FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 10000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Equine veterinary journal2025; doi: 10.1002/evj.70142

Longitudinal welfare assessment in French jump racehorses during season preparation.

Abstract: Public scrutiny of racehorse welfare is increasing. The preparatory training phase preceding the racing season is potentially a critical period for physical and mental development. Structured welfare assessment protocols have recently been developed, but their use in field conditions remains limited. Objective: (1) To evaluate the field applicability of a racehorse-specific welfare assessment protocol in a professional French jump racing yard; and (2) to explore whether it can detect relevant physical and behavioural changes in young horses during season preparation. Methods: Longitudinal observational study with repeated measures. Methods: Sixteen two- to three-year-old racehorses (10 Thoroughbreds, 6 French Non-Thoroughbreds) from a single jump racing yard were assessed at three time points (T0, T1, T2) over 5 months before the racing season. Direct observations included environmental conditions, physical health, horse grimace scale (HGS), human-horse relationship tests, and behavioural activity budgets via scan sampling. Mixed-effects models evaluated temporal changes and associated factors. Results: Horses were healthy, with adequate nutrition and comfort, though no free turn-out and social contact often limited to visual interaction (68%). Body condition score decreased significantly at T1 (β = -0.96; 95% CI: [-1.7, -0.26]; p = 0.007) and T2 (β = -2.0; 95% CI: [-2.9, -1.1]; p < 0.001). Lip commissure lesions were prevalent (external 65%, internal 75%). HGS scores increased significantly at T2 (β = 1.7; 95% CI: [0.85, 2.6]; p < 0.001), and horses with physical social contact had lower scores (β = -1.3; 95% CI: [-2.3, -0.22]; p = 0.02). Behavioural activity budgets showed inter-individual variability. Conclusions: Small sample size and attrition limit generalisability. Assessments were conducted during routine training days without altering management, occasionally limiting evaluations. Conclusions: Structured welfare assessments are feasible in field conditions, highlight areas for improvement, and can capture relevant changes during jump racing season preparation.
© 2025 EVJ Ltd.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2025-12-21 PubMed ID: 41424082DOI: 10.1002/evj.70142Google 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.

Overview

  • This study tested a welfare assessment protocol on young French jump racehorses over 5 months of preseason training.
  • It evaluated whether the protocol could be practically applied in a professional setting and detect meaningful changes in horses’ physical and behavioral health.

Background and Objectives

  • Racehorse welfare is under increasing public scrutiny, especially during critical training phases before the racing season.
  • The preparatory phase can significantly impact both the physical and mental development of the horses.
  • Despite the existence of structured welfare assessment methods, their practical application in real training yards is still limited.
  • This research had two main goals:
    • To see if a horse-specific welfare assessment protocol can be effectively used in the field within a professional jump racing yard.
    • To determine if the protocol can track important health and behavior changes in young racehorses during season preparation.

Methods

  • Study Design: A longitudinal observational study with repeated assessments at three time points (T0, T1, T2) over five months before the start of the racing season.
  • Subjects: Sixteen two- to three-year-old jump racehorses from a single French racing yard, including:
    • 10 Thoroughbreds
    • 6 French Non-Thoroughbreds
  • Assessments conducted included:
    • Environmental conditions evaluation
    • Physical health checks such as body condition scoring and lesion detection
    • Horse Grimace Scale (HGS) scores to assess pain or discomfort
    • Human-horse relationship testing to assess behavioral responses
    • Behavioral activity budgets through scan sampling to track time spent in various activities
  • Data Analysis: Mixed-effects statistical models were used to evaluate changes over time and connections to various factors like social contact.

Results

  • Health and Management:
    • Horses were generally healthy, appeared adequately fed, and were comfortable.
    • However, horses were not allowed free outdoor turn-out, and social contact was mostly limited to visual interaction for 68% of the observations.
  • Body Condition Scores (BCS):
    • BCS decreased significantly at T1 and T2 compared to baseline (T0), indicating a decline in body condition during the training period.
  • Lip Commissure Lesions:
    • Lesions were common, with 65% external and 75% internal prevalence, which may reflect equipment or management issues.
  • Horse Grimace Scale (HGS):
    • HGS scores increased significantly by T2, suggesting increased discomfort or stress.
    • Horses given physical social contact had lower HGS scores, indicating less pain or discomfort when social contact was available.
  • Behavioral Activity Budgets:
    • Significant variability was seen between individual horses in their behavior during the assessment periods.

Limitations

  • The small number of horses and some dropouts limit how broadly the results can be applied.
  • The study was conducted during normal training days without altering routine management, which sometimes limited the ability to perform thorough evaluations.

Conclusions

  • The welfare assessment protocol designed for racehorses is practical and feasible to use in real-world professional jump racing yards.
  • The protocol can identify areas where welfare might be compromised, such as decreases in body condition and presence of mouth lesions.
  • It also is sensitive enough to detect changes in horses’ pain or discomfort levels and behavioral changes over the training period.
  • The findings suggest that increasing physical social contact may improve horses’ welfare by reducing signs of discomfort.
  • This study highlights the importance of structured welfare monitoring during the critical preparation phase and encourages wider adoption of such tools.

Cite This Article

APA
Bonhomme MM, Boisdenghien L, Couroucé A, Votion DM. (2025). Longitudinal welfare assessment in French jump racehorses during season preparation. Equine Vet J. https://doi.org/10.1002/evj.70142

Publication

Equine veterinary journal
ISSN: 2042-3306
NlmUniqueID: 0173320
Country: United States
Language: English

Researcher Affiliations

Bonhomme, Maëlle M
  • Department of Functional Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium.
Boisdenghien, Laura
  • Department of Functional Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium.
Couroucé, Anne
  • Equine Department, National Vet School of Nantes, Oniris Vetagrobio, Nantes, France.
  • Biotargen, University of Caen Normandie, Saint Contest, France.
Votion, Dominique-Marie
  • Department of Functional Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium.

Grant Funding

  • FSR2024 / University of Liège
  • ASP/A 557-FC 43933 / Fonds De La Recherche Scientifique - FNRS
  • Rech-CS-2023_2026_16_Jump_SAFELY / Institut Français du Cheval et de l'Équitation (IFCE)

References

This article includes 77 references
  1. Campbell MLH. Freedoms and frameworks: how we think about the welfare of competition horses.. Equine Vet J 2016;48(5):540–542.
  2. Douglas J, Owers R, Campbell MLH. Social licence to operate: what can equestrian sports learn from other industries?. Animals 2022;12(15):1987.
  3. Heleski CR. Social license to operate–why public perception matters for horse sport–some personal reflections.. J Equine Vet Sci 2023;124:104266.
  4. McManus P. Animal‐based entertainment industries, animal death and Social Licence to Operate (SLO): an analysis of ‘The Final Race’ and the 2019 Melbourne Cup.. Soc Cult Geogr 2023;24(7):1242–1261.
  5. International Federation of Horseracing Authorities. Global Reference Library of Published Works on the Economic or Social Impact of Horseracing. 2023.
  6. International Federation of Horseracing Authorities. Facts and Figures. 2019.
  7. The American Horse Council. Results from the 2023 National Equine Economic Impact Study Released. 2023.
  8. Younge B, Vial C. Socio‐economic impact of horse production on rural areas: a comparison between Ireland and France. Forages and grazing in horse nutrition 2012;p. 453–465.
    doi: 10.3920/978-90-8686-755-4_63google scholar: lookup
  9. Markwell K, Firth T, Hing N. Blood on the race track: an analysis of ethical concerns regarding animal‐based gambling.. Ann Leis Res 2017;20(5):594–609.
  10. Mkono M, Tham A, Hughes K, Echentille S. Horse racing and the growth of hashtag activism.. Leis Stud 2024;43(5):816–831.
  11. Stallones L, McManus P, McGreevy P. Sustainability and the thoroughbred breeding and racing industries: an enhanced one welfare perspective.. Animals (Basel) 2023;13(3):490.
  12. Winter C, Frew E. Thoroughbred racing: backstage at the sport of kings.. Leis Stud 2018;37(4):452–465.
  13. Bergmann I. He loves to race – or does he?: Ethics and welfare in racing.. Equine Cultures in Transition 2019;1st edn;p. 117–133.
  14. Fiedler JM, Ayre ML, Rosanowski S, Slater JD. Horse sector participants' attitudes towards anthropomorphism and animal welfare and wellbeing.. Animals 2024;14(17):2482.
  15. Legg KA, Breheny M, Gee EK, Rogers CW. Responding to risk: regulation or prohibition? New Zealand media reporting of thoroughbred jumps racing 2016‐2018.. Animals 2019;9(5):276.
  16. Pearson G, Douglas J, Wolframm I, Furtado T. Used like pawns or treated like kings? How narratives around racehorse welfare in the 2023 grand national may affect public acceptance: an informed commentary.. Animals 2023;13(19):3137.
  17. Bergmann I. Sustainability, thoroughbred racing and the need for change.. PHK 2015;31(5):490–498.
  18. Campbell MLH. An ethical framework for the use of horses in competitive sport: theory and function.. Animals (Basel) 2021;11(6):1725.
  19. Green TC, Mellor DJ. Extending ideas about animal welfare assessment to include ‘quality of life’ and related concepts.. N Z Vet J 2011;59(6):263–271.
  20. Briant C, Riou M, Ruet A. Évaluation du bien‐être des chevaux sur le terrain: protocoles disponibles, conditions et limites d'utilisation.. INRAE Prod Anim 2024;37(3):7928.
  21. Hockenhull J, Whay HR. A review of approaches to assessing equine welfare.. Equine Vet Educ 2014;26(3):159–166.
  22. Lesimple C. Indicators of horse welfare: state‐of‐the‐art.. Animals 2020;10(2):294.
  23. Minero M, Costa ED, Dai F, Scholz P, Lebelt D. AWIN Welfare Assessment Protocol for Horses.. 2015.
  24. Viksten S, Visser E, Nyman S, Blokhuis H. Developing a horse welfare assessment protocol.. Anim Welf 2017;26(1):59–65.
  25. Mellor DJ. Updating animal welfare thinking: moving beyond the “five freedoms” towards “a life worth living”.. Animals (Basel) 2016;6(3):21.
  26. Mellor DJ, Beausoleil NJ, Littlewood KE, McLean AN, McGreevy PD, Jones B. The 2020 five domains model: including human–animal interactions in assessments of animal welfare.. Animals (Basel) 2020;10(10):1870.
  27. Mellor DJ, Beausoleil NJ. Extending the ‘Five Domains’ model for animal welfare assessment to incorporate positive welfare states.. Animal Welfare 2015;24(3):241–253.
  28. International Federation of Horseracing Authorities. IFHA Publishes Minimum Horse Welfare Standards [Internet].. 2020.
  29. Annan R, Trigg LE, Hockenhull J, Allen K, Butler D, Valenchon M. Racehorse welfare across a training season.. Front Vet Sci [Internet] 2023;10:1208744.
  30. Mactaggart AG, Phillips CJC. Validating a thoroughbred racehorse welfare index through horse behaviour and trainers' reports of welfare issues in their horses.. Animals (Basel) 2023;13(2):282.
  31. Annan R, Trigg L, Allen K, Hockenhull J, Valenchon M, Mullan S. Welfare assessment of racehorses provides a baseline for continued monitoring.. Equine Vet J [Internet] 2025;58(1):165–181.
  32. Hennes N, Ruet A, Phelipon R, Duluard A, Bourguignon H, Lansade L. Poor welfare indicators may be associated with performance limitations in racehorses.. Appl Animal Behav Sci 2025;290:106697.
  33. Steel C, Morrice‐West A. 51 ‐ veterinary aspects of training, conditioning, and racing thoroughbred racehorses [Internet].. 2024; p. 1131–1168.
  34. Uldahl M, Bundgaard L, Dahl J, Clayton HM. Assessment of skin and mucosa at the equine oral commissures to assess pathology from bit Wear: the oral commissure assessment protocol (OCA) for analysis and categorisation of oral commissures.. Animals 2022;12(5):643.
  35. Henneke DR, Potter GD, Kreider JL, Yeates BF. Relationship between condition score, physical measurements and body fat percentage in mares.. Equine Vet J 1983;15(4):371–372.
  36. Bates D, Mächler M, Bolker B, Walker S. Fitting linear mixed‐effects models using lme4.. J Stat Softw 2015;67:1–48.
  37. Campbell MLH. The role of veterinarians in equestrian sport: a comparative review of ethical issues surrounding human and equine sports medicine.. Vet J 2013;197(3):535–540.
  38. Fiedler J, Slater J. 3—Welfare of equine athletes in sport and the social license to operate [Internet].. 2024; p. 1131–1168.
  39. Maurício LS, Leme DP, Hötzel MJ. The easiest becomes the rule: beliefs, knowledge and attitudes of equine practitioners and enthusiasts regarding horse welfare.. Animals (Basel) 2024;14(9):1282.
  40. Padalino B, Zaccagnino P, Celi P. The effect of different types of physical exercise on the behavioural and physiological parameters of standardbred horses housed in single stalls.. Vet Med Int 2014;2014:875051.
  41. Fraser L. The Horse's 3 F's: Friends, Forage, Freedom Pt 1. [Internet].. 2012.
  42. Hall C, Kay R. Living the good life? A systematic review of behavioural signs of affective state in the domestic horse (Equus caballus) and factors relating to quality of life. Part I: fulfilment of species‐specific needs.. Anim Welf 2024;33:e40.
  43. Hall C, Kay R. Living the good life? A systematic review of behavioural signs of affective state in the domestic horse (Equus caballus) and factors relating to quality of life. Part 2: horse‐human interactions.. Anim Welf 2024;33:e41.
  44. Fowler AL, Pyles MB, Bill VT, Hayes SH, Harris PA, Lawrence LM. Relationships between measurements of body fat in thoroughbred horses.. J Equine Vet Sci 2020;85:102873.
  45. Kentucky Equine Research. Body Condition Scoring [Internet].. 2011.
  46. Carroll SL, Sykes BW, Mills PC. Understanding and treating equine behavioural problems.. Vet J 2023;296–297:105985.
  47. Mellor DJ. Mouth pain in horses: physiological foundations, behavioural indices, welfare implications, and a suggested solution.. Animals 2020;10(4):572.
  48. Tuomola K, Mäki‐Kihniä N, Valros A, Mykkänen A, Kujala‐Wirth M. Risk factors for bit‐related lesions in Finnish trotting horses.. Equine Vet J 2021;53(6):1132–1140.
  49. Auer U, Kelemen Z, Engl V, Jenner F. Activity time budgets—a potential tool to monitor equine welfare?. Animals 2021;11(3):850.
  50. Kádár R, Maros K, Drégelyi Z, Szedenik Á, Lukácsi A, Pesti A. Incidence of compulsive behavior (stereotypies/abnormal repetitive behaviors) in populations of sport and race horses in Hungary.. J Vet Behav 2023;61:37–49.
  51. Waters AJ, Nicol CJ, French NP. Factors influencing the development of stereotypic and redirected behaviours in young horses: findings of a four year prospective epidemiological study.. Equine Vet J 2002;34(6):572–579.
  52. 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;69(1):67–83.
  53. Flamand A, Robinet L, Raskin A, Braconnier M, Bouhamidi A, Derolez G. The social dimension of equine welfare: social contact positively affects the emotional state of stalled horses.. Anim Behav 2025;221:123055.
  54. Leleu C, Haentjens F. Morphological, haemato‐biochemical and endocrine changes in young Standardbreds with ‘maladaptation’ to early training: biomarkers of maladaptation to training.. Equine Vet J 2010;42:171–178.
  55. Uldahl M, Dahl J, Clayton HM. Body condition score in Danish horses related to type, use, and training level: patterns, risk, and protective factors.. Animals 2023;13(7):1219.
  56. Borthwick EJ, Preshaw L, Wheeler‐Launder C, Challinor C, Housby‐Skeggs N, Boalch E. Stable design influences relaxation and affiliative behavior in horses during short isolation bouts.. J Vet Behav 2023;69–70:1–7.
  57. Yarnell K, Hall C, Royle C, Walker SL. Domesticated horses differ in their behavioural and physiological responses to isolated and group housing.. Physiol Behav 2015;143:51–57.
  58. 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.
  59. Feighelstein M, Riccie‐Bonot C, Hasan H, Weinberg H, Rettig T, Segal M. Automated recognition of emotional states of horses from facial expressions.. PLoS One 2024;19(7):e0302893.
  60. Lencioni GC, de Sousa RV, Sardinha EJ d S, Corrêa RR, Zanella AJ. Pain assessment in horses using automatic facial expression recognition through deep learning‐based modeling.. PLoS One 2021;16(10):e0258672.
  61. Hausberger M, Roche H, Henry S, Visser EK. A review of the human–horse relationship.. Appl Animal Behav Sci 2008;109(1):1–24.
  62. Hemsworth PH. Human–animal interactions in livestock production.. Appl Animal Behav Sci 2003;81(3):185–198.
  63. Littlewood K, Beausoleil N, Mellor D. Chapter 1—Assessing equine welfare: operationalizing the five domains model for veterinary practitioners [Internet].. 2025; p. 1–20.
  64. Hall C, Goodwin D, Heleski C, Randle H, Waran N. Is there evidence of learned helplessness in horses?. J Appl Anim Welf Sci 2008;11(3):249–266.
  65. Hall C, Kay R, Yarnell K. Assessing ridden horse behavior: professional judgment and physiological measures.. J Vet Behav 2014;9(1):22–29.
  66. Heartz H. Learning Theory: Improving Horse‐Human Communication, Horse Welfare, and Human Safety. Equine History Collective Conference 2023.
  67. McLean AN, Christensen JW. The application of learning theory in horse training. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2017;190:18–27.
  68. Mills DS. Applying learning theory to the management of the horse: the difference between getting it right and getting it wrong. Equine Vet J 1998;30(27):44–48.
  69. Dorman C, Barnes A, Fleming P. Qualitative behavioral assessment (QBA) of horses competing in a 160 km endurance ride. J Vet Behav 2010;5(4):212.
  70. Jaramillo FM, Oliveira TM, Silva PEA, Trindade PHE, Baccarin RYA. Development of a fixed list of descriptors for the qualitative behavioral assessment of thoroughbred horses in the racing environment. Front Vet Sci 2023;10:1189846.
  71. Minero M, Dalla Costa E, Dai F, Canali E, Barbieri S, Zanella A. Using qualitative behaviour assessment (QBA) to explore the emotional state of horses and its association with human‐animal relationship. Appl Animal Behav Sci 2018;204:53–59.
  72. Hall C, Randle H, Pearson G, Preshaw L, Waran N. Assessing equine emotional state. Appl Animal Behav Sci 2018;205:183–193.
  73. Kil N, Ertelt K, Auer U. Development and validation of an automated video tracking model for stabled horses. Animals (Basel) 2020;10(12):2258.
  74. Kirsch K, Strutzke S, Klitzing L, Pilger F, Thöne‐Reineke C, Hoffmann G. Validation of a time‐distributed residual LSTM–CNN and BiLSTM for equine behavior recognition using collar‐worn sensors. Comput Electron Agric 2025;231:109999.
  75. Martin‐Cirera A, Nowak M, Norton T, Auer U, Oczak M. Comparison of transformers with LSTM for classification of the behavioural time budget in horses based on video data. Biosyst Eng 2024;242:154–168.
  76. Phelipon R, Lansade L, Razzaq M. Using deep learning models to decode emotional states in horses. Sci Rep 2025;15(1):13154.
  77. Rohan A, Rafaq MS, Hasan MJ, Asghar F, Bashir AK, Dottorini T. Application of deep learning for livestock behaviour recognition: a systematic literature review. Comput Electron Agric 2024;224:109115.

Citations

This article has been cited 0 times.
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,928 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.