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) / Living the ‘Best Life’ or ‘One Size Fits A...
Animals : an open access journal from MDPI2019; 9(4); 134; doi: 10.3390/ani9040134

Living the ‘Best Life’ or ‘One Size Fits All’-Stakeholder Perceptions of Racehorse Welfare.

Abstract: The purpose of the study was to explore the perceptions held by British racing industry stakeholders of factors influencing racehorse welfare. Ten focus groups were held across the UK with a total of 42 stakeholders from a range of roles within racehorse care including trainers, stable staff and veterinarians. Participants took part in three exercises. Firstly, to describe the scenarios of a 'best life' and the minimum welfare standards a horse in training could be living under. Secondly, to identify the main challenges for racehorse welfare and thirdly, to recall any innovative or uncommon practices to improve welfare they had witnessed. Using thematic analysis, eight themes emerged from the first exercise. Two strands, factors that contribute to maintaining health and the horse-human relationship ran through all eight themes. Across all themes horses living the 'best life' were perceived as being treated as individuals rather than being part of a 'one size fits all' life when kept under minimum welfare standards. Health was both perceived as the main challenge to welfare as well as one open to innovative practices such as improved veterinary treatments. Data obtained, informed by the knowledge and expertise of experienced stakeholders, combined with practical animal welfare science will be used to develop the first British racehorse welfare assessment protocol.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2019-03-31 PubMed ID: 30935137PubMed Central: PMC6523604DOI: 10.3390/ani9040134Google 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.

This study explored the perspectives of various stakeholders within the British racing industry on factors impacting the welfare of racehorses. The research findings informed the creation of the first ever British racehorse welfare assessment protocol.

Research Methodology

The research was conducted through ten focus groups located throughout the UK. Participation included a total of 42 stakeholders who are actively involved in racehorse care. These individuals had roles including trainers, stable staff, and veterinarians.

  • Exercise one: Participants were asked to describe what a ‘best life’ scenario for a racehorse in training would look like, and the minimum welfare standards applicable to these racehorses.
  • Exercise two: The participants identified the primary challenges affecting the welfare of racehorses.
  • Exercise three: Participants were asked to share any innovative or uncommon practices they’ve seen to improve racehorse welfare.

Research Findings

Using a method of data analysis known as thematic analysis, the researchers were able to identify eight dominant themes from the first exercise.

  • The ‘Best life’: Horses under this scenario were perceived as being treated as individuals with their specific needs being met.
  • Minimum welfare standards: In contrast, horses under minimum welfare standards were seen as being subject to a ‘one size fits all’ approach where individual needs may not be sufficiently addressed.

Two main strands ran through these themes: the factors contributing to maintaining health and the horse-human relationship.

The health of the horse appeared as both the biggest challenge to welfare and one that was open to innovative practices to improve.

Outcome and Next Steps

The data collected during this research, informed by the knowledge and expertise of the stakeholders, combined with the science of animal welfare, was then used to develop the first British racehorse welfare assessment protocol. This standard should help to ensure the welfare of racehorses is upheld in the future.

Cite This Article

APA
Butler D, Valenchon M, Annan R, Whay HR, Mullan S. (2019). Living the ‘Best Life’ or ‘One Size Fits All’-Stakeholder Perceptions of Racehorse Welfare. Animals (Basel), 9(4), 134. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9040134

Publication

Animals : an open access journal from MDPI
ISSN: 2076-2615
NlmUniqueID: 101635614
Country: Switzerland
Language: English
Volume: 9
Issue: 4
PII: 134

Researcher Affiliations

Butler, Deborah
  • School of Veterinary Sciences, University of Bristol, Langford, Somerset BS40 5DU, UK. deborah.butler@bristol.ac.uk.
Valenchon, Mathilde
  • School of Veterinary Sciences, University of Bristol, Langford, Somerset BS40 5DU, UK. mathilde.valenchon@bristol.ac.uk.
Annan, Rachel
  • School of Veterinary Sciences, University of Bristol, Langford, Somerset BS40 5DU, UK. rachel.annan@bristol.ac.uk.
Whay, Helen R
  • School of Veterinary Sciences, University of Bristol, Langford, Somerset BS40 5DU, UK. Bec.Whay@bristol.ac.uk.
Mullan, Siobhan
  • School of Veterinary Sciences, University of Bristol, Langford, Somerset BS40 5DU, UK. Siobhan.Mullan@bristol.ac.uk.

Grant Funding

  • R113851-101 / The Racing Foundation

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

This article includes 59 references
  1. British Horseracing Authority . Migration Advisory Committee—EEA Workers in the UK Labour Market. British Horseracing Authority; London, UK: 2017. pp. 1–10.
  2. Horserace Levy and Betting Board. [(accessed on 28 January 2019)]; Available online: https://www.hblb.org.uk/page/1.
  3. British Horseracing Authority. [(accessed on 13 March 2019)]; Available online: https://www.britishhorseracing.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/18_12_Full-Year-Data-Pack.pdf.
  4. British Horseracing Authority. [(accessed on 13 March 2019)]; Available online: https://www.britishhorseracing.com/racing/participants/trainers/
  5. Code of Practice for the Welfare of Horses, Ponies, Donkeys and Their Hybrids. Crown. [(accessed on 21 March 2019)]; Available online: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/code-of-practice-for-the-welfare-of-horses-ponies-donkeys-and-their-hybrids.
  6. National Equine Welfare Council. [(accessed on 15 January 2019)]; Available online: http://www.newc.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Equine-Brochure-09.pdf.
  7. Wageningen UR. [(accessed on 6 February 2019)]; Available online: http://edepot.wur.nl/238619.
  8. Viksten S, Visser K, Nyman S, Blokhuis H. Developing a protocol for welfare assessment in horses. Anim. Welf. 2017;26:59–65.
    doi: 10.7120/09627286.26.1.059google scholar: lookup
  9. Hockenhull J, Whay HR. A Review of Approaches to Assessing Equine Welfare. Equine Vet. Educ. 2014;26:159–166.
    doi: 10.1111/eve.12129google scholar: lookup
  10. Dalla Costa E, Minero M, Lebelt D, Stucke D, Canali E, Leach MC. Development of the Horse Grimace Scale (HGS) as a pain assessment tool in horses undergoing routine castration.. PLoS One 2014;9(3):e92281.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0092281pmc: PMC3960217pubmed: 24647606google scholar: lookup
  11. Mactaggart AM. Development of a Welfare Index for Thoroughbred Racehorses. 2015.
  12. Chadwick CL, Williams E, Asher L, Yon L. Incorporating Stakeholder Perspectives into the Assessment and Provision of Captive Elephant Welfare. Anim. Welf. 2017;26:461–472.
    doi: 10.7120/09627286.26.4.461google scholar: lookup
  13. Heleski CR, Anthony R. Science Alone Is Not Always Enough: The Importance of Ethical Assessment for a More Comprehensive View of Equine Welfare. J. Vet. Behav. Clin. Appl. Res. 2012;26:461–472.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jveb.2011.08.003google scholar: lookup
  14. Onwuegbuzie AJ, Dickinson WB, Leech NL, Zoran AG. A Qualitative Framework for Collecting and Analyzing Data in Focus Group Research. Int. J. Qual. Methods. 2009;8:1–12.
    doi: 10.1177/160940690900800301google scholar: lookup
  15. Madriz E. Focus groups in feminist research. 2000;pp. 835–850.
  16. Lunt P, Livingstone S. Rethinking the Focus Group in Media and Communications Research. J. Commun. 1996;2:79–98.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.1996.tb01475.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  17. Verbeke W. Influences on the Consumer Decision making Process towards Fresh Meat—Insights from Belgium and Implications. Br. Food J. 2000;102:522–538.
    doi: 10.1108/00070700010336526google scholar: lookup
  18. Lassen J, Sandøe P, Forkman P. Happy Pigs Are Dirty!—Conflicting Perspectives on Animal Welfare. Livest. Sci. 2006;10:221–230.
    doi: 10.1016/j.livsci.2006.05.008google scholar: lookup
  19. Miele M, Veissier I, Evans A, Botreau R. Animal Welfare: Establishing a Dialogue between Science and Society. Anim. Welf. 2011;20:103–117.
  20. Horseman SV, Hockenhull J, Buller H, Mullan S, Barr AR, Whay HR. Equine Welfare Assessment: Exploration of British Stakeholder Attitudes Using Focus-Group Discussions.. J Appl Anim Welf Sci 2017 Apr-Jun;20(2):176-191.
    doi: 10.1080/10888705.2017.1283226pubmed: 28375757google scholar: lookup
  21. Collins JA, More SJ, Hanlon A, Wall PG, McKenzie K, Duggan V. Use of qualitative methods to identify solutions to selected equine welfare problems in Ireland.. Vet Rec 2012 Apr 28;170(17):442.
    doi: 10.1136/vr.100281pubmed: 22331502google scholar: lookup
  22. May T. Social Research Issues, Methods and Process. 1997;pp. 5–222.
  23. Nowell LS, Norris JM, White DE, Moules NJ. Thematic Analysis: Striving to Meet the Trustworthiness Criteria. Int. J. Qual. Methods. 2017;16:1–13.
    doi: 10.1177/1609406917733847google scholar: lookup
  24. Virginia B, Clarke C. Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 2006;3:77–101.
    doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oagoogle scholar: lookup
  25. Fox K. The Racing Tribe. Watching the Horsewatchers. 2005;pp. 3–215.
  26. Cassidy R. The Sport of Kings. Kinship, Class and Thoroughbred Breeding in Newmarket. 2002;pp. 1–183.
  27. Butler D. Women, Horseracing and Gender; Becoming One of the ‘Lads’. 2017;pp. 1–244.
  28. Caretta MA, Jokinen JC. Conflating Privilege and Vulnerability: A Reflexive Analysis of Emotions and Positionality in Postgraduate Fieldwork. Prof. Geogr. 2017;69:275–283.
    doi: 10.1080/00330124.2016.1252268google scholar: lookup
  29. Warr DM. “It was fun... we don’t usually talk about these things”: Analyzing Sociable Interaction in Focus Groups. Qual. Inq. 2005;11:200–225.
    doi: 10.1177/1077800404273412google scholar: lookup
  30. Keesling R. Gatekeepers. 2011;p. 300.
  31. Racing Post. [(accessed on 17 March 2019)]; Available online: https://www.racingpost.com/news/latest/henry-daly-lays-into-sorely-misguided-and-misrepresentative-bha/371434.
  32. 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
  33. Lane JG, Bladon B, Little DR, Naylor JR, Franklin SH. Dynamic obstructions of the equine upper respiratory tract. Part 2: comparison of endoscopic findings at rest and during high-speed treadmill exercise of 600 Thoroughbred racehorses.. Equine Vet J 2006 Sep;38(5):401-7.
    doi: 10.2746/042516406778400619pubmed: 16986599google scholar: lookup
  34. Nadeau JA, Andrews FM. Equine gastric ulcer syndrome: the continuing conundrum.. Equine Vet J 2009 Sep;41(7):611-5.
    doi: 10.2746/042516409X468056pubmed: 19927575google scholar: lookup
  35. Bell RJ, Mogg TD, Kingston JK. Equine gastric ulcer syndrome in adult horses: a review.. N Z Vet J 2007 Feb;55(1):1-12.
    doi: 10.1080/00480169.2007.36728pubmed: 17339910google scholar: lookup
  36. Andrews FM, Buchanan BR, Elliot SB, Clariday NA, Edwards LH. Gastric Ulcers in Horses. J. Anim. Sci. 2005;3:438–440.
  37. Zavoshti FR, Andrews FM. Therapeutics for Equine Gastric Ulcer Syndrome.. Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract 2017 Apr;33(1):141-162.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cveq.2016.11.004pubmed: 28325176google scholar: lookup
  38. McGreevy PD. Equine Behavior. A Guide for Veterinarians and Equine Scientists. 2004.
  39. Sykes BW, Hewetson M, Hepburn RJ, Luthersson N, Tamzali Y. European College of Equine Internal Medicine Consensus Statement--Equine Gastric Ulcer Syndrome in Adult Horses.. J Vet Intern Med 2015 Sep-Oct;29(5):1288-99.
    doi: 10.1111/jvim.13578pmc: PMC4858038pubmed: 26340142google scholar: lookup
  40. Brama PAJ, Firth EC, Goodship AE, Rivero JLL, van Weeren PR. The response of musculoskeletal tissues to exercise. 2013;pp. 267–305.
  41. Henderson AJ. Don't fence me in: managing psychological well being for elite performance horses.. J Appl Anim Welf Sci 2007;10(4):309-29.
    doi: 10.1080/10888700701555576pubmed: 17970632google scholar: lookup
  42. Hartmann E, Søndergaard E, Keeling LJ. Keeping horses in groups: A review. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2012;136:77–87.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2011.10.004google scholar: lookup
  43. Mills DS, Davenport K. The effect of a neighbouring conspecific versus the use of a mirror for the control of stereotypic weaving behaviour in the stabled horse. Anim. Sci. 2002;74:95–101.
    doi: 10.1017/S1357729800052255google scholar: lookup
  44. Valenchon M, Lévy F, Moussu C, Lansade L. Stress affects instrumental learning based on positive or negative reinforcement in interaction with personality in domestic horses.. PLoS One 2017;12(5):e0170783.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0170783pmc: PMC5419560pubmed: 28475581google scholar: lookup
  45. Werhahn H, Hessel EF, Van de Weghe HFA. Competition Horses Housed in Single Stalls (II): Effects of Free Exercise on the Behavior in the Stable, the Behavior during Training, and the Degree of Stress. J. Equine Vet. Sci. 2012;32:22.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2011.06.009google scholar: lookup
  46. Cooper JJ, McDonald L, Mills DS. The effect of increasing visual horizons on stereotypic weaving: implications for the social housing of stabled horses.. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2000 Aug 1;69(1):67-83.
    doi: 10.1016/S0168-1591(00)00115-5pubmed: 10856785google scholar: lookup
  47. Rogers CW, Bolwell CF, Gee EK. Proactive Management of the Equine Athlete.. Animals (Basel) 2012 Dec 19;2(4):640-55.
    doi: 10.3390/ani2040640pmc: PMC4494282pubmed: 26487168google scholar: lookup
  48. Freund T, Everett C, Griffiths P, Hudon C, Naccarella L, Laurant M. Skill mix, roles and remuneration in the primary care workforce: who are the healthcare professionals in the primary care teams across the world?. Int J Nurs Stud 2015 Mar;52(3):727-43.
    doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2014.11.014pubmed: 25577306google scholar: lookup
  49. Thirkell J, Hyland R. A Survey Examining Attitudes towards Equine Complementary Therapies for the Treatment of Musculoskeletal Injuries. J. Equine Vet. Sci. 2017;59:82–87.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2017.10.004google scholar: lookup
  50. Coleman HJ, Rogers CW, Gee EK. The use of alternative therapies in racing thoroughbreds. Proc. N. Z. Soc. Anim. Prod. 2006;66:279–283.
  51. McGreevy P, McLean A, Buckley P, McConaghy F, McClean C. How riding may affect welfare: What the equine veterinarian needs to know. Equine Vet. Educ. 2011;23:531–539.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3292.2010.00217.xdoi: 10.1111/j.2042-3292.2010.00217.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  52. Homer JB, Hirsch GB. System dynamics modeling for public health: background and opportunities.. Am J Public Health 2006 Mar;96(3):452-8.
    doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2005.062059pmc: PMC1470525pubmed: 16449591google scholar: lookup
  53. McGowan TW, Phillips CJC, Hodgson DR, Perkins N, McGowan CM. Euthanasia in Aged Horses: Relationship between the Owner’s Personality and Their Opinions on, and Experience of, Euthanasia of Horses. Anthrozoös 2012;25:261–275.
    doi: 10.2752/175303712X13403555186091google scholar: lookup
  54. Egenvall A, Tranquille CA, Lönnell AC, Bitschnau C, Oomen A, Hernlund E, Montavon S, Franko MA, Murray RC, Weishaupt MA, Weeren vR, Roepstorff L. Days-lost to training and competition in relation to workload in 263 elite show-jumping horses in four European countries.. Prev Vet Med 2013 Nov 1;112(3-4):387-400.
    doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2013.09.013pubmed: 24125697google scholar: lookup
  55. Hausberger M, Roche H, Séverine Henry S, Visser EK. A Review of the Human-Horse Relationship. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2008;109:1–24.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2007.04.015google scholar: lookup
  56. Williams J, Tabor G. Rider Impacts on Equitation. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2017;190:28–42.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2017.02.019google scholar: lookup
  57. Boivin X, Lensink J, Tallet C, Veissier I. Stockmanship and Farm Animal Welfare. Anim. Welf. 2003;12:479–492.
  58. Racing Post. [(accessed on 13 January 2019)]; Available online: https://www.racingpost.com/news/staffing-crisis-is-product-of-a-perfect-storm-says-trainer-stuart-williams/361334.
  59. Denoix JM, Pailloux JP. Physical Therapy and Massage for the Horse. 1997.

Citations

This article has been cited 14 times.
  1. Annan R, Trigg LE, Hockenhull J, Allen K, Butler D, Valenchon M, Mullan S. Racehorse welfare across a training season.. Front Vet Sci 2023;10:1208744.
    doi: 10.3389/fvets.2023.1208744pubmed: 37448582google 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. Davies E, McConn-Palfreyman W, Parker JK, Cameron LJ, Williams JM. Is Injury an Occupational Hazard for Horseracing Staff?. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2022 Feb 12;19(4).
    doi: 10.3390/ijerph19042054pubmed: 35206242google scholar: lookup
  4. Furtado T, Preshaw L, Hockenhull J, Wathan J, Douglas J, Horseman S, Smith R, Pollard D, Pinchbeck G, Rogers J, Hall C. How Happy Are Equine Athletes? Stakeholder Perceptions of Equine Welfare Issues Associated with Equestrian Sport.. Animals (Basel) 2021 Nov 12;11(11).
    doi: 10.3390/ani11113228pubmed: 34827960google scholar: lookup
  5. Kelly KJ, McD￮ LA, Mears K. The Effect of Human-Horse Interactions on Equine Behaviour, Physiology, and Welfare: A Scoping Review.. Animals (Basel) 2021 Sep 24;11(10).
    doi: 10.3390/ani11102782pubmed: 34679804google scholar: lookup
  6. Maher JW, Clarke A, Byrne AW, Doyle R, Blake M, Barrett D. Exploring the Opinions of Irish Dairy Farmers Regarding Male Dairy Calves.. Front Vet Sci 2021;8:635565.
    doi: 10.3389/fvets.2021.635565pubmed: 33959649google scholar: lookup
  7. Butler D, Upton L, Mullan S. Capturing Beneficial Changes to Racehorse Veterinary Care Implemented during the COVID-19 Pandemic.. Animals (Basel) 2021 Apr 26;11(5).
    doi: 10.3390/ani11051251pubmed: 33926093google scholar: lookup
  8. Physick-Sheard P, Avison A, Sears W. Factors Associated with Mortality in Ontario Standardbred Racing: 2003-2015.. Animals (Basel) 2021 Apr 5;11(4).
    doi: 10.3390/ani11041028pubmed: 33916415google scholar: lookup
  9. Davies E, McConn-Palfreyman W, Williams JM, Lovell GP. The Impact of COVID-19 on Staff Working Practices in UK Horseracing.. Animals (Basel) 2020 Oct 30;10(11).
    doi: 10.3390/ani10112003pubmed: 33143200google scholar: lookup
  10. Bergmann IM. Naturalness and the Legitimacy of Thoroughbred Racing: A Photo-Elicitation Study with Industry and Animal Advocacy Informants.. Animals (Basel) 2020 Aug 26;10(9).
    doi: 10.3390/ani10091513pubmed: 32859112google scholar: lookup
  11. Egan S, Brama P, McGrath D. Irish Equine Industry Stakeholder Perspectives of Objective Technology for Biomechanical Analyses in the Field.. Animals (Basel) 2019 Aug 8;9(8).
    doi: 10.3390/ani9080539pubmed: 31398822google scholar: lookup
  12. Best R, Standing R. The Spatiotemporal Characteristics of 0-24-Goal Polo.. Animals (Basel) 2019 Jul 16;9(7).
    doi: 10.3390/ani9070446pubmed: 31315210google scholar: lookup
  13. Butler D, Valenchon M, Annan R, Whay HR, Mullan S. Stakeholder Perceptions of the Challenges to Racehorse Welfare.. Animals (Basel) 2019 Jun 17;9(6).
    doi: 10.3390/ani9060363pubmed: 31212903google scholar: lookup
  14. Mohite DS, Sheikh CS, Singh S, Kalita J, Williams S, Compston PC. Using Qualitative Methods to Explore Farrier-Related Barriers to Successful Farriery Interventions for Equine Welfare in India.. Animals (Basel) 2019 May 18;9(5).
    doi: 10.3390/ani9050252pubmed: 31109080google scholar: lookup
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,357 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.