Abstract: This presentation will include commentary on work presented at this meeting as representative of the rapidly growing body of equine behavior science evidence relevant to human-horse interaction and the welfare of domestic, feral, and wild horses.
A substantial literature has accumulated detailing the behavior patterns of wild and feral equid populations, and to some extent the behavior of horses in various domestic environments. Professor Klingel“s and Professor Houpt”s work, begun nearly 40 years ago, continues to inspire colleagues around the world to qualitatively and quantitatively describe behavior of equids in a variety of environments. Several examples of the importance of this type of work to human-horse interaction and horse welfare are evident in throughout the meeting. It forms the basis for assessing the disturbance of behavior in wildlife management projects such as fertility manipulations (Hopkins; Ransom & Cade) or species reintroduction (Kaczensky et al). Study of the apparent variability in observations among the populations will lead to a better understanding of environmental and other factors, which will have fruitful application to welfare of horses both in domestic and natural environments. Unfortunately, this work always brings to mind what I perceive as a nagging threat to horse welfare and quality of human-horse interaction is misinformation concerning natural horse behavior. Natural horse behavior seems to be of great general interest, but unfortunately inaccuracies and misinterpretations are pervasive in popular “horse culture” and continue to be a conspicuous influence on management and training of domestic horses. Unfortunately, this misinformation often makes its way and influences equine education, both lay and equine science/veterinary education. Comparative observational study of behavior of horses in all settings by trained behaviorists, along with research designed to address purported implications for management of domestic horses, along with initiatives to transfer knowledge to educators at all levels should be encouraged.

Included in this meeting is considerable work addressing questions of domestic management practices such as forced weaning, transportation, stabling, and arbitrary grouping and regrouping of horses. This adds to a growing body of applied physiology and behavior research that has established trained behaviorists as a critical resource on teams making decisions on humane management.
Also well represented in work presented at this meeting is the exploration of cognition, perception, and temperament in horses. It is personally pleasing to see examples of direct investigation of the ability of the horse to respond to subtle human posture and gesture, which for many of us has represented just annoying possible confounders of earlier cognition studies. Behaviorists trained in perception and learning will no doubt contribute enormously to this exciting area of investigation.

Abstract: Target group: Biologists, Psychologists, Veterinarians and Professionals
Meeting target: Because the last international meeting on Equine Science took place a couple years ago, there is an urgent need for equine scientists to exchange scientific knowledge, coordinate research provide knowledge for practical application, and discus research results among themselves and with professionals who work with horses. Additionally, dialog concerning the coordination of the study “Equitation Science” in Europe is urgently needed. Coordination and cooperation shall arise from the meeting, enrich the research, and advance the application of scientific knowledge for the horses` welfare.

Abstract: Longevity in faeces, migration to and survival on herbage of mixed strongyle infective larvae (approximately 70% cyathostomes: 30% large strongyles) from experimentally deposited horse faeces was studied in the dry tropical region of North Queensland for up to 2 years. Larvae were recovered from faeces deposited during hot dry weather for a maximum of 12 weeks, up to 32 weeks in cool conditions, but less than 8 weeks in hot wet summer. Translation to herbage was mainly limited to the hot wet season (December-March), except when unseasonal winter rainfall of 40-50 mm per month in July and August allowed some additional migration. Survival on pasture was estimated at 2-4 weeks in the summer wet season and 8-12 weeks in the autumn-winter dry season (April-August). Hot dry spring weather (pre-wet season) was the most unfavourable for larval development, migration and survival. Peak counts of up to 60,000 larvae kg-1 dry herbage were recorded. The seasonal nature of pasture contamination allowed the development of rational anthelmintic control programs based on larval ecology.

Abstract: Unwanted oral investigative in horses has been anecdotally attributed to the practice of hand-feeding. Fears over such behaviour developing as a consequence of using food rewards, for example in clicker training, have been implicated as a common reason for not employing food-based positive reinforcement training techniques. This study used data generated as part of a larger research project, and explored associations between five common oral investigative behaviours and the practices of hand-feeding and clicker training. Data were from a convenience sample of UK leisure horse owners using two self-administered Internet surveys. Ninety-one percent of respondents reported giving their horse food by hand and this practice was significantly associated with three of the five oral investigative behaviours, licking hands (P = 0.006), gently searching clothing (P < 0.001) and roughly searching clothing (P = 0.003). Nipping hands and biting clothes were not associated with hand-feeding, suggesting that risk factors for these behaviours originate outside of this practice. Clicker training techniques were employed by 14% of respondents and their use was not associated with the incidence of any of the five oral investigative behaviours. These findings suggest that horse owners should not be deterred from using food-based positive reinforcement techniques with their horses, as fears that this practice will result in unwanted oral investigative behaviours from their horses appear unfounded.

Abstract: Removing a horse from its social group may be considered risky, both for the handler and the horse, because other horses can interfere in the catching process. The main aim of this study was to identify where and when these risk situations occur while removing a horse from its group. A potential risk situation was defined by the closeness of loose horses in the group or by any physical contact with them. Whether the number of horses following would be influenced by the social rank of the horse being led out, and whether more horses would follow to the gate when a larger proportion of the group was removed compared to when a single horse was taken out were also investigated. Thirty-two mares (1–2 years) were kept in groups of four. All horses were taken out of their home paddock twice alone (64 tests) and twice with a companion (32 tests). One handler (or two handlers when two horses were removed) was asked to approach (phase 1) and catch the target horse (phase 2), walk it to the centre of the paddock and remain stationary at a post for 30 s (phase 3), walk to the paddock entrance (phase 4) and through the gate (phase 5). The number of horses following, and the number of loose horses in proximity (<2 m, 2–5 m) to the target horse and handler was estimated, and horse–horse and horse–human interactions were recorded continuously for the five scoring phases. Significantly more loose horses were within 2 m of a single target horse during the phases approach (mean ± SD: 1.5 ± 0.8), catch (1.6 ± 0.9) and post (1.7 ± 0.7) than during walk (1.0 ± 0.5) and gate (1.1 ± 0.6). Rank did not influence the number of horses following to the gate (high rank: 2.4 ± 0.7; lower rank: 2.0 ± 1.0; P = 0.396) and interactions between horses were rare. A greater proportion of the loose horses followed when two horses (0.9 ± 0.2) were removed compared to when a single horse (0.7 ± 0.3) was taken out (P = 0.011). In conclusion, maintaining a distance to other horses in the group by reducing the time being relatively stationary, so giving loose horses fewer chances to approach, is likely to contribute to improved handler's safety. Removing a small proportion of the group may also decrease the probability of the other horses following.