Abstract: Horses are likely to exhibit aggression when meeting for the first time. Therefore, this study compared 3 methods for mixing horses to evaluate their effectiveness in reducing aggressive interactions: (1) mixing pairs of horses in a paddock (P, 10 minutes, 15 tests), (2) introducing 1 unfamiliar horse to a pair of familiar, resident horses in a paddock (PP, 10 minutes, 15 tests), (3) allowing limited physical contact between pairs of horses for a short period of pre-exposure in neighboring boxes (B, 5 minutes, 16 tests) before mixing them in a paddock (BP, 10 minutes 16 tests). A total of 16 Swedish Standardbred mares, aged 6-18 years (mean age ± SD: 11 ± 4.4), were included in the study. Half of the horses were familiar with each other (resident horses, n = 8), whereas the other half were bought in from a variety of sources (unfamiliar horses, n = 8). Social interactions, consisting of behaviors from the sender, the receiver, and the subsequent sender's response, were recorded continuously as frequencies. There were no differences in the frequencies of aggressive behaviors between the 3 mixing methods, including those aggressive behaviors in which physical contact had been attempted (kick, strike). Although resident horses were overall more aggressive (median number of aggressive behaviors per horse, 62; Q1, 36; Q3, 68.5) than unfamiliar horses (median per horse, 4; Q1, 2; Q3, 12.5) during all tests (U = 97, P = 0.003), none of the 62 tests needed to be terminated. Unfamiliar horses did not receive more aggression from resident horses in PP (mean per test ± SD: 5.1 ± 3.1) than in P (mean per test ± SD: 6.4 ± 4.9) (t = 0.63, P = 0.544). However, the behavior “attack” was more frequent in PP (median per test, 2; Q1, 0; Q3, 5) than in P (median per test, 0; Q1, 0; Q3, 1) (U = 282, P = 0.042), and “flee” was more frequent in PP (median per test, 6; Q1, 4; Q3, 8) than in P (median per test, 1; Q1, 0; Q3, 6) (U = 290, P = 0.018). Pre-exposure in boxes did not reduce aggression in BP (median per test, 7; Q1, 4.3; Q3, 11.8) as compared with P (median per test, 6; Q1, 2; Q3, 16) (U = 264, P = 0.767), but during pre-exposure in B tests, horses exchanged more nonaggressive (median per test, 2; Q1, 0.3; Q3, 4) than aggressive (median frequency of aggressive behavior, 0; Q1, 0; Q3, 1) (W = 71, P = 0.013) and mixed interactions (median per test, 0; Q1, 0; Q3, 1) (W = 92, P = 0.016) through the opening. Results suggest mixing an unfamiliar horse with 2 resident horses at the same time instead of one by one may be preferable. In this way, the total aggression received by the unfamiliar horse will potentially be less, even though aggressive interactions may be more intense.

Abstract: To determine whether pen size affected the behaviour and welfare of farmed red deer confined temporarily in yards, four groups of ten 2-year-old stags were confined for 40 min or 2 days in each of spring and summer, in either large (5 m × 4 m ) or small (2.5 m × 4) pens. In the small pens, wall pacing and vertical/horizontal head movements at the walls were more frequently observed (P < 0.05) and were carried out by a greater percentage of the deer (P < 0.001), and distances between individuals were smaller (P < 0.01), than observations in the large pens. Aggressive activities varied seasonally, with head-butting and chasing being seen most frequently in the spring (P < 0.05) and biting and kicking being seen most frequently in the summer (P < 0.05), and the overall frequency of aggressive activities was low in summer. In spring, in small pens there were fewer threats to head-butt, head butts by moving animals, and less stepping activity than in large pens (P < 0.05). In summer, in small pens there were more threats to butt and more stepping activity than in the large pens (P < 0.05). In both seasons, aggressive activities were correlated with wall pacing (r = 0.58 and 0.55, respectively). It was concluded that the effect of pen size on the frequency and nature of aggressive and other activities varied seasonally. In order minimise aggression and stepping activity, small pens were favoured in spring and large pens were favoured in summer. However, in both seasons there were greater inter-individual distances and reduced pacing and head movements at the walls in large pens. This latter finding may indicate that the large pens were less aversive to the deer, regardless of season.

Abstract: Horses are highly social animals that have evolved to live in social groups. However, in modern husbandry systems, single housing prevails where horses experience social isolation, a challenge-to-welfare factor. One major reason for this single housing is the owners’ concerns that horses may injure each other during aggressive encounters. However, in natural conditions, serious injuries due to aggressive encounters are rare. What could therefore explain the claimed risks of group living for domestic horses? Basing our questioning on the current knowledge of the social life of horses in natural conditions, we review different practices that may lead to higher levels of aggression in horses and propose practical solutions. Observations of natural and feral horses mostly indicate a predominance of low frequencies and mild forms of aggression, based on subtle communication signals and ritualized displays and made possible by group stability (i.e. stable composition), dominance hierarchy and learning of appropriate social skills by young horses. Obviously, adults play a major role here in canalizing undesirable behaviours, and social experience during development, associated with a diversity of social partners, seems to be a prerequisite for the young horse to become socially skilled. Given the natural propensity of horses to have a regulation of aggression in groups, the tendency to display more aggression in groups of domestic horses under some management practices seems clearly related to the conditions offered. We therefore review the managing practices that could trigger aggressiveness in horses. Non social practices (space, resource availability) and social practices (group size, stability of membership, composition and opportunities for social experiences during development) in groups of domestic horses are discussed here. Finally, we propose simple practical solutions leading to more peaceful interactions in groups of domestic horses, based on the knowledge of horses’ natural social life which therefore should be enhanced (e.g. ensuring roughage availability, favouring group stability, introducing socially experienced adults in groups of young horses, etc.). The state of the art indicates that many questions still need to be answered. Given the importance of the associated welfare issues and the consequences on the use of horses, further research is required, which could benefit horses… and humans.

Abstract: Viele Pferdebesitzer bevorzugen aus Angst vor aggressiven Interaktionen und Verletzungsgefahr der Tiere untereinander die Einzelhaltung, obwohl von Tierschutzorganisationen die Gruppenhaltung für Pferde empfohlen wird. In dieser Studie beobachteten wir während des alltäglichen Soziallebens als auch bei der Eingliederung von neuen Gruppenmitgliedern das Sozialverhalten, insbesondere das Aggressionsverhalten, von elf Gruppen domestizierter Pferde (Equus caballus) verschiedener Größe und Zusammensetzung. Während des alltäglichen Soziallebens hatten die Gruppe und der Paddock-Typ (Gras / kein Gras) keinen Einfluss auf die Verhaltensweisen, wohingegen die Paddockgröße unter 10000 m2 einen signifikanten Einfluss auf die submissiven Verhaltensweisen (GzLM; n=56; t=-2.061, P=0.044) und einen nicht signifikanten Einfluss auf die aggressiven Verhaltensweisen (GzLM; n=56; t=-1.782, P=0.081) hatte. Allerdings verringerten sich sowohl die aggressiven als auch die submissiven Verhaltensweisen mit steigendem Platzangebot bis zu 10000 m2 (Spearman rank Korrelation; n=56; aggressive Verhaltensweisen: r = -0.313, P = 0.019; submissive Verhaltensweisen: r = -0.328, P = 0.014). Während den Eingliederungen reduzierten sich die Aggressionen pro Stunde mit der Vergrößerung des Platzangebotes (Spearman rank Korrelation; n=28; r=-0.402, P=0.034). Dies zeigte sich noch deutlicher, wenn Beobachtungen mit einem Platzangebot von über 10000 m2 ausgeschlos- sen wurden (Spearman rank Korrelation; n=23; r=-0.549, P=0.007). Während des alltäglichen Soziallebens näherte sich der Aggressionslevel der Nulllinie an, wenn das Platzangebot pro Pferd mehr als 331 m2 betrug. Deshalb empfehlen wir zur Reduzierung des Aggressionslevels und des Verletzungsrisikos von sozial gehaltenen Pferdegruppen ein Platzangebot von mindestens 331 m2 pro Pferd.
[Even though animal welfare organisations propose group housing for horse welfare, many owners stable horses individually for fear of aggressive interactions and injury risks. In the present study we observed social behaviour, and especially aggressiveness, in eleven domestic horse groups (Equus caballus) of different size and composition, in basic social situations and when new group members were introduced. During basic social situations, the group and the type of paddock (grass / no grass) had no effect on any of the behaviours, where- as the enclosure size below 10,000 m2 had a significant effect on submissive behaviour (GzLM; n=56; t=-2.061, P=0.044) and an insignificant effect on aggressive behaviour (GzLM; n=56; t=-1.782, P=0.081). However, aggressive and submissive behaviour dimi- nished with the increase of enclosure sizes up to 10,000 m2 (Spearman rank correlation; n = 56; aggressive behaviour: r = -0.313, P=0.019; submissive behaviour: r=-0.328, P=0.014). During introductions, aggression levels per hour decreased with any increase of enclosure size (Spearman rank correlation; n=28; r=-0.402, P=0.034) and even more when enclosure sizes above 10,000 m2 were excluded (Spearman rank correlation; n=23; r=-0.549, P=0.007). During basic social situations the aggression level approached zero when the space allowance was more than 331 m2 per horse. We therefore recommend keeping horse groups in an enclosure with at least 331 m2 per horse to reduce aggression and injuries.]

Abstract: Horses are a highly social species living in complex social systems which should require them to memorise and generalise social experiences and distinguish between familiar and unfamiliar conspecifics. In the main part of my thesis I concentrated on the specific conflict situation of a horse being introduced into a new social group, and investigated its behaviour and stress level. Horses were either introduced (1) immediately, (2) after an observation period, or (3) together with an integration horse after an observation period. Additionally, in the second part of my thesis I arranged several experiments to elaborate additional aspects which could affect the behaviour of horses during introductions. In this study I could describe a simplified method for measuring stress through the analysis of faecal GCMs in horses. An enzyme immunoassay (EIA) for 11-oxoaetiocholanolone using 11-oxoaetiocholanolone-17-CMO: BSA (3?,11-oxo-A EIA) as antigen showed high amounts of immunoreactive substances. The new assay increases the accuracy of the test and lowers the expenses per sample; also storing of samples at room temperature after collection is less critical. This is a big advantage both in the field of wildlife management of equids and in the field of equestrian sports (chapter 1). Comparing the different introduction techniques, the introduction with an integration horse led to significantly less total interactions and lower levels of aggression than the introduction of single horses, both immediately and after several days of observing the new group. Additionally, by observing the behaviour of the horses during everyday sociality I could develop a formula describing the interrelationship between expected aggression level and enclosure size per horse. The curve takes an exponential shape. Starting from a space allowance of 300 m2 and more per horse, the amount of aggressions per hour approaches zero. For the reduction of aggression levels and injury risks in socially kept horses I recommend an enclosure size of at least 300 m2 per horse (chapter 2). I further investigated the stress level of the introduced animals. Horses which were immediately introduced did not show elevated faecal GCMs. In contrast, horses which were introduced after an observation period had slightly elevated values 2 and 3 days after the introduction. For horses introduced together with an integration horse faecal GCMs were significantly above the baseline value on the day of introduction and 1 day after it. These differences between introduction techniques indicate that the introduction event itself is not as stressful as previously assumed. Rather standing together with an integration horse and not being able to integrate immediately into the complete group elicits stress in horses (chapter 3). In the commentary of chapter 4 several studies are discussed which failed to demonstrate social learning in horses. It is argued that they did not consider important aspects which could have an influence, such as the dominance status or the social background of the horses (chapter 4). In chapter 5 a social feeding situation was investigated. The social rank as well as the position of conspecifics affected the feeding strategy of horses. Domestic horses used social cognition and strategic decision making in order to decide where to feed. When possible they tended to return to the same, continuously supplied feeding site and switched to an ?avoidance tendency? in the presence of dominant horses or when another horse was already feeding there (chapter 5). One possibility to recognize group members is through olfactory recognition. In chapter 6 it is shown that horses are able to distinguish their own from their conspecifics? faeces. In addition, they paid most attention to the faeces of those group members from which they received the highest amount of aggressive behaviour (chapter 6). Horses show cognitive abilities because they are able to use humans as local enhancement cues when searching for food, independently of their body posture or gaze consistency when the persons face them. Moreover, they seem to orientate on the attention of familiar persons more than of unfamiliar persons (chapter 7). Altogether, the results of this thesis provide further support for the view that horses show good conflict resolution strategies. They are perfectly able to deal with the conflict situation of being introduced to new group members, and the introduction event itself is not as stressful as previously assumed. It is rather suggested that standing together with an integration horse and not being able to integrate immediately into the complete group elicits stress in horses. All additional experimental set-ups could demonstrate that horses are well capable of social cognition.