From Human Perception of Good Practices to Horse (Equus Caballus) Welfare: Example of Equine-Assisted Activities

Author:

Grandgeorge Marine1,Lerch Noémie1,Delarue Alizée1,Hausberger Martine23ORCID

Affiliation:

1. CNRS, EthoS (Éthologie Animale et Humaine)—UMR 6552, Univ Rennes, Normandie Univ, F-35000 Rennes, France

2. CNRS, Université de Paris Cité, UMR 8002, Integrative Neuroscience and Cognitive Center, F-75270 Paris, France

3. Department Zoology and Entomology, Rhodes University, Makhanda 6139, South Africa

Abstract

Equine-assisted intervention (EAI) studies deal with clients, whereas very few studies focused on the effects on animals. EAI equids are also submitted to management, which influences their welfare. Management and working conditions depend on human decisions and perception. We gathered information through a survey about facilities managers’ strategies (n = 51) and obtained direct information on management and working practices and their consequences on equids’ welfare through an observational study (n = eight facilities, 174 equids). Differences in managers’ perceptions of good management practices were related to the facility’s involvement in EAI, e.g., increased awareness of equids’ needs (housing and feeding), especially when EAI was the main activity. A detailed observational study on eight additional facilities confirmed that. Facility management profiles were paralleled by equids’ welfare profiles. Clear correlates were found between management decisions and welfare consequences. One major factor influencing welfare and human–equid interactions appeared to be working modalities, with more EAI facilities practicing groundwork and bitless work. Facilities where equids were the most involved in mixed activities had the most equids with compromised welfare. Given EAI clients’ particularities, conventional working modalities are less adapted and at risk of increased discomfort for equids. Overall, survey and observational approaches converged but some discrepancies (choice of equid type) appeared between the reported and observed prevalence.

Funder

IFCE

Région Bretagne

Publisher

MDPI AG

Reference99 articles.

1. Micoud, A., and Charvolin, F. (2008). Points de vue sur la Recherche Autour des Interactions avec l’Animal à But Thérapeutique et/ou Educatif. Note de Synthèse, Modys (UMR 5264-CNRS)/Fondation Adrienne & Pierre Sommer.

2. How to keep your horse safe?;Lesimple;An epidemiological study about management practices. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci.,2016

3. Variables affecting the prevalence of behavioural problems in horses;Normando;Can riding style and other management factors be significant? Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci.,2011

4. Hausberger, M., Lerch, N., Guilbaud, E., Stomp, M., Grandgeorge, M., Henry, S., and Lesimple, C. (2020). On-Farm Welfare Assessment of Horses: The Risks of Putting the Cart before the Horse. Animals, 10.

5. Risk factors associated with health disorders in sport and leisure horses in the Netherlands;Visser;J. Anim. Sci.,2014

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3