|
|
Kaiser, L., Heleski, C. R., Siegford, J., & Smith, K. A. (2006). Stress-related behaviors among horses used in a therapeutic riding program. J Am Vet Med Assoc, 228(1), 39–45.
Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To determine whether therapeutic riding resulted in higher levels of stress or frustration for horses than did recreational riding and whether therapeutic riding with at-risk individuals was more stressful for the horses than was therapeutic riding with individuals with physical or emotional handicaps. DESIGN: Observational study. ANIMALS: 14 horses in a therapeutic riding program. PROCEDURE: An ethogram of equine behaviors was created, and horses were observed while ridden by 5 groups of riders (recreational riders, physically handicapped riders, psychologically handicapped riders, at risk children, and special education children). Number of stress-related behaviors (ears pinned back, head raised, head turned, head tossed, head shaken, head down, and defecation) was compared among groups. RESULTS: No significant differences in mean number of stress-related behaviors were found when horses were ridden by recreational riders, physically handicapped riders, psychologically handicapped riders, or special education children. However, mean number of stress-related behaviors was significantly higher when horses were ridden by the at-risk children. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results suggest that for horses in a therapeutic riding program, being ridden by physically or psychologically handicapped individuals is no more stressful for the horses than is being ridden in the same setting by recreational riders. However, at-risk children caused more stress to the horses, suggesting that the time horses are ridden by at-risk children should be limited both daily and weekly.
|
|
|
|
Mills, D. S. (1998). Personality and individual differences in the horse, their significance, use and measurement. Equine Vet J Suppl, (27), 10–13.
Abstract: The biological diversity of a species gives rise to individual differences in behavioural tendency. Traditionally, this variation has been considered to be of little scientific importance or value, but the description and quantification of the fundamental basis of this variability is relevant to many aspects of equine science. The reliable identification of these features may allow the development of more accurate diagnostic and prognostic indicators for a range of clinical diseases. Biologically based traits also provide a more rational basis for selective management and breeding programmes in which specific behavioural tendencies are sought. Individual differences in behaviour also reflect the range of subjective feelings experienced by animals and therefore need to be understood by those concerned with animal welfare. Psychometric techniques concerned with the assessment of personality may provide a suitable basis for scientific study in this field. Potentially methodologies include: behavioural tests, objective behaviour measures or the quantification of reports from those familiar with the subjects. The assessment of the validity and reliability of the variables measured in these tests is an integral part of their development. Interobserver correlation in an experiment based on the subjective rating of 20 horses with respect to 14 familiar terms used to describe horse personality was generally low. This suggests that, with the exception of the terms 'flighty' and 'sharp', the empirical terminology commonly used to describe horse personality is unreliable.
|
|
|
|
Cooper, J. J., & Mason, G. J. (1998). The identification of abnormal behaviour and behavioural problems in stabled horses and their relationship to horse welfare: a comparative review. Equine Vet J Suppl, (27), 5–9.
Abstract: Many behaviours in domestic animals, such as the 'stable vices' of horses, are treated because they are considered undesirable for economic or cultural reasons, and not because the activity affects the horse's quality of life. The impact of a behaviour on the human reporter is not a function of its impact on the animal performer, and an understanding of the causes and effects of the particular activity is necessary to assess the costs and benefits of treatment. Where the behaviour is a sign of poor welfare, such as an inadequate environment, treatment can best be achieved by removing these underlying causal factors. Pharmacological or physical prevention of a behaviour can be justified only if the behaviour causes harm to the performer or to others. In these cases, prevention of the behaviour without addressing its causes is no cure and may result in its perseverance in a modified form or the disruption of the animal's ability to adapt to its environment. Where the behavioural 'problem' causes no harm and is not related to poor housing, then the education of the reporter, rather than treatment of the performer, may be the best solution.
|
|
