FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Animals (Basel) / How Happy Are Equine Athletes? Stakeholder Perceptions of Eq...
Animals : an open access journal from MDPI2021; 11(11); 3228; doi: 10.3390/ani11113228

How Happy Are Equine Athletes? Stakeholder Perceptions of Equine Welfare Issues Associated with Equestrian Sport.

Abstract: The international governing body for equestrian sports, the Fédération Equestre Internationale (FEI), states that the welfare of the horse must be paramount and never subordinated to competitive or commercial influences. However, there is growing unease about welfare issues from both within and outside the sport. The aim of this study was to understand stakeholder perceptions of current welfare issues within equestrian sport, determine whether there is scope for change, and explore attitudes towards welfare assessment. Participants ( = 48) from equestrian sport ( = 38) and animal welfare research ( = 10) attended a workshop that included welfare-related presentations and focus group sessions. The focus group sessions were recorded, anonymised and analysed using thematic analysis. Conflict between the demands of competition and the needs of the horse was identified as a key welfare challenge. Although the physical health of equine athletes is closely monitored, horses' psychological needs are sometimes overlooked. Participants recognised that improving competition practices may not be as impactful as improving the general management and training of horses. The term "quality of life" was considered preferable to "welfare", which had negative connotations. Participants appreciated the idea of incorporating formal welfare assessments into their training and competition plans but stated that existing tools are rarely used and are not deemed feasible for real-life conditions.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2021-11-12 PubMed ID: 34827960PubMed Central: PMC8614509DOI: 10.3390/ani11113228Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The research paper explores stakeholders’ views on welfare concerns in equestrian sports, focusing on how competition demands might conflict with the needs of horses. The research suggests that stakeholders recognize the potential for improvement in certain practices and attitudes, including paying more attention to horses’ psychological needs, focusing on overall management and training, and utilizing welfare assessments.

Objective and Methodology of Study

  • The primary purpose of this research was to ascertain the perceptions of stakeholders with regards to current welfare issues within equestrian sports. Specifically, the researchers wanted to find out if there were any areas of potential change within the sport and to explore attitudes towards welfare assessments.
  • To achieve this, the researchers organized a workshop that was attended by 48 participants comprised of individuals involved in equestrian sports (38 persons) and those involved in animal welfare research (10 persons). The workshop included presentations related to equine welfare and focus group sessions for discussions.
  • The researchers recorded the focus group sessions, subsequently anonymizing and analyzing them through thematic analysis to determine key areas of concern and potential areas for improvement.

Key Findings

  • The research revealed a significant observation: there was a discernible conflict between the demands placed on horses due to competition and the horses’ physical and psychological needs. While there was close monitoring of the horses’ physical health, their psychological needs were frequently overlooked.
  • The attendees recognized the need for improving competition practices but also pointed out that amelioration in this aspect alone might not significantly impact the animals’ wellbeing. Instead, overall improvements in general management and training of horses would be more beneficial.
  • The term “quality of life” was preferred over the term “welfare” as participants felt that the latter had negative connotations and did not accurately reflect their concerns for the horses.
  • The idea of integrating formal welfare assessments in training and competition programs was welcomed. Nonetheless, there was a consensus that available tools for such assessments are rarely utilized and do not seem practical for real-life conditions.

Cite This Article

APA
Furtado T, Preshaw L, Hockenhull J, Wathan J, Douglas J, Horseman S, Smith R, Pollard D, Pinchbeck G, Rogers J, Hall C. (2021). How Happy Are Equine Athletes? Stakeholder Perceptions of Equine Welfare Issues Associated with Equestrian Sport. Animals (Basel), 11(11), 3228. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11113228

Publication

Animals : an open access journal from MDPI
ISSN: 2076-2615
NlmUniqueID: 101635614
Country: Switzerland
Language: English
Volume: 11
Issue: 11
PII: 3228

Researcher Affiliations

Furtado, Tamzin
  • Leahurst Campus, University of Liverpool, Neston, Liverpool CH64 7TE, UK.
Preshaw, Liane
  • The Horse Trust, Slad Lane, Princes Risborough, Bucks HP27 0PP, UK.
Hockenhull, Jo
  • Animal Welfare and Behaviour Group, Bristol Veterinary School, University of Bristol, Bristol BS40 5DU, UK.
Wathan, Jennifer
  • The Brooke Hospital for Animals, London EC3A 2BJ, UK.
Douglas, Janet
  • World Horse Welfare, Anne Colvin House, Snetterton, Norwich NR16 2LR, UK.
Horseman, Sue
  • Animal Welfare and Behaviour Group, Bristol Veterinary School, University of Bristol, Bristol BS40 5DU, UK.
Smith, Rebecca
  • Leahurst Campus, University of Liverpool, Neston, Liverpool CH64 7TE, UK.
Pollard, Danica
  • The British Horse Society, Abbey Park, Stareton, Kenilworth, Warwickshire CV8 2XZ, UK.
Pinchbeck, Gina
  • Leahurst Campus, University of Liverpool, Neston, Liverpool CH64 7TE, UK.
Rogers, Jan
  • The Horse Trust, Slad Lane, Princes Risborough, Bucks HP27 0PP, UK.
Hall, Carol
  • National Equine Welfare Council, Slad Lane, Princes Risborough, Bucks HP27 0PP, UK.
  • School of Animal, Rural and Environmental Sciences, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham NG25 0QF, UK.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

References

This article includes 58 references
  1. Fédération Equestre Internationale. [(accessed on 14 June 2021)]. Available online: https://inside.fei.org/fei/about-fei/structure.
  2. Fédération Equestre Internationale. Fédération Equestre Internationale Code of Conduct for the Welfare of the Horse. .
  3. Webster J. International standards for farm animal welfare: science and values.. Vet J 2013 Oct;198(1):3-4.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2013.08.034pubmed: 24200741google scholar: lookup
  4. Campbell ML. Freedoms and frameworks: How we think about the welfare of competition horses.. Equine Vet J 2016 Sep;48(5):540-2.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12598pubmed: 27515500google scholar: lookup
  5. Fraser D. Assessing welfare at the farm and group level: The interplay between science and values. Anim. Welf. 2003;12:433–443.
  6. Mellor DJ. Animal emotions, behaviour and the promotion of positive welfare states.. N Z Vet J 2012 Jan;60(1):1-8.
    doi: 10.1080/00480169.2011.619047pubmed: 22175422google scholar: lookup
  7. Mellor DJ, Beausoleil NJ, Littlewood KE, McLean AN, McGreevy PD, Jones B, Wilkins C. The 2020 Five Domains Model: Including Human-Animal Interactions in Assessments of Animal Welfare.. Animals (Basel) 2020 Oct 14;10(10).
    doi: 10.3390/ani10101870pmc: PMC7602120pubmed: 33066335google scholar: lookup
  8. Farm Animal Welfare Council. Farm Animal Welfare in Great Britain: Past, Present and Future. 2009.
  9. Kirkwood J.K.. Quality of life: The heart of the matter. Anim. Welf. 2007;16:3–7.
  10. Mellor DJ. Enhancing animal welfare by creating opportunities for positive affective engagement.. N Z Vet J 2015 Jan;63(1):3-8.
    doi: 10.1080/00480169.2014.926799pubmed: 24875268google scholar: lookup
  11. Yeates JW, Main DC. Assessment of positive welfare: a review.. Vet J 2008 Mar;175(3):293-300.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2007.05.009pubmed: 17613265google scholar: lookup
  12. Hall C, Randle H, Pearson G, Preshaw L, Waran N. Assessing equine emotional state. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2018;205:183–193.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2018.03.006google scholar: lookup
  13. Keeling LJ. Healthy and happy: animal welfare as an integral part of sustainable agriculture.. Ambio 2005 Jun;34(4-5):316-9.
    doi: 10.1579/0044-7447-34.4.316pubmed: 16092262google scholar: lookup
  14. Horseman SV, Buller H, Mullan S, Whay HR. Current Welfare Problems Facing Horses in Great Britain as Identified by Equine Stakeholders.. PLoS One 2016;11(8):e0160269.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0160269pmc: PMC4976980pubmed: 27501387google scholar: lookup
  15. Mason G, Mendl M. Why is there no simple way of measuring animal welfare?. Anim. Welf. 1993;2:301–319.
  16. Kauppinen T, Vainio A, Valros A, Rita H, Vesala K.M.. Improving animal welfare: Qualitative and quantitative methodology in the study of farmers’ attitudes. Anim. Welf. 2010;19:523–536.
  17. Fédération Equestre Internationale Global Dressage Forum 2004. [(accessed on 14 June 2021)]. Available online: https://inside.fei.org/media-updates/2004-global-dressage-forum.
  18. Fédération Equestre Internationale Dressage Rules 2020. [(accessed on 14 June 2021)]. Available online: https://inside.fei.org/sites/default/files/FEI_Dressage_Rules_2021_Clean_Version_0.pdf.
  19. Hall C, Kay R, Yarnell K. Assessing ridden horse behavior: Professional judgment and physiological measures. J. Vet. Behav. 2014;9:20–29.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jveb.2013.09.005google scholar: lookup
  20. AWIN. AWIN Welfare Assessment Protocol for Horses. 2015.
  21. Campbell ML. The role of veterinarians in equestrian sport: a comparative review of ethical issues surrounding human and equine sports medicine.. Vet J 2013 Sep;197(3):535-40.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2013.05.021pmc: PMC3898908pubmed: 23773811google scholar: lookup
  22. Heleski C.R., Anthony R. Science Alone Is Not Always Enough: The Importance of Ethical Assessment for a More Comprehensive View of Equine Welfare. J. Vet. Behav. 2012;7:169–178.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jveb.2011.08.003google scholar: lookup
  23. Heleski C, Stowe C.J., Fiedler J, Peterson M.L., Brady C, Wickens C, MacLeod J.N.. Thoroughbred racehorse welfare through the lens of ‘social license to operate’—With an emphasis on a U.S. perspective. Sustainability 2020;12:1706.
    doi: 10.3390/sህ1706google scholar: lookup
  24. Duncan E, Graham R, McManus P. ‘No one has even seen… smelt… or sensed a social license’: Animal geographies and social license to operate. Geoforum 2018;96:318–327.
    doi: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2018.08.020google scholar: lookup
  25. Morrison J. Soc. Licens.: How Keep Your Organ. Legitimate. .
  26. Graham R, McManus P. Changing Human-Animal Relationships in Sport: An Analysis of the UK and Australian Horse Racing Whips Debates.. Animals (Basel) 2016 May 3;6(5).
    doi: 10.3390/ani6050032pmc: PMC4880849pubmed: 27153097google scholar: lookup
  27. Horse Welfare Board. A Life Well Lived. A New Strategic Plan for the Welfare of Horses Bred for Racing 2020–2024. .
  28. Broom D.M.. Quality of life means welfare: How is it related to other concepts and assessed?. Anim. Welf. 2007;16:45–53.
  29. Yeates J. Quality of life and animal behaviour. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2016;181:19–26.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2016.04.018google scholar: lookup
  30. Silverman D. Doing Qualitative Research: A Practical Handbook. 4th ed. 2013; pp. 12–14.
  31. Furtado T, Christley R. Study design synopsis: From the horse's mouth: Qualitative methods for equine veterinary research.. Equine Vet J 2021 Sep;53(5):867-871.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.13436pubmed: 33826162google scholar: lookup
  32. Belzile J.A., Öberg G. Where to begin? Grappling with how to use participant interaction in focus group design. Qual. Res. 2012;12:459–472.
    doi: 10.1177/1468794111433089google scholar: lookup
  33. Tessier S. From field notes, to transcripts, to tape recordings: Evolution or combination?. Int. J. Qual. Methods 2012;11:446–460.
    doi: 10.1177/160940691201100410google scholar: lookup
  34. Parameswaran U.D., Ozawa-Kirk J.L., Latendresse G. To live (code) or to not: A new method for coding in qualitative research. Qual. Soc. Work. 2020;19:630–644.
    doi: 10.1177/1473325019840394google scholar: lookup
  35. McGreevy PD, Murphy J. Introduction. Equitation Science.. Vet J 2009 Jul;181(1):1-4.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2009.03.004pubmed: 19406675google scholar: lookup
  36. Doherty O, Casey V, McGreevy P, Arkins S. Noseband Use in Equestrian Sports - An International Study.. PLoS One 2017;12(1):e0169060.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0169060pmc: PMC5207535pubmed: 28045961google scholar: lookup
  37. Bergmann I. Sustainability, thoroughbred racing and the need for change. Pferdeheilkunde 2015;31:490–498.
    doi: 10.21836/PEM20150509google scholar: lookup
  38. Ricard A., Fournethanocq F. Analysis of factors affecting length of competitive life of jumping horses. Genet. Sel. Evol. 1997;29:251–267.
    doi: 10.1186/1297-9686-29-2-251google scholar: lookup
  39. Wallin L., Strandberg E., Philipsson J., Dalin G. Estimates of longevity and causes of culling and death in Swedish warmblood and coldblood horses. Livest. Sci. 2000;63:275–289.
    doi: 10.1016/S0301-6226(99)00126-8google scholar: lookup
  40. Braam A., Nasholm A., Roepstorff L., Philipsson J. Genetic variation in durability of Swedish Warmblood horses using competition results. Livest. Sci. 2011;142:181–187.
    doi: 10.1016/j.livsci.2011.07.011google scholar: lookup
  41. Ricard A, Blouin C. Genetic analysis of the longevity of French sport horses in jumping competition.. J Anim Sci 2011 Oct;89(10):2988-94.
    doi: 10.2527/jas.2011-3931pubmed: 21551348google scholar: lookup
  42. Tanner JC, Rogers CW, Firth EC. The relationship of training milestones with racing success in a population of Standardbred horses in New Zealand.. N Z Vet J 2011 Nov;59(6):323-7.
    doi: 10.1080/00480169.2011.617029pubmed: 22040339google scholar: lookup
  43. Tanner JC, Rogers CW, Firth EC. The association of 2-year-old training milestones with career length and racing success in a sample of Thoroughbred horses in New Zealand.. Equine Vet J 2013 Jan;45(1):20-4.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2011.00534.xpubmed: 22320408google scholar: lookup
  44. Górecka-Bruzda A., Kosinska I., Jaworski Z., Jezierski T., Murphy J. Conflict behavior in elite show jumping and dressage horses. J. Vet. Behav. 2015;10:137–146.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jveb.2014.10.004google scholar: lookup
  45. McBride SD, Mills DS. Psychological factors affecting equine performance.. BMC Vet Res 2012 Sep 27;8:180.
    doi: 10.1186/1746-6148-8-180pmc: PMC3514365pubmed: 23016987google scholar: lookup
  46. Dyson S. The ridden horse pain ethogram. Equine Vet. Educ. 2021.
    doi: 10.1111/eve.13468google scholar: lookup
  47. Comyn I., Bathe A.P., Foote A., Mar C.M.. Analysis of sudden death and fatal musculoskeletal injury during FEI three-day eventing. Equine Vet. J. 2017;49((Suppl. 51)):9.
  48. de Solis CN, Althaus F, Basieux N, Burger D. Sudden death in sport and riding horses during and immediately after exercise: A case series.. Equine Vet J 2018 Sep;50(5):644-648.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12803pubmed: 29330860google scholar: lookup
  49. Reid K., Rogers C.W., Gronqvist G., Gee E.K., Bolwell C.F.. Anxiety and pain in horses measured by heart rate variability and behavior. J. Vet. Behav. 2017;22:1–6.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jveb.2017.09.002google scholar: lookup
  50. Hall C, Kay R, Green J. A Retrospective Survey of Factors Affecting the Risk of Incidents and Equine Injury During Non-Commercial Transportation by Road in the United Kingdom.. Animals (Basel) 2020 Feb 12;10(2).
    doi: 10.3390/ani10020288pmc: PMC7070744pubmed: 32059511google scholar: lookup
  51. Butler D, Valenchon M, Annan R, Whay HR, Mullan S. Living the 'Best Life' or 'One Size Fits All'-Stakeholder Perceptions of Racehorse Welfare.. Animals (Basel) 2019 Mar 31;9(4).
    doi: 10.3390/ani9040134pmc: PMC6523604pubmed: 30935137google scholar: lookup
  52. Manrique L.P., Bánszegi O., Hudson R., Szenczi P. Repeatable individual differences in behaviour and physiology in juvenile horses from an early age. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2021;235:105227.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2021.105227google scholar: lookup
  53. Fédération Equestre Internationale Endurance. Rules 2019. [(accessed on 14 June 2021)]. Available online: https://inside.fei.org/sites/default/files/FEI%20Endurance%20Rules%20-%201%20January%202021%20-%20CLEAN.final_.pdf.
  54. Fédération Equestre Internationale Eventing Rules 2020. [(accessed on 14 June 2021)]. Available online: https://inside.fei.org/sites/default/files/Eventing%20Rules%20for%202021%20-%20clean%20version%20-%2010.12.2020_0.pdf.
  55. Campbell MLH. An Ethical Framework for the Use of Horses in Competitive Sport: Theory and Function.. Animals (Basel) 2021 Jun 9;11(6).
    doi: 10.3390/ani11061725pmc: PMC8230307pubmed: 34207809google scholar: lookup
  56. Safryghin A, Hebesberger DV, Wascher CAF. Testing for Behavioral and Physiological Responses of Domestic Horses (Equus caballus) Across Different Contexts - Consistency Over Time and Effects of Context.. Front Psychol 2019;10:849.
    doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00849pmc: PMC6482254pubmed: 31057468google scholar: lookup
  57. Dalla Costa E, Dai F, Lebelt D, Scholz P, Barbieri S, Canali E, Minero M. Initial outcomes of a harmonized approach to collect welfare data in sport and leisure horses.. Animal 2017 Feb;11(2):254-260.
    doi: 10.1017/S1751731116001452pubmed: 27406177google scholar: lookup
  58. Rioja-Lang FC, Connor M, Bacon H, Dwyer CM. Determining a Welfare Prioritization for Horses Using a Delphi Method.. Animals (Basel) 2020 Apr 9;10(4).
    doi: 10.3390/ani10040647pmc: PMC7222753pubmed: 32283607google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 4 times.
  1. Springer S, Mihatsch DI, Grimm H, Jenner F. Between Leisure and Pressure-Veterinarians' Attitudes towards the Care of Competition Horses in Germany, Austria and Switzerland.. Animals (Basel) 2023 Jun 27;13(13).
    doi: 10.3390/ani13132126pubmed: 37443925google scholar: lookup
  2. Smith R, Furtado T, Brigden C, Pinchbeck G, Perkins E. A Qualitative Exploration of UK Leisure Horse Owners' Perceptions of Equine Wellbeing.. Animals (Basel) 2022 Oct 26;12(21).
    doi: 10.3390/ani12212937pubmed: 36359063google scholar: lookup
  3. Douglas J, Owers R, Campbell MLH. Social Licence to Operate: What Can Equestrian Sports Learn from Other Industries?. Animals (Basel) 2022 Aug 5;12(15).
    doi: 10.3390/ani12151987pubmed: 35953977google scholar: lookup
  4. Dyson S, Pollard D. Application of the Ridden Horse Pain Ethogram to Horses Competing in British Eventing 90, 100 and Novice One-Day Events and Comparison with Performance.. Animals (Basel) 2022 Feb 25;12(5).
    doi: 10.3390/ani12050590pubmed: 35268159google scholar: lookup
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,383 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.