FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 10000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Animals : an open access journal from MDPI2020; 10(3); 371; doi: 10.3390/ani10030371

On-Farm Welfare Assessment of Horses: The Risks of Putting the Cart before the Horse.

Abstract: Although the question of animal welfare has been an important source of concern in the scientific community for several decades, many aspects are still under debate. On-farm assessments have to be rapid, acceptable to farmers and safe for both the assessors and animals. They are thus very demanding, with multiple decisions to make, such as the choice of appropriate indicators, sampling methods and scoring. Research has moved from resource-based to animal-based criteria, which reflects the subjective welfare state of an animal rather than relying upon external indices. In the present review, we describe two major (i.e., the most frequently/recently tested or disseminated) protocols: one in low-/middle-income countries, and the other in high-income countries, for on-farm assessments of horses, using animal-based resources; we evaluate their strengths and limitations, and then we compare their results with those obtained by various other studies. We propose lines of improvement, particularly in view of public dissemination, and offer suggestions for further refinement or new protocols. We emphasize the high risks of putting the cart before the horse, i.e., proposing protocols that rely upon indicators and sampling methods that need to be refined, as this could lead to under-evaluation (or less likely over-evaluation) of current welfare problems. Because welfare is a subjective experience, the true representation of an individual's actual welfare status has to be evaluated by using objective assessment tools (that are validated and have a scientific basis) used by well-trained observers.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2020-02-25 PubMed ID: 32106531PubMed Central: PMC7143857DOI: 10.3390/ani10030371Google 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
  • Review

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 research article discusses the complexities of assessing the welfare of horses on farms, emphasizing the importance of accurate, reliable protocols to ensure the well-being of the animals. It reviews and evaluates current protocols for this purpose, highlighting challenges and proposing improvements.

Understanding the Research

The main theme of this research article revolves around the assessment of animal welfare, particularly for horses, on farms. The researchers delve into the following areas:

  • The shift in research focus from resource-based to animal-based criteria, meaning the consideration of the animal’s subjective welfare state instead of external factors.
  • A comprehensive evaluation of the two most frequently used protocols for on-farm welfare evaluation of horses; one used in low/middle-income countries and the other in high-income countries.
  • An in-depth discussion and analysis of these protocols’ strengths and limitations.
  • A comparison of the results obtained from these protocols with results from various other studies.

Proposed improvements

The authors of this paper suggest improvements in the current methods of on-farm horse welfare assessment:

  • They propose suggestions that could lead to refinement of existing protocols or creation of new ones, thus adding more precision to the evaluation process.
  • They emphasize the risks of rushing to propose protocols that rely upon indicators and sampling methods that need refinement, as this could lead to under- or over-evaluation of current welfare problems.

Importance of Objective Assessment Tools

A key conclusion of this research is the call for objective assessment tools that are validated and based on scientific data. The authors stress that:

  • Because welfare is a subjective experience, its accurate assessment requires tools that give a true representation of an individual’s actual welfare status.
  • Improperly designed or implemented protocols not only risk inaccurate results, but also may pose danger to both the assessors and the animals.
  • Assessments must be done by well-trained observers to ensure accuracy, safety, and efficiency.

Cite This Article

APA
Hausberger M, Lerch N, Guilbaud E, Stomp M, Grandgeorge M, Henry S, Lesimple C. (2020). On-Farm Welfare Assessment of Horses: The Risks of Putting the Cart before the Horse. Animals (Basel), 10(3), 371. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10030371

Publication

Animals : an open access journal from MDPI
ISSN: 2076-2615
NlmUniqueID: 101635614
Country: Switzerland
Language: English
Volume: 10
Issue: 3
PII: 371

Researcher Affiliations

Hausberger, Martine
  • Univ Rennes, Normandie Univ, CNRS, EthoS (Éthologie animale et humaine)-UMR 6552, F-35380 Paimpont, France.
Lerch, Noémie
  • Univ Rennes, Normandie Univ, CNRS, EthoS (Éthologie animale et humaine)-UMR 6552, F-35380 Paimpont, France.
Guilbaud, Estelle
  • Univ Rennes, Normandie Univ, CNRS, EthoS (Éthologie animale et humaine)-UMR 6552, F-35380 Paimpont, France.
Stomp, Mathilde
  • Univ Rennes, Normandie Univ, CNRS, EthoS (Éthologie animale et humaine)-UMR 6552, F-35380 Paimpont, France.
Grandgeorge, Marine
  • Univ Rennes, Normandie Univ, CNRS, EthoS (Éthologie animale et humaine)-UMR 6552, F-35380 Paimpont, France.
Henry, Séverine
  • Univ Rennes, Normandie Univ, CNRS, EthoS (Éthologie animale et humaine)-UMR 6552, F-35380 Paimpont, France.
Lesimple, Clémence
  • Univ Rennes, Normandie Univ, CNRS, EthoS (Éthologie animale et humaine)-UMR 6552, F-35380 Paimpont, France.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

This article includes 83 references
  1. Lesimple C. Indicators of Horse Welfare: State-of-the-Art.. Animals (Basel) 2020 Feb 13;10(2).
    doi: 10.3390/ani10020294pmc: PMC7070675pubmed: 32069888google scholar: lookup
  2. Broom DM. A history of animal welfare science.. Acta Biotheor 2011 Jun;59(2):121-37.
    doi: 10.1007/s10441-011-9123-3pubmed: 21347723google scholar: lookup
  3. Blokhuis H.J., Jones R.B., Geers R., Miele M., Veissier I.. Measuring and monitoring animal welfare: Transparency in the food product quality chain.. Anim. Welf. 2003;12:445–455.
  4. Burn C.C., Pritchard J.C., Whay H.R.. Observer reliability for working equine welfare assessment: Problems with high prevalence of certain results.. Anim. Welf. 2009;18:177–187.
  5. Jensen RB, Danielsen SH, Tauson AH. Body condition score, morphometric measurements and estimation of body weight in mature Icelandic horses in Denmark.. Acta Vet Scand 2016 Oct 20;58(Suppl 1):59.
    doi: 10.1186/s13028-016-0240-5pmc: PMC5073991pubmed: 27766968google scholar: lookup
  6. Lesimple C, Hausberger M. How accurate are we at assessing others' well-being? The example of welfare assessment in horses.. Front Psychol 2014;5:21.
    doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00021pmc: PMC3900850pubmed: 24478748google scholar: lookup
  7. Lesimple C, Fureix C, Biquand V, Hausberger M. Comparison of clinical examinations of back disorders and humans' evaluation of back pain in riding school horses.. BMC Vet Res 2013 Oct 15;9:209.
    doi: 10.1186/1746-6148-9-209pmc: PMC4015870pubmed: 24128080google scholar: lookup
  8. Jeffcott LB. The Fourth Sir Frederick Hobday Memorial Lecture. Back problems in the horse--a look at past, present and future progress.. Equine Vet J 1979 Jul;11(3):129-36.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1979.tb01324.xpubmed: 158523google scholar: lookup
  9. Fonseca B.P.A., Alves A.L.G., Nicoletti J.L.M., Thomassian A., Hussni C.A., Mikail S.. Thermography and ultrasonography in back pain diagnosis of equine athletes.. J. Equine Vet. Sci. 2006;26:507–510.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2006.09.007google scholar: lookup
  10. 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
  11. Carter RA, Geor RJ, Burton Staniar W, Cubitt TA, Harris PA. Apparent adiposity assessed by standardised scoring systems and morphometric measurements in horses and ponies.. Vet J 2009 Feb;179(2):204-10.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2008.02.029pubmed: 18440844google scholar: lookup
  12. Catalano D.N., Coleman R.J., Hathaway M.R., McCue M.E., Rendahl A.K., Martinson K.L.. Estimation of actual and ideal bodyweight using morphometric measurements and owner guessed bodyweight of adult draft and Warmblood horses.. J. Equine Vet. Sci. 2016;39:38–43.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2015.09.002google scholar: lookup
  13. Hawkins P, Morton DB, Burman O, Dennison N, Honess P, Jennings M, Lane S, Middleton V, Roughan JV, Wells S, Westwood K. A guide to defining and implementing protocols for the welfare assessment of laboratory animals: eleventh report of the BVAAWF/FRAME/RSPCA/UFAW Joint Working Group on Refinement.. Lab Anim 2011 Jan;45(1):1-13.
    pubmed: 21123303doi: 10.1258/la.2010.010031google scholar: lookup
  14. Hausberger M, Fureix C, Bourjade M, Wessel-Robert S, Richard-Yris MA. On the significance of adult play: what does social play tell us about adult horse welfare?. Naturwissenschaften 2012 Apr;99(4):291-302.
    doi: 10.1007/s00114-012-0902-8pubmed: 22402927google scholar: lookup
  15. Blois-Heulin C., Rochais C., Camus S., Fureix C., Lemasson A., Lunel C., Bézard E., Hausberger M.. Animal welfare: Could adult play be a false friend?. Anim. Behav. Cogn. 2015;2:156–185.
    doi: 10.12966/abc.05.04.2015google scholar: lookup
  16. Visser EK, Neijenhuis F, de Graaf-Roelfsema E, Wesselink HG, de Boer J, van Wijhe-Kiezebrink MC, Engel B, van Reenen CG. Risk factors associated with health disorders in sport and leisure horses in the Netherlands.. J Anim Sci 2014 Feb;92(2):844-55.
    doi: 10.2527/jas.2013-6692pubmed: 24352963google scholar: lookup
  17. Altmann J. Observational study of behavior: sampling methods.. Behaviour 1974;49(3):227-67.
    doi: 10.1163/156853974X00534pubmed: 4597405google scholar: lookup
  18. Benhajali H., Richard-Yris M.A., Leroux M., Ezzaouia M., Charfi F., Hausberger M.. A note on the time budget and social behaviour of densely housed horses A case study in Arab breeding mares.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2007;112:196–200.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2007.08.007google scholar: lookup
  19. Benhajali H, Richard-Yris MA, Ezzaouia M, Charfi F, Hausberger M. Foraging opportunity: a crucial criterion for horse welfare?. Animal 2009 Sep;3(9):1308-12.
    doi: 10.1017/S1751731109004820pubmed: 22444907google scholar: lookup
  20. Hausberger M., Fureix C., Lesimple C.. Detecting horses’ sickness: In search of visible signs.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2016;175:41–49.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2015.09.005google scholar: lookup
  21. Marquié L, Raufaste E, Lauque D, Mariné C, Ecoiffier M, Sorum P. Pain rating by patients and physicians: evidence of systematic pain miscalibration.. Pain 2003 Apr;102(3):289-296.
    doi: 10.1016/S0304-3959(02)00402-5pubmed: 12670671google scholar: lookup
  22. Brown A. Standardised Equine Based Welfare Assessment Tool (SEBWAT) [(accessed on 20 December 2019)]; Available online: https://www.thebrooke.org/sites/default/files/Professionals/SEBWAT.pdf.
  23. Dalla Costa E., Murray L., Dai F., Canali E., Minero M.. Equine on-farm welfare assessment: A review of animal-based indicators.. Anim. Welf. 2014;23:323–341.
    doi: 10.7120/09627286.23.3.323google scholar: lookup
  24. Pritchard JC, Lindberg AC, Main DC, Whay HR. Assessment of the welfare of working horses, mules and donkeys, using health and behaviour parameters.. Prev Vet Med 2005 Jul 12;69(3-4):265-83.
    doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2005.02.002pubmed: 15907574google scholar: lookup
  25. Sommerville R, Brown AF, Upjohn M. A standardised equine-based welfare assessment tool used for six years in low and middle income countries.. PLoS One 2018;13(2):e0192354.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0192354pmc: PMC5821349pubmed: 29466391google scholar: lookup
  26. Pritchard JC, Barr AR, Whay HR. Validity of a behavioural measure of heat stress and a skin tent test for dehydration in working horses and donkeys.. Equine Vet J 2006 Sep;38(5):433-8.
    doi: 10.2746/042516406778400646pubmed: 16986604google scholar: lookup
  27. Pritchard J., Barr A., Whay H.. Repeatability of a skin tent test for dehydration in working horses and donkeys.. Anim. Welf. 2007;16:181–183.
  28. Pritchard JC, Burn CC, Barr AR, Whay HR. Validity of indicators of dehydration in working horses: a longitudinal study of changes in skin tent duration, mucous membrane dryness and drinking behaviour.. Equine Vet J 2008 Sep;40(6):558-64.
    doi: 10.2746/042516408X297462pubmed: 18356129google scholar: lookup
  29. Burn C., Dennison T., Whay H.. Relationships between behavior and health in working horses, donkeys, and mules in developing countries.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2010;126:109–118.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2010.06.007google scholar: lookup
  30. Ali A.B.A., El Sayed M.A., Matoock M.Y., Fouad M.A., Heleski C.R.. A welfare assessment scoring system for working equids-A method for identifying at risk populations and for monitoring progress of welfare enhancement strategies (trialed in Egypt). Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2016;176:52–62.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2015.12.001google scholar: lookup
  31. Luna D, Vásquez RA, Rojas M, Tadich TA. Welfare Status of Working Horses and Owners' Perceptions of Their Animals.. Animals (Basel) 2017 Aug 1;7(8).
    doi: 10.3390/ani7080056pmc: PMC5575568pubmed: 28788109google scholar: lookup
  32. Popescu S., Diugan E.A.. The relationship between behavioral and other welfare indicators of working horses.. J. Equine Vet. Sci. 2013;33:1–12.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2012.04.001google scholar: lookup
  33. Popescu S, Diugan EA. The relationship between the welfare quality and stress index in working and breeding horses.. Res Vet Sci 2017 Dec;115:442-450.
    doi: 10.1016/j.rvsc.2017.07.028pubmed: 28772242google scholar: lookup
  34. Tadich T., Escobar A., Pearson R.. Husbandry and welfare aspects of urban draught horses in the south of Chile.. Arch. Med. Vet. 2008;40:267–273.
    doi: 10.4067/S0301-732X2008000300007google scholar: lookup
  35. Fureix C, Jego P, Sankey C, Hausberger M. How horses (Equus caballus) see the world: humans as significant "objects".. Anim Cogn 2009 Jul;12(4):643-54.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-009-0223-2pubmed: 19381698google scholar: lookup
  36. Ashley FH, Waterman-Pearson AE, Whay HR. Behavioural assessment of pain in horses and donkeys: application to clinical practice and future studies.. Equine Vet J 2005 Nov;37(6):565-75.
    doi: 10.2746/042516405775314826pubmed: 16295937google scholar: lookup
  37. Fureix C, Menguy H, Hausberger M. Partners with bad temper: reject or cure? A study of chronic pain and aggression in horses.. PLoS One 2010 Aug 26;5(8):e12434.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0012434pmc: PMC2928779pubmed: 20865160google scholar: lookup
  38. 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):249-66.
    doi: 10.1080/10888700802101130pubmed: 18569222google scholar: lookup
  39. Rochais C, Fureix C, Lesimple C, Hausberger M. Lower attention to daily environment: a novel cue for detecting chronic horses' back pain?. Sci Rep 2016 Jan 29;6:20117.
    doi: 10.1038/srep20117pmc: PMC4731760pubmed: 26823123google scholar: lookup
  40. Fureix C, Jego P, Henry S, Lansade L, Hausberger M. Towards an ethological animal model of depression? A study on horses.. PLoS One 2012;7(6):e39280.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0039280pmc: PMC3386251pubmed: 22761752google scholar: lookup
  41. Lesimple C, Fureix C, De Margerie E, Sénèque E, Menguy H, Hausberger M. Towards a postural indicator of back pain in horses (Equus caballus).. PLoS One 2012;7(9):e44604.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0044604pmc: PMC3436792pubmed: 22970261google scholar: lookup
  42. Lesimple C., Fureix C., Aubé L., Hausberger M.. Detecting and measuring back disorders in nonverbal individuals: The example of domestic horses.. Anim. Behav. Cogn. 2016;3:159–179.
    doi: 10.12966/abc.05.08.2016google scholar: lookup
  43. Rochais C, Henry S, Fureix C, Hausberger M. Investigating attentional processes in depressive-like domestic horses (Equus caballus).. Behav Processes 2016 Mar;124:93-6.
    doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2015.12.010pubmed: 26739514google scholar: lookup
  44. Von Borstel U., Visser E., Hall C.. Indicators of stress in equitation.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2017;190:43–56.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2017.02.018google scholar: lookup
  45. AWIN Welfare Assessment Protocol for Horses. [(accessed on 20 December 2019)]; Available online: https://air.unimi.it/retrieve/handle/2434/269097/384836/AWINProtocolHorses.pdf.
  46. Blokhuis H., Veissier I., Mele M., Jones B.. The Welfare Quality® project and beyond: Safeguarding farm animal well-being.. Acta Agric. Scand. 2010;60:129–140.
    doi: 10.1080/09064702.2010.523480google scholar: lookup
  47. Wemelsfelder F.. How animals communicate quality of life: The qualitative assessment of behaviour.. Anim. Welf. 2007;16:25–31.
  48. Czycholl I, Klingbeil P, Krieter J. Interobserver Reliability of the Animal Welfare Indicators Welfare Assessment Protocol for Horses.. J Equine Vet Sci 2019 Apr;75:112-121.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2019.02.005pubmed: 31002084google scholar: lookup
  49. Dany P., Vidament M., Yvon J.M., Reigner F., Barrière P., Layne A.L., Lansade L., Minero M., Dalla Costa E., Briant C.. Protocole d’évaluation du bien-être chez le cheval “AWIN Horse”: Essai en conditions expérimentales et premières évaluations sur le terrain.. 43è Journées de la Recherche Equine. Institut Français du Cheval et de l’Equitation; Paris, France 2017.
  50. Mills D.S.. Repetitive movement problems in the horse.. The Domestic Horse, The Origins, Development and Management of Its Behaviour. Cambridge University Press; Cambridge, UK 2005. pp. 212–227.
  51. Dalla Costa E., Dai F., Murray L.A.M., Guazzetti S., Canali E., Minero M.. A study on validity and reliability of on-farm tests to measure human–animal relationship in horses and donkeys.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2015;163:110–121.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2014.12.007google scholar: lookup
  52. Hausberger M., Roche H., Henry S., Visser E.K.. 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
  53. Andreasen S., Wemelsfelder F., Sandoe P., Forkman B.. The correlation of Qualitative Behavior Assessment with Welfare Quality® protocol outcomes in on-farm welfare assessment of dairy cattle.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2013;143:9–17.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2012.11.013google scholar: lookup
  54. Minero M., Dalla Costa E., Dai F., Murray L.A.M., Canali E., Wemelsfelder F.. Use of Qualitative Behaviour Assessment as an indicator of welfare in donkeys.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2016;174:147–153.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2015.10.010google scholar: lookup
  55. Battini M., Peric T., Ajuda I., Grosso L., Barbieri S., Stilwell G., Prandi A., Comin A., Tubaro F., Mattiello S.. Hair coat condition: A valid and reliable indicator for on farm welfare assessment in adult dairy goats.. Small Ruminant Res. 2015;123:197–203.
    doi: 10.1016/j.smallrumres.2014.12.009google scholar: lookup
  56. Lesimple C., Reverchon-Billot L., Galloux P., Stomp M., Boichot L., Coste C., Henry S., Hausberger M.. Free movement: A key for welfare improvement in sport horses?. Appl. Anim. Behave. Sci. 2020:104972.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2020.104972google scholar: lookup
  57. Lee J., Floyd T., Erb H., Houpt K.. Preference and demand for exercise in stabled horses.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2011;130:91–100.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2011.01.001google scholar: lookup
  58. Whisher L., Raum M., Pina L., Pérez L., Erb H., Houpt C., Houpt K.. Effects of environmental factors in cribbing activity by horses.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2011;135:6–69.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2011.09.001google scholar: lookup
  59. Lesimple C., Poissonnet A., Hausberger M.. How to keep your horse safe? An epidemiological study about management practices.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2016;181:105–114.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2016.04.015google scholar: lookup
  60. Hausberger M., Muller C.. A brief note of some possible factors involved in the reactions of horses to humans.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2002;76:339–344.
    doi: 10.1016/S0168-1591(02)00016-3google scholar: lookup
  61. Sondergaard E., Halekoh U.. Young horses’ reactions to humans in relation to handling and social environment.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2003;84:265–280.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2003.08.011google scholar: lookup
  62. Welfare Monitoring System Assessment Protocol for Horses. [(accessed on 20 December 2019)]; Available online: https://edepot.wur.nl/238619.
  63. DuBois C., DeVries T., Haley D.B., Lawlis P., Merkies K.. Putting an on-farm welfare assessment tool in practice in the Canadian equine industry—A pilot study.. J. Equine Vet. Sci. 2018;63:35–40.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2017.12.004google scholar: lookup
  64. Cooper J., Albentosa M.. Behavioural adaptation in the domestic horse: Potential role of apparently abnormal responses including stereotypic behaviour.. Livest. Prod. Sci. 2005;92:177–182.
    doi: 10.1016/j.livprodsci.2004.11.017google scholar: lookup
  65. Kiatwoska-Stenzel A., Sowinska J., Witkowska D.. The effect of different bedding materials used in stable on horses behaviour.. J. Equine Vet. Sci. 2016;42:57–66.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2016.03.007google scholar: lookup
  66. Fureix C, Benhajali H, Henry S, Bruchet A, Prunier A, Ezzaouia M, Coste C, Hausberger M, Palme R, Jego P. Plasma cortisol and faecal cortisol metabolites concentrations in stereotypic and non-stereotypic horses: do stereotypic horses cope better with poor environmental conditions?. BMC Vet Res 2013 Jan 7;9:3.
    doi: 10.1186/1746-6148-9-3pmc: PMC3544618pubmed: 23289406google scholar: lookup
  67. Benhajali H., Richard-Yris M.A., Ezzaouia M., Charfi F., Hausberger M.. Reproductive status and stereotypies in breeding mares: A brief report.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2010;128:64–68.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2010.09.007google scholar: lookup
  68. Hockenhull J., Creighton E.. Management practices associated with owner-reported stable-related and handling behaviour problems in UK leisure horses.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2014;155:49–55.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2014.02.014google scholar: lookup
  69. Löckener S., Reese S., Erhard M., Wöhr A.C.. Pasturing in herds after housing in horseboxes induces positive cognitive bias in horses.. J. Vet. Behav. 2016;11:50–55.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jveb.2015.11.005google scholar: lookup
  70. Visser E.K., Ellis A.D., Van Reenen C.G.. The effect of two different housing conditions on the welfare of young horses stabled for the first time.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2008;114:521–533.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2008.03.003google scholar: lookup
  71. Christensen J., Ladewig J., Sondergaard E., Malmkvist J.. Effects of individual versus group stabling on social behaviour in domestic stallions.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2002;75:233–248.
    doi: 10.1016/S0168-1591(01)00196-4google scholar: lookup
  72. Heleski C.R., Shelle A.C., Nielsen B.D., Zanella A.J.. Influence of housing on weanling horse behavior and subsequent welfare.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2002;78:291–302.
    doi: 10.1016/S0168-1591(02)00108-9google scholar: lookup
  73. Pessoa G., Trigo P., Mesquita Neto F., Lacreta Junior A., Sousa T., Muniz J., Moura R.. Comparative well-being of horses kept under total or partial confinement prior to employment for mounted patrols.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2016;184:51–58.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2016.08.014google scholar: lookup
  74. Hausberger M, Gautier E, Biquand V, Lunel C, Jégo P. Could work be a source of behavioural disorders? A study in horses.. PLoS One 2009 Oct 28;4(10):e7625.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0007625pmc: PMC2763287pubmed: 19862328google scholar: lookup
  75. Stomp M, Leroux M, Cellier M, Henry S, Lemasson A, Hausberger M. An unexpected acoustic indicator of positive emotions in horses.. PLoS One 2018;13(7):e0197898.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0197898pmc: PMC6040684pubmed: 29995876google scholar: lookup
  76. Henry S, Fureix C, Rowberry R, Bateson M, Hausberger M. Do horses with poor welfare show 'pessimistic' cognitive biases?. Naturwissenschaften 2017 Feb;104(1-2):8.
    doi: 10.1007/s00114-016-1429-1pubmed: 28083632google scholar: lookup
  77. Raabymagle P., Ladewig J.. Lying behaviour in horses in relation to box size.. Sci. Pap. 2006;26:11–17.
  78. Lesimple C., Gautier E., Benhajali H., Rochais C., Lunel C., Bensaïd S., Khalloufi A., Henry S., Hausberger M.. Stall architecture influences horses’ behaviour and the prevalence and type of stereotypies.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2019;219:104833.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2019.104833google scholar: lookup
  79. 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
  80. Fraser D.. Assessing animal well-being: Common sense, uncommon science. Proceedings of the Conference on Food Animal Well-Being, West Lafayette, IN, USA, 13–15 April 1993. Purdue University Office of Agricultural Research Programs; West Lafayette, IN, USA 1993. pp. 37–54.
  81. Benhajali H, Ezzaouia M, Lunel C, Charfi F, Hausberger M. Temporal feeding pattern may influence reproduction efficiency, the example of breeding mares.. PLoS One 2013;8(9):e73858.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0073858pmc: PMC3787043pubmed: 24098636google scholar: lookup
  82. Mellor D., Beausoleil N.. Extending the ‘Five Domains’ model for animal welfare assessment to incorporate positive welfare states.. Anim. Welf. 2015;24:241–253.
    doi: 10.7120/09627286.24.3.241google scholar: lookup
  83. Bell C, Rogers S, Taylor J, Busby D. Improving the Recognition of Equine Affective States.. Animals (Basel) 2019 Dec 11;9(12).
    doi: 10.3390/ani9121124pmc: PMC6941154pubmed: 31835886google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 12 times.
  1. Grandgeorge M, Lerch N, Delarue A, Hausberger M. From Human Perception of Good Practices to Horse (Equus Caballus) Welfare: Example of Equine-Assisted Activities. Animals (Basel) 2024 Sep 2;14(17).
    doi: 10.3390/ani14172548pubmed: 39272332google scholar: lookup
  2. Viksten SM, Hartmann E, Schneller K, Steen M. Welfare of extensively managed Swedish Gotland ponies. Anim Welf 2023;32:e21.
    doi: 10.1017/awf.2023.20pubmed: 38487419google scholar: lookup
  3. Gueguen L, Henry S, Delbos M, Lemasson A, Hausberger M. Selected Acoustic Frequencies Have a Positive Impact on Behavioural and Physiological Welfare Indicators in Thoroughbred Racehorses. Animals (Basel) 2023 Sep 20;13(18).
    doi: 10.3390/ani13182970pubmed: 37760370google scholar: lookup
  4. Harvey AM, Beausoleil NJ, Ramp D, Mellor DJ. Mental Experiences in Wild Animals: Scientifically Validating Measurable Welfare Indicators in Free-Roaming Horses. Animals (Basel) 2023 Apr 28;13(9).
    doi: 10.3390/ani13091507pubmed: 37174544google scholar: lookup
  5. Popescu S, Lazar EA, Borda C, Blaga Petrean A, Mitrănescu E. Changes in Management, Welfare, Emotional State, and Human-Related Docility in Stallions. Animals (Basel) 2022 Oct 30;12(21).
    doi: 10.3390/ani12212981pubmed: 36359105google scholar: lookup
  6. Long M, Dürnberger C, Jenner F, Kelemen Z, Auer U, Grimm H. Quality of Life within Horse Welfare Assessment Tools: Informing Decisions for Chronically Ill and Geriatric Horses. Animals (Basel) 2022 Jul 17;12(14).
    doi: 10.3390/ani12141822pubmed: 35883370google scholar: lookup
  7. Lerch N, Cirulli F, Rochais C, Lesimple C, Guilbaud E, Contalbrigo L, Borgi M, Grandgeorge M, Hausberger M. Interest in Humans: Comparisons between Riding School Lesson Equids and Assisted-Intervention Equids. Animals (Basel) 2021 Aug 28;11(9).
    doi: 10.3390/ani11092533pubmed: 34573500google scholar: lookup
  8. Hausberger M, Lesimple C, Henry S. Detecting Welfare in a Non-Verbal Species: Social/Cultural Biases and Difficulties in Horse Welfare Assessment. Animals (Basel) 2021 Jul 30;11(8).
    doi: 10.3390/ani11082249pubmed: 34438708google scholar: lookup
  9. 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/ani11061725pubmed: 34207809google scholar: lookup
  10. Kelemen Z, Grimm H, Vogl C, Long M, Cavalleri JMV, Auer U, Jenner F. Equine Activity Time Budgets: The Effect of Housing and Management Conditions on Geriatric Horses and Horses with Chronic Orthopaedic Disease. Animals (Basel) 2021 Jun 23;11(7).
    doi: 10.3390/ani11071867pubmed: 34201584google scholar: lookup
  11. Manteca Vilanova X, Beaver B, Uldahl M, Turner PV. Recommendations for Ensuring Good Welfare of Horses Used for Industrial Blood, Serum, or Urine Production. Animals (Basel) 2021 May 20;11(5).
    doi: 10.3390/ani11051466pubmed: 34065236google scholar: lookup
  12. Auer U, Kelemen Z, Engl V, Jenner F. Activity Time Budgets-A Potential Tool to Monitor Equine Welfare?. Animals (Basel) 2021 Mar 17;11(3).
    doi: 10.3390/ani11030850pubmed: 33802908google scholar: lookup
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,727 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.