmness in horses, nor that licking lips and
chewing are signs of calmness, or are associated with head lowering. However,
it is possible that different results would be achieved under different conditions,
e.g. when a horse is exhibiting postural tonus prior to the application of head
lowering techniques.
Et plus recemment:
Anecdotally, head lowering in horses has been proposed an indicator of calmness or
submission. To investigate the effects of head lowering, the current study used four groups of
horses. Groups 1 and 2 were held still while their pre-test heart rates were recorded. Then
Group 1 was simply held without the application of head lowering while Group 2 had
repeated stimuli for head lowering applied as required for a five minute period. Groups 3 and
4 also had their pre-test heart rates recorded but were then subjected to artificial arousal until
their heart rates exceeded 100 bpm. Immediately after this arousal group 3 had no head
lowering applied while Group 4 had the stimulus for head lowering applied for a five minute
period. Heart rates were recorded continuously during testing and all behavioural responses
were recorded on video for subsequent analysis. Repeated measures analysis showed that
heart rate was not different between Groups 1 and 2 (P=0.538) or Groups 3 and 4 (P=0.709)
for any of these time periods. The horses in Group 1 were most likely to exhibit licking and
chewing (P=0.017). There were no differences between Groups 3 and 4 in licking and
chewing (P=0.439). In Groups 2 and 4, significantly more stimuli were required to maintain
the horses’ heads in the lowered position during the first 30 s compared with any other
periods measured (P=0.012 and P<0.001, respectively). These results indicate that head
lowering did not influence the heart rate of the horses whether aroused or not and that the
responses of licking and chewing were not associated with head lowering.
Bonne lecture
@+
Eric
Accueil 
.... mais très vite.