Abstract: Introduction
Are horses doing well in their husbandries? For the first time the answer shall be given objectively by an integral on-farm welfare assessment system for horse husbandries. A current research project at the Technical University Munich evaluates indicators for well-being, pain and suffering in horses in order to develop a welfare assessment system (Baumgartner and Zeitler-Feicht 2013, 2014a, 2014b, 2015, Zeitler-Feicht et al. 2015). The research project is professionally supported by horse husbandry experts from academics, industries as well as leading organizations for horse owners and veterinarians.
The aim of the project is to develop a welfare assessment system for all horse husbandry systems which can be applied both for sport horses and for leisure horses. It is based on national animal welfare standards (BMELV 2009) and does take sustainability into consideration. Animal-based indicators are completed with resource-based indicators if necessary. It is stipulated that indicators are valid, reliable and feasible.
Welfare criteria were formulated for the two principles „good health“ and „behavioural demands“ (see figure 1 and 2). Each has to be represented by at least one indicator.
The principle „behavioural demands“ aims at the possibility for horses to practise species-specific behaviour. It is gathered to what extent the housing conditions allow the horses to live out and show species-specific behaviour. Furthermore in the present studies the frequency of selected behaviours including abnormal behaviour were collected in precise timeframes.
Potential indicators for assessing equine welfare on-farm were selected by study of literature and field tests. The field tests included direct observations on free-ranged horses, horses in group-housing systems and single-stabled horses. The following section presents selected indicators that are feasible for assessing equine behaviour on-farm.
Feasible behavioural indicators for well-being
The literature research revealed that „being together“ is linked with affiliative behaviour. It includes „resting together“, „foraging together“ and additionally „walking together“. Horses do have a strong need for social bonds. „Being-together“ amongst horses must be voluntary and not caused by bad weather conditions or lack of space. Therefore the context must be considered. For temporary direct observations the frequency in group-housing systems is sufficient (0.57 ± 0.67 per horse per 20 minutes). That´s why in our study „being-together“ is considered as a feasible indicator for well-being for horses in permanent or temporary groups. It is intended to conduct further studies on its validity.
Other behaviours such as „social play“ is not only linked with positive emotional states in adult horses. Several studies showed that horses use „social play“ as a stress relief. However, it is too seldom to collect in an on-farm assessment system. Because of the lack of feasibility and validity we excluded „social play“ as an indicator for well-being.
Feasible behavioural indicators for suffering
Horses show „abnormal behaviour“ in distress, frustration, deprivation or conflict situations. The present studies showed a relatively high frequency in single-stabled horses (3.3 ± 6.45 per horse per 20 minutes). Hence „abnormal behaviour“ is a feasible and valid indicator for suffering. However, established stereotypes need to be excluded, because they may indicate a previous welfare status rather than the current welfare status.
Horses use „agonistic behaviour“ to regulate social relations, to defend themselves or to defend resources. If husbandry or management is inadequate, „agonistic behaviour“ increases and thereby the frequency of injuries caused by social conflicts. A high frequency of „agonistic behaviour“ indicates a high aggression level in group-housed horses and therefore distress and suffering. The mean frequency of group-housed horses is sufficient for temporary observations (2.6 ± 2.26 per horse per 20 minutes). As a result „agonistic behaviour“ is a feasible and vaild indicator for suffering. Further studies need to be done on the scoring and severity.
Key words
Animal-based indicators
Equine welfare
Being-together
Abnormal behaviour
Agonistic behaviour
References
Baumgartner M. & M. H. Zeitler-Feicht (2013): Entwicklung eines Bewertungssystems zur Beurteilung der Tiergerechtheit von Pferdehaltungen als Bestandteil eines Nachhaltigkeitsmanagementsystems. KTBL Schrift: Aktuelle Arbeiten zur artgemäßen Tierhaltung 503, 226 – 227.
Baumgartner M. & M. H. Zeitler-Feicht (2014a): Indikatoren für Tierwohl beim Pferd. 7. Pferde-Workshop Uelzen 2014. DGfZ-Schriftreihe Heft 64, 161 – 166.
Baumgartner M. & M. H. Zeitler-Feicht (2014b): Entwicklung eines Bewertungssystems zur Beurteilung der Tiergerechtheit von Pferdehaltungen als Bestandteil eines Nachhaltigkeitsmanagementsystems. 9. Niedersächsisches Tierschutzsymposium in Oldenburg, Hrsg. Nds. Ministerium für Ernährung, Landwirtschaft und Verbraucherschutz, 37 – 42.
Baumgartner M. & M.H. Zeitler-Feicht (2015): Eignung ausgewählter tierbezogener Indikatoren zur Beurteilung der Tiergerechtheit von Pferdehaltungen hinsichtlich Praktikabilität. In: Tagungsband der Deutschen Veterinärmedizinischen Gesellschaft e.V. (DVG), Fachgruppen „Ethologie und Tierhaltung“ sowie „Tierschutz“, Verlag der DVG Service GmbH, Gießen, S. 182 – 192.
BMELV (2009): Leitlinien zur Beurteilung von Pferdehaltungen unter Tierschutzgesichtspunkten. Bundesministerium für Ernährung, Landwirtschaft und Verbraucherschutz. Sachverständigengruppe tierschutzgerechte Pferdehaltung.
Zeitler-Feicht M.H., Frank V., Ramoser A., Seiler S., Girisch C., Baumgartner M. (2015): Anhand welcher Verhaltensweisen lassen sich Rückschlüsse auf das Wohlbefinden von Pferden ziehen? In: Tagungsband der Deutschen Veterinärmedizinischen Gesellschaft e.V. (DVG), Fachgruppen „Ethologie und Tierhaltung“ sowie „Tierschutz“, Verlag der DVG Service GmbH, Gießen, S. 148 – 156.

Abstract: For communicating with the environment (other horses, foals, owner, etc.), horses have to use different methods. In contrast with the human, for whom talking is the most important way of communication, the horses can’t talk. In the years 1990s and before, the imagination was such that the infants do not express verbally to the pain either (like horses).
To communicate, horses use their body language. Vocalization (if not the body language), seems to be the most important way of communication in horses, though it seems they use the same tone when exposing to different events.
In this study which was performed in collaboration with the electronic institute of Sharif technical university (the top most technical university of the country), totally 25 horses were used. The horses were exposed to different events (hunger, pain, loneliness, mating, parturition and separation of the 1-2 weeks old foals from their dams). The verbal expressions of the horses were studied using spectrogram.
The results of this study showed that there were significant differences between the spectrograph of the voices of the horses, exposed to hunger, and the separation of the foals from dams. This was the same (no significant differences) when horses were exposed to loneliness, separation and hunger. There were no significant differences between the verbal expressions of the horses while exposed to mating, parturition.
One of the most important reasons why the horses do not have verbal expressions when exposing to the pain, might be the absence of the part of the brain, responsible for the pain interpretation. Morse research has to be performed to prove this.

Abstract: Naturally, horses live in groups in which all individuals are long-term acquainted with each other and a stable hierarchical system is established. In conservation management, introduction of horses into foreign groups is often required but will lead to fights, stress and increased health risks for the animals. We investigated the integration process of four Przewalski mares from the Zoo Leipzig into the herd of five Przewalski horses of the semireserve Liebenthal (Brandenburg, Germany). We observed changes in social hierarchy as well as a higher stress level (expressed by disturbed activity pattern and lower synchronization with environmental conditions) especially in the introduced horses (from Zoo Leipzig). We investigated the animals continuously over two years to detect what time is needed for a successful integration. Finally, we give some advice for the integration of Przewalski horses into a new herd to reduce the stress of the animals substantially.

Abstract: Stress responses play an important role in allowing animals to cope with challenges. Glucocorticoids, key elements in the neuroendocrine stress axis, are traditionally measured as a parameter for welfare assessment. As blood sample collection itself disturbs an animal, non-invasive or minimal invasive methods have gained importance for assessing stress. In horses saliva and faeces are most frequently used. Faecal samples offer the advantage that they can be collected easily and stress-free. In faecal samples circulating hormone levels are integrated over a certain period of time. As a consequence faecal glucocorticoid metabolites represent the cumulative secretion and they are less affected by short episodic fluctuations of hormone secretion.
However, in order to gain reliable information about an animal’s adrenocortical activity, certain criteria have to be met: Depending whether the impact of acute or chronic stressors is assessed, frequent sampling might be necessary whereas in other cases, single samples will suffice. Background knowledge regarding the metabolism and excretion of glucocorticoids is essential and a careful validation is obligatory. In addition, this presentation will address analytical issues regarding sample storage, extraction procedures, and immunoassays and various examples of a successful application in equids will be given. Applied properly, non-invasive techniques to monitor stress hormones are a useful tool for animal welfare assessment.