FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Front Vet Sci / Welfare assessment of horses and mules used in recreational ...
Frontiers in veterinary science2022; 9; 1031192; doi: 10.3389/fvets.2022.1031192

Welfare assessment of horses and mules used in recreational and muleteer work in the Colombian coffee region.

Abstract: The welfare of working equids in developing countries is sometimes threatened due to the limited resources and/or knowledge of their owners. The objective of this study is to evaluate the welfare of creole horses and mules using a validated protocol that assesses animal-based indicators. A total of 160 horses and 40 mules from three municipalities in the Colombian coffee-growing region were evaluated by means of direct observation of health and behavioral parameters. A descriptive analysis of the variables expressed in proportions was performed. Interactions between the different measurements were examined using the Chi-squared test. Spearman correlations were used to relate the measurements. Horses and mules demonstrated friendly behavior in front of the evaluators (78.13 and 61.54%, respectively); apathetic or severely depressed behavior was low (10.7 and 17.5%, P > 0.05). Significant differences in body condition score (BCS) were observed between mules and horses (P < 0.05); eighty percent of the mules and 54.4% of the horses exhibited a healthy body condition score (3 or more on a scale of 1 to 5). Less than 15% of the animals had eye problems, limb deformities, and gait abnormalities. Injuries to the head, withers, spine, ribs/flank, hindquarters, and hind legs were observed in a frequency between 12.5 and 30.43% of the animals, with a higher frequency in horses (P < 0.05). Weak correlations (R2 coefficient < 0.5), although statistically significant, were observed between low body conditions and the presence of skin and deeper tissue lesions, systemic health abnormalities, and limb problems (P < 0.05). The results indicate that owners care for their animals. However, the presence of skin and deep tissue lesions, especially in horses, suggests that they are subjected to high workloads. Therefore, it is essential to train owners in aspects related to the importance of providing their equids with adequate rest periods to recover from work and develop actions to strengthen human-equine interaction.
Copyright © 2022 Romero, Meneses and Sanchez.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2022-11-17 PubMed ID: 36467651PubMed Central: PMC9713311DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2022.1031192Google 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 research investigates the welfare conditions of horses and mules used for recreational and muleteer work in Colombia’s coffee-growing region. The findings suggest that while most equids exhibit good health, there are notable instances of injuries and conditions potentially resulting from overwork.

Objective and Methodology of the Study

  • The research was conducted to assess the welfare of creole horses and mules working in the Colombian coffee region.
  • The study leveraged a validated protocol that uses animal-based indicators such as health and behavioral parameters to evaluate welfare.
  • A total of 160 horses and 40 mules were assessed from three different municipalities in the coffee-growing region.
  • Health and behaviour parameters were evaluated using direct observation and a descriptive analysis of the variables expressed in proportions was carried out.
  • The interplay between different measurements was established using Chi-squared tests, with Spearman correlations used to link the measurements.

Key Findings from the Study

  • Most horses and mules displayed friendly behavior in front of the evaluators, with incidences of apathetic or severely depressed behavior being relatively low.
  • Significant differences in body condition score (BCS) were found between mules and horses. The majority of mules (80%) and horses (54.4%) were found to have a healthy body condition score (BCS of 3 or more on a scale of 1 to 5).
  • Less than 15% of the animals exhibited eye problems, limb deformities, and gait abnormalities. However, injuries to regions such as the head, withers, spine, ribs/flank, hindquarters, and hind legs were found with varying frequency in the animal population.
  • While weak correlations were observed between low body conditions and the presence of skin and deeper tissue lesions, systemic health abnormalities, and limb problems, these were found to be statistically significant.

Implications of the Study

  • The findings from this study indicate that equid owners generally care for their animals. However, health issues, especially skin and deep tissue lesions, were found particularly in horses, suggesting that the animals might be subjected to excessive workloads.
  • The study suggests that it is crucial to train owners on the importance of providing their equids with adequate rest periods to recover from work.
  • Moreover, additional efforts should be made to further strengthen human-equine interaction in the interests of animal welfare.

Cite This Article

APA
Romero MH, Meneses F, Sanchez JA. (2022). Welfare assessment of horses and mules used in recreational and muleteer work in the Colombian coffee region. Front Vet Sci, 9, 1031192. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2022.1031192

Publication

Frontiers in veterinary science
ISSN: 2297-1769
NlmUniqueID: 101666658
Country: Switzerland
Language: English
Volume: 9
Pages: 1031192

Researcher Affiliations

Romero, Marlyn H
  • Department of Animal Health, Faculty of Agrarian and Animal Sciences, University of Caldas, Manizales, Colombia.
Meneses, Fernando
  • Program of Veterinary Medicine, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, Santa Rosa de Cabal University Corporation-UNISARC, Santa Rosa de Cabal, Colombia.
Sanchez, Jorge A
  • Department of Animal Health, Faculty of Agrarian and Animal Sciences, University of Caldas, Manizales, Colombia.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References

This article includes 42 references
  1. Pritchard JC. Animal traction and transport in the 21st century: getting the priorities right.. Vet J (2010) 186:271–4.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2010.08.004pubmed: 20833088google scholar: lookup
  2. Velázquez-Beltrán LG, Sánchez-Vera E, Nava-Bernal EG, Arriaga-Jordán CM. The role of working equines to livelihoods in current day campesino hill-slope communities in central Mexico.. Trop Anim Health Prod (2011) 43:1623–32.
    doi: 10.1007/s11250-011-9881-6pubmed: 21637993google scholar: lookup
  3. 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
  4. Ali ABA, El Sayed MA, Matoock MY, Fouad MA, Heleski CR. 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
  5. Mekuria S, Mulachew M, Abebe R. Management practices and welfare problems encountered on working equids in Hawassa town, Southern Ethiopia.. J Vet Med Anim Heal (2013) 5:243–50.
    doi: 10.5897/JVMAH10.017google scholar: lookup
  6. Pritchard JC, Lindberg AC, Main DCJ, Whay HR. Assessment of the welfare of working horses, mules and donkeys, using health and behaviour parameters.. Prev Vet Med (2005) 69:265–83.
    doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2005.02.002pubmed: 15907574google scholar: lookup
  7. Mayorga CDA. Paisaje Cultural Cafetero, Patrimonio de la Humanidad. La cuestión del discurso patrimonial en contraste con el paisaje de la caficultura.. Territorios (2015) 32:35–59.
    doi: 10.12804/territ32.2015.02google scholar: lookup
  8. Instituto Colombiano Agropecuario I . Reglamento que establece los requisitos para la expedición de licencias zoosanitarias de funcionamiento que autorizan las concentraciones de animiales y se señalan los requisitos sanitarios para los animales que participen en ellas. D Of la República, Resolución 001634. (2010). Available online at: https://www.ica.gov.co/getdoc/016f3c96-a458-4fa6-ae96-41d18b2221f5/requisitos-sanitarios-y-de-inocuidad-en-la-producc.aspx (accessed November 2, 2019).
  9. Burn CC, Dennison TL, Whay HR. Environmental and demographic risk factors for poor welfare in working horses, donkeys and mules in developing countries.. Vet J (2010) 186:385–92.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2009.09.016pubmed: 19926316google scholar: lookup
  10. Burn CC, Dennison TL, Whay HR. Relationships between behaviour and health in working horses, donkeys, and mules in developing countries.. Appl Anim Behav Sci (2010) 126:109–18.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2010.06.007google scholar: lookup
  11. Dalla Costa E, Dai F, Murray LAM, Guazzetti S, Canali E, Minero M. Study on validity and reliability of on-farm tests to measure human–animal relationship in horses and donkeys.. Appl Anim Behav Sci (2015) 163:110–21.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2014.12.007google scholar: lookup
  12. 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) 6:20117.
    doi: 10.1038/srep20117pmc: PMC4731760pubmed: 26823123google scholar: lookup
  13. Hall C, Goodwin D, Heleski C, Randle H, Waran N. Is there evidence of learned helplessness in horses?. J Appl Anim Welf Sci (2008) 11:249–66.
    doi: 10.1080/10888700802101130pubmed: 18569222google scholar: lookup
  14. Kumar N, Fisseha KK, Shishay N, Hagos Y. Welfare assessment of working donkeys in Mekelle city, Ethiopia.. Glob Vet (2014) 12:314–9.
    doi: 10.5829/idosi.gv.2014.12.03.82120google scholar: lookup
  15. Lagos J, Rojas M, Rodrigues JB, Tadich T. Perceptions and attitudes towards mules in a group of soldiers.. Animals (2021) 11:1009.
    doi: 10.3390/ani11041009pmc: PMC8067085pubmed: 33916720google scholar: lookup
  16. Ali ABA, Matoock MY, Fouad MA, Heleski CR. Are mules or donkeys better adapted for Egyptian brick kiln work? (Until we can change the kilns). J Vet Behav (2015) 10:158–65.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jveb.2014.12.003google scholar: lookup
  17. Ali ABA, El Sayed MA, McLean AK, Heleski CR. Aggression in working mules and subsequent aggressive treatment by their handlers in Egyptian brick kilns—Cause or effect?. J Vet Behav (2019) 29:95–101.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jveb.2018.05.008google scholar: lookup
  18. McLean AK, Navas González FJ, Canisso IF. Donkey and mule behavior.. Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract (2019) 35:575–88.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cveq.2019.08.010pubmed: 31672203google scholar: lookup
  19. Luna D, Vásquez R, Rojas M, Tadich T. Welfare status of working horses and owners′ perceptions of their animals.. Animals (2017) 7:56.
    doi: 10.3390/ani7080056pmc: PMC5575568pubmed: 28788109google scholar: lookup
  20. Luna D, Vásquez R, Yáñez J, Tadich T. The relationship between working horse welfare state and their owners' empathy level and perception of equine pain.. Anim Welf (2018) 27:115–23.
    doi: 10.7120/09627286.27.2.115google scholar: lookup
  21. Hötzel MJ, Vieira MC, Leme DP. Exploring horse owners' and caretakers' perceptions of emotions and associated behaviors in horses.. J Vet Behav (2019) 29:18–24.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jveb.2018.10.002google scholar: lookup
  22. Sankey C, Henry S, André N, Richard-Yris M-A, Hausberger M. Do horses have a concept of person?. PLoS ONE (2011) 6:e18331.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0018331pmc: PMC3068175pubmed: 21479184google scholar: lookup
  23. Stone SM. Human facial discrimination in horses: can they tell us apart?. Anim Cogn (2010) 13:51–61.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-009-0244-xpubmed: 19533185google scholar: lookup
  24. Waiblinger S, Boivin X, Pedersen V, Tosi M-V, Janczak AM, Visser EK. Assessing the human–animal relationship in farmed species: a critical review.. Appl Anim Behav Sci (2006) 101:185–242.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2006.02.001google scholar: lookup
  25. Luz MPF, Maia CM, Gonçalvez HC, Puoli Filho JNP. Influence of workload and weather conditions on rolling behaviour of horses and mules.. Behav Processes (2021) 189:104433.
    doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2021.104433pubmed: 34090953google scholar: lookup
  26. Proops L, Burden F, Osthaus B. Mule cognition: a case of hybrid vigour?. Anim Cogn (2009) 12:75–84.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-008-0172-1pubmed: 18636282google scholar: lookup
  27. Hemsworth LM, Jongman E, Coleman GJ. Recreational horse welfare: The relationships between recreational horse owner attributes and recreational horse welfare.. Appl Anim Behav Sci (2015) 165:1–16.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2014.11.019pubmed: 0google scholar: lookup
  28. Burden F, Thiemann A. Donkeys are different.. J Equine Vet Sci (2015) 35:376–82.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2015.03.005google scholar: lookup
  29. Mclean A. Comparing the physiological and biochemical parameters of mules and hinnies to horses and donkeys Amy K. McLean, PhD North Carolina State University Proceedings in the Donkey and Mule Welfare Symposuim, Hydra, Greece October; (2015).. .
  30. Haddy E, Brown J, Burden F, Raw Z, Kaminski J, Proops L. “What can we do to actually reach all these animals?” Evaluating approaches to improving working equid welfare.. PLoS ONE (2022) 17:e0273972.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0273972pmc: PMC9462723pubmed: 36084063google scholar: lookup
  31. Cruz Amaya JM, Sánchez VJA, Vera Hernández LG. Caracterización y prevalencia de las enfermedades orales en el caballo criollo, departamento de Caldas, Colombia.. Rev Med Vet (Bogota) (2012) 39:73.
    doi: 10.19052/mv.73google scholar: lookup
  32. Dixon PM, Dacre I. Review of equine dental disorders.. Vet J (2005) 169:165–87.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2004.03.022pubmed: 15727909google scholar: lookup
  33. Buitrago-Mejía J, Díaz-Cueto M, Suarez-Chica A, Cardona-Álvarez J. Distribución geográfica de la casuística clínica equina del servicio ambulatorio de grandes animales de la universidad de córdoba, colombia.. Rev Científica (2017) XXVII:270–81.
  34. Burden FA, Du Toit N, Hernandez-Gil M, Prado-Ortiz O, Trawford AF. Selected health and management issues facing working donkeys presented for veterinary treatment in rural Mexico: some possible risk factors and potential intervention strategies.. Trop Anim Health Prod (2010) 42:597–605.
    doi: 10.1007/s11250-009-9462-0pubmed: 19784862google scholar: lookup
  35. Galindo F, de Aluja A, Cagigas R, Huerta LA, Tadich TA. Application of the hands-on donkey tool for assessing the welfare of working equids at Tuliman, Mexico.. J Appl Anim Welf Sci (2018) 21:93–100.
    doi: 10.1080/10888705.2017.1351365pubmed: 28762781google scholar: lookup
  36. Fsahaye S, Kumar N, Kebede E, Abebe N. Health and welfare assessment of working donkeys in and around Rama town, Tigray, Ethiopia.. Ethiop Vet J (2018) 22:26.
    doi: 10.4314/evj.v22i1.3google scholar: lookup
  37. Reix CE, Dikshit AK, Hockenhull J, Parker RMA, Banerjee A, Burn CC. Two-year participatory intervention project with owners to reduce lameness and limb abnormalities in working horses in Jaipur, India.. PLoS ONE (2015) 10:e0124342.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0124342pmc: PMC4405470pubmed: 25898014google scholar: lookup
  38. Pearson NY. A Study of Horse Ownership Management in Victoria. Australia.. (2003).
  39. Paul H, Hemsworth GJC. Human-livestock interactions: The stockperson and the productivity and welfare of intensively farmed animals.. 2nd ed. Wallingford UK: CABI International. (2011).
  40. Lynden J, Hollands T, Ogden J, A. Farrier. A Farrier making every contact count: a microlevel analysis of farrier-client interaction for partnership working in managing a horse with laminitis.. J Equine Vet Sci (2020) 87:102924.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2020.102924pubmed: 32172914google scholar: lookup
  41. 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 (2010) 37:565–75.
    doi: 10.2746/042516405775314826pubmed: 16295937google scholar: lookup
  42. Pritchard JC, Burn CC, Barr ARS, Whay HR. Haematological and serum biochemical reference values for apparently healthy working horses in Pakistan.. Res Vet Sci (2009) 87:389–95.
    doi: 10.1016/j.rvsc.2009.05.003pubmed: 19552930google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 0 times.
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,344 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.