Feed on

lyo-windmillDuring the evening of Sunday, 15 September, Klaus Ferdinand Hempfling’s remaining seven one-year students sent me a public letter through the comments section of this blog. It is a letter which challenges some of the most fundamental principles and values which I have come to espouse through some of the developments that I have recorded in this blog. It is also a letter that is highly critical of some of the statements which I have made in this blog. Accordingly, I am replying to this letter in the form of a special post on this blog.


Hempfling’s one-year students’ letter

Letter for Andrew

It’s always easy not to live your own life but instead to criticize the massive and therefore publicly exposed life of someone else.  We have personally experienced KFH for at least two years and we can all only say about your blog, that nothing of this has anything to do with the reality of this man and his teachings.

This man will certainly be mentioned in history, because of the things he has accomplished through his own massively hard work and in spite of resistance from people like you.

It would show good character, if you would at least keep your hands off everything he is doing. But instead it seems you take all you can get out of him and his accomplishments for free, just as you please, and in the same breath you write one negative thing after the other.

One thing still needs to be said: what if you, at the end of your life conclude, that you were simply mistaken? That you have spent so much time and so much effort in your life doing everything possible to really hurt one of the greatest horse people and philosophers in every way you could. What then? Where then is your own time and your own life?

Your words emanate for us only one single desire: only once to be like this man whom you are disgusted by so much. Just once, one single time to be so great, so honest, so authentic, so strong, so caring, so joyful and so respected.

Inner and outer beauty has always stood in contrast to the people who are not able to accomplish anything on their own, which define themselves only by trying with all means to destroy what other people accomplished.

Isn’t it so that you once wanted something from Klaus but didn’t get it in the way that you thought? As well known, the fruits, which are hanging too high, do in our imagination quickly get very sour. Even if it does not happen now – Time will enlighten dark activities.

It’s never too late to take on better ideas and it’s never too late to admit a mistake and to turn towards life anew.

Stop with your public guessing about Klaus, the School and us.

Stop writing about Klaus, the School and us.

KFH One-Year-School students: Vera, Nanda, Karina, Cecile, Kate, Klaudia and Jo


My reply

Dear Vera, Nanda, Karina, Cecile, Kate, Klaudia and Jo

Despite the tone and tenor of your letter, I welcome your decision to send it and in so doing to take the initiative to engage in direct contact with me in a public forum such as this. You have obviously spent a great deal of time reading what I have written and have made an effort to respond to it in the midst of your busy study schedule. I am truly appreciative of this.

The tone of your letter is hostile, accusatory and peremptory. You start and end it without a salutation or friendly greeting. I look at this and wonder what response you were seeking to elicit by adopting such an approach.

Eye-witnesses report that one of the lessons taught by Hempfling to his Compact Schooling I students in 2010, a course which at least two of you attended together with Vicki, focused on preparations for communication with other people. Are you aware of what you are about to say before you say it and the response which it may elicit? Did you actually consider this before you wrote your letter to me?

My initial response was to reply to your letter with silence but then I read it again and was struck by a number of factors which suggested that a written reply would be more appropriate, one which should occur in the public forum that you have chosen: this blog.


The nature of your letter

So what are the factors that I refer to? In the first place, I am struck by the fact that you have sent me a letter which only deals with you in the last two sentences, and then only as an addendum to another person and organisation.

Secondly, I notice that your letter is predominantly concerned with what you perceive to be an attack by me against that other person and organisation rather than yourselves.

Thirdly, that person and organisation are Klaus Ferdinand Hempfling and his Akedah International school.

Fourthly, you are highly critical of me and not only utterly uncritical of Hempfling but describe him in terms usually reserved for a distinguished hero: ‘one of the greatest horse people and philosophers’ and ‘so great, so honest, so authentic, so strong, so caring, so joyful and so respected’.

Fifthly, I note that several turns of phrase are employed in your letter which are distinctly reminiscent of the style of English that is so typical of the flowery prose which is so frequently used by Hempfling himself.

Sixthly, I am aware that you have chosen to send me this letter in a public forum from Hempfling’s school, where you are currently studying, and I am also aware that no communications written about or on behalf of Hempfling normally leave the latter or his school for publication in the public domain without his permission.

As such, I believe that there are eminently reasonable grounds for me to conclude that yours is a letter which, if not written in part by Hempfling, has been drawn up and sent on his behalf in your capacity as his utterly loyal, unquestioning followers but with his consent, defending him and his interests but you only in so far as you are attending his school as his faithful students.


Your claims and accusations

Accordingly, I shall address you in the role that you have chosen for yourselves: loyal, unquestioning followers of the man you clearly acknowledge as master: Klaus Ferdinand Hempfling.

You start by stating that no part of this blog ‘has anything to do with the reality of this man and his teachings’ but in the same breath you tell me that ‘you take all you can get out of him and his accomplishments for free, just as you please’. These positions seem to be irreconcilable with each other. Perhaps you are confused as to which, if either, applies.

You claim that I once wanted something from Hempfling. Yes, it is true that I once wanted to attend the same course at Hempfling’s school which you are about to complete. I entered into an agreement with him for this purpose, in accordance with which I undertook to pay him a large sum of money and he promised to teach me in return. I was prepared to keep my side of the bargain but was Hempfling willing to keep his promise? The fact that I am here and you are there speaks for itself.

You contend that I taken things from Hempfling for free. Let me tell you that I have paid for everything that I have learned from him except where the relevant information has been offered freely by the man himself, any of his accredited coaches or anyone who has learned from him in the capacity of a student and/or an assistant. I have paid for his books, his DVDs and any paid publication or forum in which articles by or about him have appeared.

The Hempfling video in which Jasmijn Wauters and Jo Ross appear


The ‘negative things’

In the same breath you accuse me of publishing ‘negative things’ about Hempfling in this blog. Let us examine who is responsible for those negative things – your master, me or anyone else – as I run through the main ones that I have covered in this blog:

  1. Vicki and I were denied entry into the one-year course which you are about to complete, because we refused to pay your master more than we had agreed to. Was I responsible for your master’s actions in this respect or was he?
  2. after Vicki and I were denied entry into the one-year course, your master invited us to his home in Denmark to start afresh and find a solution which would enable us to attend his school. We dropped everything and drove from the Netherlands to Denmark to do so, only to find that he was absolutely not interested in any solution but was more preoccupied with securing my submission to his will. Was I responsible for your master’s actions in this respect or was he?
  3. for a long period of time your master refused to refund my deposit of thousands of euros in accordance with his own general terms and conditions, finally doing so only after lengthy proceedings through the European Union’s European Consumer Centre, when I threatened to turn to the courts to sue him not only for the refund of that deposit but for compensation based on breach of contract. Was I responsible for your master’s actions in this respect or was he?
  4. some time after your master’s one-year course started, I discovered a German woman called Sigrid Kreile, who had spent some time in a sect in Catalonia, Spain, earlier this century and had suffered psychological abuse and financial loss in her efforts to escape from it. She wrote a book about her experiences called Im Bannkreis des Pferdeschamanen [Under the Spell of the Horse Shaman] which was published in 2005 (see my post entitled Snippets Germane to Germany) and can be ordered here.. The leader of that sect was subsequently identified in the public domain as your master by various individuals, including one journalist and two psychologists. Was I responsible for your master’s actions in this respect or was he?
  5. your master promised to teach no more than 10 students at a time as part of his one-year course but grossly exceeded that number by combining it with other courses during the period from September to November 2011, in September 2012 and again this year during his summer academy, which is now drawing to a close. Was I responsible for your master’s actions in this respect or was he?
  6. your master promised the one-year students free accommodation as advertised by him but chopped and changed that accommodation a number of times both before and during the course. Was I responsible for your master’s actions in this respect or was he?
  7. the majority of the horses that started the one-year course with you are no longer with you. One of those was Karina’s young gelding, Cody, with whom your master failed to achieve a magical connection and whom Nanda later inexplicably wrote that she feared him (see my post entitled Breaking the Cycle of Chaos. You know what happened to Cody and so do I. Was I responsible for your actions and those of your master in this respect and, if not, who was?
  8. 30% of the students who started your one-year course have dropped out. Am I responsible for this?
  9. your master gave you a promise in his advertising materials for his one-year course that you would have the opportunity to qualify as a body awareness and/or horse practitioner. The latter qualification (horse practitioner) is evidently no longer available. Am I responsible for your master’s actions in this respect or is he?
  10. about seven and a half months into your one-year course one of your fellow students, Jasmijn Wauters, left your master’s school, abandoning the dream that had taken her there and running the risk of losing the fee she had paid for the remainder of the course which she missed in accordance with Akedah’s general terms and conditions. I ask myself how much pressure she must have felt was being brought to bear on her to have taken such drastic action and risked such loss. Was I responsible for this and, if not, who was?
  11. earlier this year Cecile, acting on behalf of your master’s school, which you defend so passionately, contacted an equestrian centre where your former fellow student, Jasmijn Wauters, was scheduled to give a number of courses and effectively tried to have those courses cancelled. The excuse was lame: Jasmijn had mentioned that she had studied with your master for seven months in her advertising materials. Let us put this into perspective. Not only did Jasmijn study with your master for more than seven months, she was also the only student amongst you who worked with three different stallions while studying with your master, and was the only one amongst you whom your master evidently felt was good enough to feature in one of his YouTube videos while training a stallion (I am referring to training and not chasing a stallion away from a mare, which is what you did in the same video, Jo). Through Cecile your master’s school endeavoured to prevent Jasmijn from doing part of the work she performs in order to earn a living. Was I responsible for this or was it Cecile, your master and/or his Akedah school?
  12. your master relies on videos, images, stories and books depicting him as an excellent horseman to entice people to attend his courses, which until quite recently were predominantly geared towards teaching them body and spiritual awareness rather than learn how to interact with horses in the way that your master does. Am I responsible for this discrepancy or is your master?
  13. not too long ago your master had new terms and conditions drawn up to govern the services which his Akedah school offers. They are strongly loaded in his and his school’s favour and are potentially highly prejudicial to his students. Am I responsible for your master’s actions in this respect or is he?

Pferdeschamane Hempfling

So I could go on, if I were to write more about your master and his school in this blog. And each time I would be able to ask you whether I am responsible for your master’s actions or whether he is.


Seeking the external or the ‘inner guru’

Here I should stop to say that what I present as conjecture or speculation in my writings is precisely that. Equally, what I present as fact is not ‘guesswork’ as you assert. Rather it is based on personal, frequently corroborated experience, written or other hard evidence, the testimony of eye witnesses or a combination thereof.

You claim that I want to be like this man, your master. After reading the numerous points that I have just mentioned, do you honestly believe that I seek to be like your master? And if I tell you that what I have mentioned is just the tip of the iceberg of what I know, do you really believe that I want to be like him ‘just once, one single time’?

If there was a single horseman whom I would like to resemble it would be a quietly spoken, unassuming man who lives with his wife and a small herd of horses in a rural area of the French-speaking state of Quebec in Canada. There this gentle man came to horses quite late in his life (at 37 years of age to be precise) but within the space of a decade he had managed to develop such a close relationship with horses that he was able to teach them collection on the ground using nothing more than a cordeo (neck ring) and a twig. He cares for his herd of horses in accordance with holistic principles and interacts with and trains them in the herd at liberty or only on a cordeo. His horses are free to join in the interaction or leave when they choose, as they are not confined by a small picadero (square version of a round pen) such as that used by Hempfling, a round yard such as that used by Parelli and other so-called ‘ natural horsemanship’ trainers, or even a large manège such as that used by Nevzorov. This is a man who empathises with horses and humans, who empowers them, who is enlightened in his approach to them, and who is trustworthy. Is he perfect? No. But I would dearly prefer my shortcomings to occur at the level that is his. The man’s name is Michael Bevilacqua and he is so without ego, that he eschews the limelight and refuses to publish his profile on prominent websites, such as YouTube and Facebook.

Michael Bevilacqua and friend enjoying a good read

Michael Bevilacqua and friend enjoying a good read

Yes, if there was a single horse person whom I would very much want to be like, it would be Michael Bevilacqua but I do not want this and there is a very good reason for it. If I have learned anything from your master and in spite of him, it is that I need to become not like him or anyone else but like myself, my true authentic self. This is the essence of your master’s teachings, for it is only then that I will have a chance of becoming a human whom a horse seeks to be with.

You suggest that I only find negative things to write about your master. This is not true. If you read my writings and not merely scan them for what you believe to be ‘negative things’ about your master, you will know that the positive things that I have written about your master far outweigh any mention of ‘negative’ actions on the part of him and his school about which I have reported but for which, as I have shown above, I am not responsible. I do not doubt that your master is capable of being ‘so great, so honest, so authentic, so strong, so caring, so joyful and so respected’. All of us are capable of this. For most of us, including your master, it is a constant struggle to allow this capability to materialise and this is why I feel that I can identify with him more readily than with Michael Bevilacqua, to whom such qualities seem to come more naturally than to Hempfling or myself.


Acknowledgement of Hempfling’s role

Your master has played and continues to play a major role in helping people rediscover their authenticity and, in so doing, become humans whom a horse seeks to be with. This in turn is of major benefit to the horses those people encounter in their lives. It is a role which has had a major impact on my life, first in providing me with the inspiration – through his magical relationship with his chestnut gelding, Janosch – which really set me off on this journey that started in 2007, and since then in what I have learned from him through the various avenues that I have mentioned above. And it is a role which I hope he will continue to play through his various printed and audio-visual publications, as well as his online presence.

Jasmijn and Stanley, the first of three stallions which she took to Hempfling’s one-year course.


Rediscovering your authentic self

When you look at yourself in the mirror each morning as you count down to the close of your one-year course at the end of this week, do you really see your authentic self or do you see your master peering over your shoulder urging you to do all that pleases him and to avoid all that displeases him, rather than what would bring you closer to your authentic self? And if you do see your master in the mirror, perhaps it is time – as you leave your master’s school – for you to ask yourself whether you should not be doing what he preaches rather than what he wants. It is eminently possible for you to strike out on your own, and like those who have gone before you and are already doing so – yes, people like Noora Enqvist and your former fellow student, Jasmijn Wauters – draw and build on what you have learned from Hempfling. And if you do this, you will still be able to claim in your publicity materials that you have spent a year studying with the great Hempfling over a period of two years, for this is true and no one – not even the man whom you currently treat and praise as a perfect master – can take this away from you or deny your legal right to publicly acknowledge your teacher, whether he supports you or not.

Alternatively, you may choose to continue to serve as your master’s loyal, unquestioning followers. Either way it is your choice and whatever you choose to do, I respect your choice and sincerely wish every single one of you the very best. May you eventually find within yourself the ability to become the kind of human a horse seeks to be with. I would like to leave you with the following words of wisdom:

Ironically, taking time to observe and reflect instead of seeking answers outside of ourselves may bring us much closer to ourselves, horses, nature and what we want, than we ever imagined possible. In the world that we live, it can be one of the most difficult journeys to pursue. That fragile, subdued flame within our hearts struggles against the oppressive, surrounding norms. This is your chance to bring it back to life.

Michael Bevilacqua, Beyond the Dream Horse, p. 8

Take care and be well, all of you, including your master!





17 Responses to “Reply to Hempfling’s One-year Students”

  1. Paulette says:

    Negativity breeds negativity. It is a viscous cycle where no one wins.

    People want to be inspired. In my own work, there is so much that I could criticise, but this approach inspires no-one. Perhaps it is time to let go and move on.

    There will always be people that want to read articles like this, but are these the people you want surrounding you? My experience has shown me that people that thrive on negativity do not bring joy into your life.

    I hope to read more positive posts in the future and do hope that dear Anais (Ribbleton Amparo) is doing really well.


    • Andrew says:

      Dear Paulette

      It is so very good to hear from you again.

      You are right: it is better not to allow oneself to be weighed down by negativity.

      If I have understood the guidance of people such as Eckhart Tolle, advancement on the path to enlightenment requires that we not ignore negativity when we encounter it but that we acknowledge it for what it is, deal with it appropriately and then continue on our journey. I have sought to do this but have perhaps not been quite as adept at doing so as those closer to enlightenment. Please forgive me if this is the case.

      We have just heard from Holland that Anaiis is doing well.

      Be well!

  2. Vera says:

    Reading this blog I observe all the tools for sensationalist recordings being used. 1) Slanting data: a selective ensemble of facts to support a specific point of view. 2) Twist of data: a selective interpretation of the facts to support a specific point of view. Using adverbs and adjectives to convey an opinion, and presenting hypothesis without offering its opposite. 3) Improper conclusions: using arguments based on correct logic but not true facts, and using arguments based on true facts but not correct logic.

    With these concepts in mind, read again the articles in this blog. Once it is recognized how the attention can intentionally be shifted away from the data itself, the audience can’t be deceived.

    Dishonorable communication is a lie. More specifically, it is when the data of the communication is used to serve personal affairs that are not expressed in a complete or explicit way. In an honorable communication, all opinion, hypothesis and other subjective slant ultimately serve to highlight how we use the data, but never to alter the data it self. Of course some authors can’t resist the temptation to alter the data with their opinion – especially when the unaltered data does not support their opinion.

    A great moral responsibility lies on the media and on all the members of a given society: to protect the perception of every individual. Too often however, we find the corrupt perception of an individual, or group, through false accusations in the name of “giving a great news”.

    Andrew, to be a fluent speaker or writer does not automatically qualify you as somebody who manages ethical communication to the world. I boycott and refuse the information you are providing in this blog regarding Klaus Ferdinand Hempfling, his School, and his teachings.

    Klaus has been with horses and teaching in the highest level since his beginnings, and has maintained the level for more than 25 years. Throughout his career Klaus has been respected and recognized world wide as one of the top masters in horse work. His teachings have been, are and will continue to be successful because he is a representation of what he is teaching.


    • Andrew says:

      Dear Vera

      You may be right in your assessment of me and my writings but, to paraphrase George Bernard Shaw, what can we two do against all those who disagree?

      May Klaus Ferdinand Hempfling’s teachings on the importance of living authentically in the moment continue to guide you as they have me and still do.

      Be well!

  3. Dear Andrew – I sense openness – I sense self reflection – I sense respect – I sense compassion – I sense…………..more – CHAPEAU..

    Take care and be well

  4. Vic says:

    Dear Vera, Nanda, Karina, Cecile, Kate, Klaudia and Jo,

    I felt incredibly sad and physically sick when I read your letter on the previous blog post.

    I am amazed that such a letter could come out of the Akedah International School. I had no idea it was that bad.

    What I find scary is that after all those self awareness lessons there is so little self awareness. So little understanding of communication.

    I think KFH understands horses better than he understands humans. I do sincerely hope all of you have learned to communicate better with your horses.

    To really dig down into what is wrong with this letter would require at lease 20 to 25 A4 or Word document pages.

    Your comments bring back the ghosts of past (pre-Andrew) criticism of KFH as a shaman guru sect leader.

    Have any of you actually followed this blog? Your comments do not reflect what I have read on this blog. Personally I have no time for people who criticise and run other people down, and I follow this blog because Andrew has not done that. He has given mature, reasoned and constructive critiques of a number of personalities in the human-horse interactions world. KFH is naturally a central figure, simply because he has made himself a central figure.

    KFH has helped me to some extent, but then so have Pat and Linda Parelli, Carolyn Resnick, Mark Rashid and Michael Bevilacqua to name a few.

    Who is best? That depends on each one of us and our horse’s personalities (each is an individual as we are). Then we need to take what is relevant and apply it in our own selves. There is no “one size fits all.” The master should encourage the student to develop and improve him or her self, not to copy the master.

  5. Dear Andrew

    In a way, I have noticed that you are a thorn in virtually everyone’s side as you challenge just about everything related to the domestication of the horse, but as they say, there is no rose without a thorn – unless you live in Portugal where they are painstakingly removed before sale – and maybe not just in Portugal:-) Nevertheless, your action is thought-provoking and would help us to strive to thrive with our beloved horses no matter what. You promote dialogue where others would pinch it off in the bud. And so we are left with the question: can there really be connection without genuine communication?

    As people, we are so needy of words but, in the end, what we share with horses speaks its own truth – and I have had the pleasure to witness you in that state (and especially with dogs, as well, in your case.)

    So thank you for your independent, unique and, naturally, authentic voice in the world of relationships


  6. Pia says:

    Hi Andrew, just want to say that what you have written very much reflects my sentiments. You are very brave by putting yourself in this vulnerable position. Yes , you are critical but you admit to not being perfect. And yes, we are all struggling to reach that elusive goal of self realisation.
    Best regards, Pia.

  7. Anne says:

    Hello Andrew,
    I would like to thank you for your blog, which has been wonderfully inspiring and thought-provoking throughout my personal voyage to becoming a human a horse would want to be with. I suspect that I am part of a large silent audience that follows your blogs and the discussions that ensue with great joy. (Thank you Geerteke, Ian and all those who contribute their unique, heart-filled perspectives, pushing the reflexions further and further…).

    Wishing you and Vicky all the best!


    • Andrew says:

      Dear Anne

      Thank you for your kind words and good wishes. It is humbling to know that there are people like you who derive so much from what are essentially the writings and experiences of other ordinary people.

      Be well!

  8. Kate Long says:

    It is interesting, and accurate that you term Klaus a master.
    It is a word that I was most nervous of at the start of my schooling.
    The word did conjure up for me an assumed loss of individuality,
    I pictured that I would have to go against myself in order to carry out someone else’s wishes.

    The common consensus with the One Year students was that I had lightning bolts coming out of my forehead toward Klaus when he was teaching in those first three months.
    I was , then, a classic product of modern society.

    In this day and age there is little room for (and quite a lot of fear of) the ancient structure of master and pupil as one did find so common in traditional times.
    Masters were sought and honoured in music, martial arts,war,horsemanship, calligraphy etc.
    If one did find the right master, who could prove himself trustworthy, it was natural ,and understood as necessary , to honour the masters guidance.
    Nowadays with society so focused on the ‘individual right’ not the community or collective, there is a rapid fear around the idea of master and pupil.
    The fear is so strong in some it is but a small jump in their minds to call this structure of master/pupil cult related.

    Klaus never told me to cut it out with the lightning bolts in those early days…he always said to question everything.
    Never disengaged your own mind.
    If one is to serve another, horse,human,nature,child…anything…it must be done without relinquishing yourself.

    In our western society it is considered the individual’s right to have his opinion.
    In Klaus’s school we are taught it is our duty.
    Before every class begins , Klaus always asks…’does everyone agree? Does anyone not agree?’
    As we are training authenticity and sensitivity, we train to increase the awareness of our inner sensations and of course these cannot exclude our opinions!
    If we were to be mere puppets in Klaus’s school, and mutely follow his word, we would be refusing the first major step toward authenticity.
    It would be like someone wanting to learn how to fly but refusing to get in an aeroplane!
    What is authenticity if not the seamless expression from inner realm to outer form with nothing limiting,stagnating,negating,over rating, expectating (I know it is not a word but it brings me great pleasure to leave it there in honour of the delightful European English of the One Year School) or castrating the organic nature of the being.

    In the early days of the schooling I did try to be a good student, (a common legacy of our society) and when I took this approach to the horses it was repelling!
    I remember one sweet mare was very fast to stand on her hind legs because I was trying to be good….and Klaus calling from the sidelines….’stop trying to be good! Stop pretending! Ground yourself Kate. Be yourself!!

    Thankfully those days of trying to be something other than myself in such a gross unconscious way are over.(the deepening of authenticity never over though , as my task and duty and delight in life continues.)
    It is why I am so intensely grateful to have been a student of the One Year school.
    (And threefold delighted that it took two years….)
    To be authentic one has to strike out on a path where no one has been before.
    It is simply not possible to walk in someone else’s shoes to get there.
    Klaus has always said ‘You have to jump! Trust yourself and jump! Trust Life and jump!

    It is the most valuable thing to day after day be offered the safety and encouragement to jump into your own waiting arms.
    Such delicious simplicity, being yourself.
    Trusting the Life that brings you to Life, animates you, breathes you.

    It enjoys writing words like this….and then goes to bed.
    Kate Long
    KFH masterclass.

  9. alexia says:

    Hi Kate,
    That is a wonderful testament to your recent life. It is both wonderful to hear and feel.
    I understand completely the true authentic devotion and gratitude of the disciple/master relationship and why not use those words in our modern world as they are again coming to be understood. How lucky you are to have someone to lead you safely to yourself and amongst horses too!
    Bon Voyage
    Alexia xx

  10. Heather says:

    I have been following this conversation with interest.

    It has been good to hear from the one year students after so long – particularly good to hear from you Kate and how happy you are – you seem to have got a lot out of your one year. However I agree that the first letter was very disturbing and cult like in its writing.

    I do hope that everyone who attended the one year course is okay and I would love to hear about the progress you have made with your horses.

    For me personally, I realise that at the time I was there I was under ‘the spell’ – which was finally broken by several unpleasant events which happened (thank goodness). I then went on to research cult like characteristics and sadly found many similarities. However now I’m making wonderful progress with the horses – more than I ever hoped for.

    I think it is healthy to be having a debate like this – it is not negative – we have to keep an open mind. Also a person in the public eye cannot afford to be sensitive to criticism – they have put themselves out there for the world to see – so should welcome it.

    Best wishes,

  11. Vera says:


    On the 20th of August you wrote on your blog “There are indeed times when silence does speak”, regarding the non participation of the KFH One-Year-Schoolers in your blog and condemning my opinion of KFH to be in doubt. You will agree this is a very low punch.

    I do not like the content of your blog, I am not interested in your life and I think it is pitiful that you spend so much effort trying to undermine other people’s life. THIS IS THE REASON WHY I HAD NOT WRITTEN ANYTHING IN YOUR BLOG BEFORE. Be sure, I do not agree with your way of looking at life and your way of talking about KFH: on one sentence you put him on a pedestal and on the next sentence you drop him to the lowest level. When you do this you are not talking about Klaus, you are displaying your own rage, resentments and misleading communication.

    YOU ARE GUILTY OF PUTTING IN DOUBT THAT I COULD EVER AGREE WITH YOUR OPINION. So, I give you back your question: “Are you aware of what you are about to say before you say it and the response which it may elicit?”

    Andrew, I am not hypocritically friendly with you because you have trespassed in many levels my dignity and my reputation, but you can clearly recognize that I am honest with you.

    Andrew and Heather, you are valuing friendliness over a clear honest communication. In the togetherness with horses you can appreciate that the horse will only be “friendly” (better said would be: trustful and cooperative) if you are honest, fair and delivered to serve others; horses live in the first line and can’t pretend to be friendly. I am reacting and communicating on what has been harvested by Andrew’s implications. And you will also agree that I not only have the right, but I have the duty to let you know that I am displeased with your accusations.

    Vera Alvarez del Castillo
    Member of the KFH Master Class

    • Heather says:

      Hi there Vera!

      I am only replying to this as I must say I was surprised to see my name mentioned! So seeing I have been thrown into the mix – I will respond.

      As I said previously – it is healthy to look critically at things – and not to get defensive if someone doesn’t agree with your point of view.

      I was only relaying my point of view – which IS clear and honest communication. I know I haven’t done a ‘masterclass’ but then again I have experienced the teaching. I am also free to write my opinion of things. It is no different than attending anything/buying anything – you are free to review. And this blog is a good platform to use as it has a good readership.

      I do not always agree with what Andrew writes – but then again – I enjoy reading about his adventures – that is what a blog is – normally to write about what you are doing -and people are free to either read it or not read it!!

      It is one thing to teach clear and honest communication and another to actually live it. And being friendly does not mean you are a hypocrite – you can still state your views in a friendly way. In fact – why would I be angry with you. I only wish you the best!

      Once again – my comments relate to my personal view of my experience – and that is all. I am not out to create enemies nor am I living a life of bitterness! In fact – life is great!!!!!!

      But then again – I guess I live in the ‘brown world’ – what would I know!!! (sarcasm!)

      Best wishes,