|
|
Imbert, C., Caniglia, R., Fabbri, E., Milanesi, P., Randi, E., Serafini, M., et al. (2016). Why do wolves eat livestock?: Factors influencing wolf diet in northern Italy. Biological Conservation, 195, 156–168.
Abstract: Thanks to protection by law and increasing habitat restoration, wolves (Canis lupus) are currently re-colonizing Europe from the surviving populations of Russia, the Balkan countries, Spain and Italy, raising the need to update conservation strategies. A major conservation issue is to restore connections and gene flow among fragmented populations, thus contrasting the deleterious consequences of isolation. Wolves in Italy are expanding from the Apennines towards the Alps, crossing the Ligurian Mountains (northern Italy) and establishing connections with the Dinaric populations. Wolf expansion is threatened by poaching and incidental killings, mainly due to livestock depredations and conflicts with shepherds, which could limit the establishment of stable populations. Aiming to find out the factors affecting the use of livestock by wolves, in this study we determined the composition of wolf diet in Liguria. We examined 1457 scats collected from 2008 to 2013. Individual scats were genotyped using a non-invasive genetic procedure, and their content was determined using microscopical analyses. Wolves in Liguria consumed mainly wild ungulates (64.4%; in particular wild boar Sus scrofa and roe deer Capreolus capreolus) and, to a lesser extent, livestock (26.3%; in particular goats Capra hircus). We modeled the consumption of livestock using environmental features, wild ungulate community diversity, husbandry characteristics and wolf social organization (stable packs or dispersing individuals). Wolf diet varied according to years and seasons with an overall decrease of livestock and an increase of wild ungulate consumption, but also between packs and dispersing individuals with greater livestock consumption for the latter. The presence of stable packs, instead of dispersing wolves, the adoption of prevention measures on pastures, roe deer abundance, and the percentage of deciduous woods, reduced predation on livestock. Thus, we suggest promoting wild ungulate expansion, the use of prevention tools in pastures, and supporting wolf pack establishment, avoiding lethal control and poaching, to mitigate conflicts between wolf conservation and husbandry.
|
|
|
|
Mori, E., Benatti, L., Lovari, S., & Ferretti, F. (2016). What does the wild boar mean to the wolf? European Journal of Wildlife Research, 63(1), 9.
Abstract: Generalist predators are expected to shape their diets according to the local availability of prey species. In turn, the extent of consumption of a prey would be influenced by the number of alternative prey species. We have tested this prediction by considering the wild boar and the grey wolf: two widespread species whose distribution ranges overlap largely in Southern Europe, e.g. in Italy. We have reviewed 16 studies from a total of 21 study areas, to assess whether the absolute frequency of occurrence of wild boar in the wolf diet was influenced by (i) occurrence of the other ungulate species in diet and (ii) the number of available ungulate species. Wild boar turned out to be the main prey of the wolf (49% occurrence, on average), followed by roe deer (24%) and livestock (18%). Occurrence of wild boar in the wolf diet decreased with increasing usage of roe deer, livestock, and to a lower extent, chamois and red deer. The number of prey species did not influence the occurrence of wild boar in the wolf diet. The wild boar is a gregarious, noisy and often locally abundant ungulate, thus easily detectable, to a predator. In turn, the extent of predation on this ungulate may not be influenced so much by the availability of other potential prey. Heavy artificial reductions of wild boar numbers, e.g. through numerical control, may concentrate predation by wolves on alternative prey (e.g. roe deer) and/or livestock, thus increasing conflicts with human activities.
|
|
|
|
Giljov, A., Malashichev, Y., & Karenina, K. (2019). What do wild saiga antelopes tell us about the relative roles of the two brain hemispheres in social interactions? Anim. Cogn., .
Abstract: Two brain hemispheres are unequally involved in the processing of social stimuli, as demonstrated in a wide range of vertebrates. A considerable number of studies have shown the right hemisphere advantage for social processing. At the same time, an approach-withdrawal hypothesis, mainly based on experimental evidence, proposes the involvement of both brain hemispheres according to approach and withdrawal motivation. The present study aimed to test the relative roles of the two hemispheres in social responses displayed in a natural context. Visual biases, implicating hemispheric lateralization, were estimated in the social interactions of saiga antelope in the wild. In individually identified males, the left/right visual field use during approach and withdrawal responses was recorded based on the lateral head/body position, relative to the conspecific. Lateralized approach responses were investigated in three types of interactions, with left visual field bias found for chasing a rival, no bias--for attacking a rival, and right visual field bias--for pursuing a female. In two types of withdrawal responses, left visual field bias was found for retreating after fighting, while no bias was evident in fight rejecting. These findings demonstrate that neither the right hemisphere advantage nor the approach-withdrawal distinction can fully explain the patterns of lateralization observed in social behaviour. It is clear that both brain hemispheres play significant roles in social responses, while their relative contribution is likely determined by a complex set of motivational and emotional factors rather than a simple dichotomous distinction such as, for example, approach versus withdrawal motivation.
|
|
|
|
Gehring, T. M., VerCauteren, K. C., Provost, M. L., & Cellar, A. C. (2010). Utility of livestock-protection dogs for deterring wildlife from cattle farms. Wildl. Res., 37(8), 715–721.
Abstract: Context. Livestock producers worldwide are negatively affected by livestock losses because of predators and wildlife-transmitted diseases. In the western Great Lakes Region of the United States, this conflict has increased as grey wolf (Canis lupus) populations have recovered and white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) have served as a wildlife reservoir for bovine tuberculosis (Myobacterium bovis).Aims. We conducted field experiments on cattle farms to evaluate the effectiveness of livestock-protection dogs (LPDs) for excluding wolves, coyotes (C. latrans), white-tailed deer and mesopredators from livestock pastures.Methods. We integrated LPDs on six cattle farms (treatment) and monitored wildlife use with tracking swaths on these farms, concurrent with three control cattle farms during 2005-2008. The amount of time deer spent in livestock pastures was recorded using direct observation.Key results. Livestock pastures protected by LPDs had reduced use by these wildlife compared with control pastures not protected by LPDs. White-tailed deer spent less time in livestock pastures protected by LPDs compared with control pastures not protected by LPDs.Conclusions. Our research supports the theory that LPDs can be an effective management tool for reducing predation and disease transmission. We also demonstrate that LPDs are not limited to being used only with sheep and goats; they can also be used to protect cattle.Implications. On the basis of our findings, we support the use of LPDs as a proactive management tool that producers can implement to minimise the threat of livestock depredations and transmission of disease from wildlife to livestock. LPDs should be investigated further as a more general conservation tool for protecting valuable wildlife, such as ground-nesting birds, that use livestock pastures and are affected by predators that use these pastures.
|
|
|
|
McGreevy, P., Berger, J., De Brauwere, N., Doherty, O., Harrison, A., Fiedler, J., et al. (2018). Using the Five Domains Model to Assess the Adverse Impacts of Husbandry, Veterinary, and Equitation Interventions on Horse Welfare. Animals, 8(3), 41.
Abstract: The aim of this study was to conduct a series of paper-based exercises in order to assess the negative (adverse) welfare impacts, if any, of common interventions on domestic horses across a broad range of different contexts of equine care and training. An international panel (with professional expertise in psychology, equitation science, veterinary science, education, welfare, equestrian coaching, advocacy, and community engagement; n = 16) met over a four-day period to define and assess these interventions, using an adaptation of the domain-based assessment model. The interventions were considered within 14 contexts: C1 Weaning; C2 Diet; C3 Housing; C4 Foundation training; C5 Ill-health and veterinary interventions (chiefly medical); C6 Ill-health and veterinary interventions (chiefly surgical); C7 Elective procedures; C8 Care procedures; C9 Restraint for management procedures; C10 Road transport; C11 Activity—competition; C12 Activity—work; C13 Activity—breeding females; and C14 Activity—breeding males. Scores on a 1–10 scale for Domain 5 (the mental domain) gathered during the workshop were compared with overall impact scores on a 1–10 scale assigned by the same panellists individually before the workshop. The most severe (median and interquartile range, IQR) impacts within each context were identified during the workshop as: C1 abrupt, individual weaning (10 IQR 1); C2 feeding 100% low-energy concentrate (8 IQR 2.5); C3 indoor tie stalls with no social contact (9 IQR 1.5); C4 both (i) dropping horse with ropes (9 IQR 0.5) and forced flexion (9 IQR 0.5); C5 long-term curative medical treatments (8 IQR 3); C6 major deep intracavity surgery (8.5 IQR 1); C7 castration without veterinary supervision (10 IQR 1); C8 both (i) tongue ties (8 IQR 2.5) and (ii) restrictive nosebands (8 IQR 2.5); C9 ear twitch (8 IQR 1); C10 both (i) individual transport (7.00 IQR 1.5) and group transport with unfamiliar companions (7 IQR 1.5); C11 both (i) jumps racing (8 IQR 2.5) and Western performance (8 IQR 1.5); C12 carriage and haulage work (6 IQR 1.5); C13 wet nurse during transition between foals (7.5 IQR 3.75); and C14 teaser horse (7 IQR 8). Associations between pre-workshop and workshop scores were high, but some rankings changed after workshop participation, particularly relating to breeding practices. Domain 1 had the weakest association with Domain 5. The current article discusses the use of the domain-based model in equine welfare assessment, and offers a series of assumptions within each context that future users of the same approach may make when assessing animal welfare under the categories reported here. It also discusses some limitations in the framework that was used to apply the model.
|
|
|
|
Broekhuis, F., Madsen, E. K., Keiwua, K., & Macdonald, D. W. (2019). Using GPS collars to investigate the frequency and behavioural outcomes of intraspecific interactions among carnivores: A case study of male cheetahs in the Maasai Mara, Kenya. Plos One, 14(4), e0213910.
Abstract: Intraspecific interactions between individuals or groups of individuals of the same species are an important component of population dynamics. Interactions can be static, such as spatial overlap, or dynamic based on the interactions of movements, and can be mediated through communication, such as the deployment of scent marks. Interactions and their behavioural outcomes can be difficult to determine, especially for species that live at low densities. With the use of GPS collars we quantify both static and dynamic interactions between male cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus) and the behavioural outcomes. The 99% home-ranges of males overlapped significantly while there was little overlap of the 50% home-ranges. Despite this overlap, male cheetahs rarely came into close proximity of one another, possibly because presence was communicated through frequent visits to marking posts. The minimum distance between individuals in a dyad ranged from 89m to 196m but the average proximity between individuals ranged from 17,145 ± 6,865m to 26,367 ± 11,288m. Possible interactions took place more frequently at night than by day and occurred mostly in the 50% home-range of one individual of a dyad or where cores of both individuals overlapped. After a possible encounter male cheetahs stayed in close proximity to each other for up to 6 hours, which could be the result of a territory defence strategy or the presence of a receptive female. We believe that one of the encounters between a singleton and a 5-male coalition resulted in the death of the singleton. Our results give new insights into cheetah interactions, which could help our understanding of ecological processes such as disease transmission.
|
|
|
|
Genov, P. W., & Kostava, V. (1993). Untersuchungen zur zahlenmäßigen Stärke des Wolfes und seiner Einwirkung auf die Haustierbestände in Bulgarien. Zeitschrift für Jagdwissenschaft, 39(4), 217–223.
Abstract: Die Untersuchung wurde in der Zeitspanne von 1984 bis 1988 durchgeführt. Es wurden die Protokolle des Staatlichen Versicherungsinstituts benutzt, die Angaben für Raubüberfälle von Wölfen auf Haustiere beinhalten (Tabelle 1). Außerdem wurden Angaben über die während dieser Zeitspanne erlegten Wölfe zusammengefaßt. Die Abschußzahlen lauten: 1984 – 163, 1985 – 147, 1986 – 179, 1987 – 211 und 1988 – 220 Tiere. Die Anzahl der in den einzelnen Gebirgen lebenden Wölfe wurde nach einer Umfrage festgestellt. Für die in Betracht kommenden Gebirge werden folgende Bestandszahlen angenommen: Rhodopen -- 60-80 Individuen, 189 bis 264 km2 pro Tier, Rila- und Piringebirge -- 60-80 Tiere, 109 bis 145 km2 pro Tier, Ossogowo-Belassiza Gebirgssystem -- 40-50 Individuen, 57-70 km2 pro Tier, West- und Mittelbalkan -- 35-38 Wölfe, 200 km2 pro Tier. Dazu kommen noch 10-15 Wölfe im Flußbecken von Beli Lom und etwa 20 Exemplare in Strandscha- und Sakargebirge. Insgesamt lebten in Bulgarien im Jahre 1988 etwa 260-330 Wölfe (Abb. 1).
|
|
|
|
Rehren, K. D. (2018). Untersuchung der „Schiefe“ des Pferdes:Symmetrie von Bewegungsablauf und Hufbelastung (Bernhard Ohnesorge Harald Sieme P. S. Karsten Feige, Ed.). Ph.D. thesis, Cuvillier Verlag, Göttingen.
Abstract: Ziel der Studie war die Beschreibung der motorischen Lateralität („Schiefe“) gesunder adulter Pferde. Hierzu wurden 14 lahmfreie Pferde (10 Warmblüter, 4 Quarter Horses) auf dem Laufband in Schritt und Trab auf individuelle Abweichungen von der symmetri-schen Bewegung hinsichtlich Abstellung der Hinterhand, Wirbelsäulenform (Biegung), Vor- und Rückführung sowie Belastung von Vorder- und Hintergliedmaßen jeweils simul-tan hochfrequenzkinematographisch und kinetisch mittels resistiver Hufdrucksensoren untersucht. Zusätzlich wurden bevorzugte Abstellung und Biegung sowie Galopppräfe-renz klinisch bzw. reiterlich beurteilt, das Vorliegen einer Weideschrittpräferenz unter-sucht und Freilaufversuche (bevorzugte Abbiegerichtung, Ausweichrichtung um ein Hin-dernis, Galoppräferenz) durchgeführt. Keines der Pferde zeigte Symmetrie über alle Merkmale; zwar wurde bei jedem Merkmal für einzelne Probanden Symmetrie festgestellt, mit Ausnahme des Galopp-Freilaufver-suchs trat Asymmetrie jedoch häufiger auf. 12 Probanden zeigten in der Bewegungsana-lyse eine signifikante seitliche Abstellung (8x rechts (R), 4x links (L), mittlere seitliche Abweichung im Schritt 1,22°±1,09°, im Trab 1,05°±1,03°), 10 eine bevorzugte Biegung (9x L, 1x R), 13 signifikante Asymmetrien der Gliedmaßenvor- bzw. -rückführung und 12 eine signifikante asymmetrische Gliedmaßenbelastung für die normalisierte Spitzenkraft (PFN, peak force) bzw. den Impuls der Belastung (IN) an mindestens einem Beinpaar (alle Merkmale individuell wiederholbar). Linksabgestellte Pferde führten in beiden Gang-arten das rechte Hinterbein signifikant weiter zurück als nach rechts abgestellte Pferde, die tendenziell eher das linke Hinterbein weiter zurückführten. – Die auf dem Laufband festgestellten Asymmetrien traten in beiden Gangarten auf, aber nicht immer überein-stimmend, wobei die Richtung der bevorzugten Abstellung und ebenso der bevorzugten Biegung beim einzelnen Pferd in Schritt und Trab nie gegensätzlich waren. Jeder dieser beiden Parameter wurde daher für das einzelne Pferd über beide Gangarten zusammen-gefasst. Die Richtung von Abstellung und Biegung waren voneinander unabhängig, so-dass die Bewegungsmuster Abstellung ohne Biegung, Biegung ohne Abstellung, Abstel-lung mit Biegung in Laufrichtung (Travers) sowie Abstellung mit Biegung entgegen der Laufrichtung (Schulterherein) vorkamen. Kein Pferd war in beiden Merkmalen symmet-risch; für manche Pferde war neben der einfachen Biegung auch eine S-Form der Wir-belsäule signifikant. Die Belastungssymmetrie der Gliedmaßen war in beiden Gangarten von der Abstellung und der Biegung unabhängig, es gab aber Hinweise auf Zusammen-hänge zwischen bestimmten Kombinationen von Abstellung und Biegung einerseits und der Existenz einer Belastungsasymmetrie der Vorderbeine im Trab andererseits (unge-bogen mit Abstellung laufende und im Schulterherein laufende Pferde belasteten i.d.R. asymmetrisch).
8 Pferde wiesen eine signifikante Weideschrittpräferenz auf (5x L, 3x R), die bei ebenso vorhandener seitlicher Abstellung signifkant häufiger auf der der Abstellung abgewandten Seite auftrat. Sie wies keinen Zusammenhang mit der Rückführung der Hinterbeine im Schritt oder im Trab auf. Das Auftreten einer Weideschrittpräferenz war signifikant vom durch Abstellung und Biegung bestimmten Bewegungsmuster abhängig (Auftreten bei Abstellung ohne Biegung und bei Schulterherein, nicht bei Travers oder Biegung ohne Abstellung). Zudem zeigt die Präferenz der Pferde im Weideschritt eine starke Überein-stimmung mit der Belastungssymmetrie der Vorderbeine im Trab (bevorzugt vorgestelltes Bein wird mehr belastet (IN); symmetrische Belastung bei fehlender Präferenz). Im Hindernisversuch hatten 12 von 13 getesteten Probanden eine signifikant bevorzugte Ausweichrichtung (5x L, 7x R); diese war unabhängig von der gemessenen Wirbelsäulenform, lag aber bei Pferden mit seitlicher Abstellung überwiegend auf der Seite der gemessenen Abstellung. Im Abbiegeversuch zeigten 6 von 12 getesteten Probanden eine signifikant bevorzugte Abbiegerichtung (3x L, 3x R), diese war weder von der Abstellungsrichtung noch von der Wirbelsäulenform, der Weideschrittpräferenz oder der Belastungssymmetrie der Vorderbeine im Trab abhängig. Die meisten Pferde zeigten im Freilauf keine signifikante Galopppräferenz (2x L, 11x gerade (N), 1x R), wogegen reiterlich bei den meisten Pferden eine Präferenz festgestellt wurde; beide Beurteilungen stimmten ebenso wie die Beurteilungen verschiedener Reiter nicht miteinander überein. Die gemessene Abstellungsrichtung ließ sich durch visuelle Beobachtung mit hoher Si-cherheit vorhersagen. Die bevorzugte Wirbelsäulenform stimmte nicht mit der reiterlich oder an der Longe festgestellten Biegung überein, wohl aber mit der Seite, auf die die Mähne fällt. Die vorliegende Studie weist nach, dass individuell stabile motorische Lateralität, weitge-hend bestehend aus den den Merkmalen der reiterlich postulierten „Schiefe“, bei gesun-den Pferden in symmetrischen Gangarten besteht und dass zwischen bestimmten Merkmalen vorhersagbare Zusammenhänge bestehen. Daraus ergeben sich wertvolle Schlussfolgerungen für das reiterliche Geraderichten des Pferdes, für das in Übereinstimmung mit der Reitliteratur insbesondere die Lektion Schulterherein geeignet erscheint. Es ist gelungen, für die wesentlichen Merkmale Abstellung, Biegung und Belastungssymmetrie der Vordergliedmaßen im Trab klinische Tests aufzuzeigen, die mit hoher Sicher-heit die Ergebnisse der Bewegungsanalyse vorhersagen können, wobei Rückschlüsse auf weitere asymmetrische Merkmale möglich sind. Die reiterliche Beurteilung von bevor-zugter Biegung und Galopppräferenz scheint jedoch von weiteren Faktoren außer dem Pferd selbst abhängig zu sein und stimmt häufig nicht mit den messbaren Parametern überein. – In dieser Studie wird erstmals eine wissenschaftlich überprüfte und klinisch anwendbare Methode zur umfassenden Analyse der motorischen Lateralität im Sinne der „Schiefe“ eines Pferdes beschrieben.
Summary -“Crookedness“ in the Horse: Symmetry of Motion and Hoof Loading
The purpose of this study was description of motor laterality (in terms of “crookedness“) of sound adult horses. 14 non-lame horses (10 Warmblood horses, 4 Quarter Horses) were examined walking and trotting on a treadmill for individual motion asymmetry concerning keeping the hindlimbs at an angle (hindlimbs not tracking the frontlimbs, “hindquarter angle”), lateroflexion, pro- and retraction of the limbs as well as loading of front- and hindlimbs. High-speed-kinematography and resistive pressure sensors were used simultanously. The horses were also ridden to evaluate preferred lateroflexion and preferred lead in canter. Moving at an angle towards a preferred side was assessed visually. Laterality of grazing stance was tested, as well as preferred turning direction, obstacle avoidance direction and preferred lead in canter while moving unrestrained in an arena. None of the horses moved symetrically over all traits; although there were symmetrical traits with individual horses, asymmetry was more commen (except for the unrestrained preferred lead test). On the treadmill, 12 horses moved with their hindquarters significantly at a angle (8x right (R), 4x left (L), mean lateral angle 1,22°±1,09° at a walk and 1,05°±1,03° at a trot), 10 showed laterality for lateroflexion (9x L, 1x R), 13 had significant asymmetries for protraction and/ or retraction and 12 for loading of contralateral limbs concerning normalized peak force (PFN) and impulse (IN), respectively, of at least one pair of limbs (all with good repeatibility). Horses keeping their hindquarters to the left showed significantly larger retraction of the right hindlimb compared to horses keeping their hindquarters to the right, who tended to further retract the left hindlimb. – Asymmetries found on the treadmill occurred in both gaits but were not always the same in both gaits, though the direction of the hindquarter angle as well as that of the preferred lateroflexion never contradicted each other within the same individual. Therefore, a specific laterality direction of hindquarter angle and lateroflexion could be assigned to each horse. The direction of preferred hindquarter angle and lateroflexion, respectively, were independent of each other so that the movement patterns “hindquarter angle without lateroflexion”, “lateroflexion without hindquarter angle”, “hindquarter angle with lateroflexion to the same side” (hindquarter-in/ travers) and “hindquarter angle with lateroflexion to opposite sides” (shoulder-in) could be found; no horse moved symmetrical for both traits. The lateroflexion of some horses could even be regarded as a double bend. At both gaits, symmetry of limb loading was independent of hindquarter angle as well as lateroflexion, taken seperately; still, there seems to be a relation between certain combinations of hindquarter angle and lateroflexion, on the one side, and the existence or absence of asymmetric loading of the frontlimbs in trot (horses moving with hindquarter angle, but without lateroflexion, and horses moving in shoulder-in mostly had asymmetric frontlimb loading).
238 7. Summary8 horses displayed laterality for a grazing stance (5x L, 3x R); their hindquarter angle, if they showed one, was significantly more often on the opposite side of their advanced frontleg while grazing. The direction of the grazing stance was independent of hindlimb retraction symmetry in either gait. Occurrence of grazing stance laterality significantly depended on the movement pattern consisting of hindquarter angle and lateroflexion (horses moving with a hindquarter angle, but without lateroflexion, and horses moving in shoulder-in mostly showed grazing stance laterality, while horses moving with lateroflexion, but without a hindquarter angle, and horses moving in hindquarter-in did not). Also, grazing stance laterality was highly predictive of the symmetry of frontlimb loading at trot (advanced frontleg has significantly higher impulse (IN) at trot; horses without grazing stance laterality showed symmetrical impulse). 12 of 13 horses displayed laterality for obstacle avoidance direction (5x L, 7x R) that was independent of the individually preferred lateroflexion but if the horses showed a hindquarter angle it was usually to the same side. 6 of 12 horses showed laterality for turning direction (3x L, 3x R) that had no relation to laterality of either hindquarter angle, lateroflexion, grazing stance or frontlimb loading symmetry at trot. Most horses had no significant lead preference in the unrestrained canter test (2x L, 11x no preference (N), 1x R) even though riders assigned a lead preference to most horses; both ratings did not match, as well as the rating between two different riders did not match. The (measured) direction of hindquarter angle was highly predictable by visual asessment. Preferred (measured) lateroflexion did not match the direction of lateroflexion assigned by either rider or on the long line; it was in agreement with the mane side of the horse, though. This study proves that individual and stable motor laterality exists in sound horses in symmetrical gaits, mostly consisting of the traits that are hypothesized as “crookedness” in riding literature. It also shows that predictible relationships exist between certain traits thereof. This knowledge is valuable since it has implications for the training of riding horses for straightness, wherefore especially riding shoulder-in should be helpful. Relatively easy clinical tests could successfully be found that allow well predicting main features of individual horses ́ motor laterality like hindquarter angle, lateroflexion and frontlimb loading symmetry at trot as measured on the treadmill. Some conclusions can also be drawn for other asymmetrical traits. The asessment of preferred lateroflexion and canter lead performed by riders, though, seems to also underlie other influences than the horse itself and failed to be a predictor of the measured traits. – For the first time, a scientifically proven and clinically applicable method of asessing a horses motor laterality in terms of “crookedness” is presented.
|
|
|
|
Hölker, S. (2016). Typologie der deutschen Pferdehaltung – Eine empirische Studie mittels Two-Step-Clusteranalyse. Z. Agrarpolit. Landwirtsch., 94(3).
Abstract: In der deutschen Pferdebranche besteht u. a. hinsichtlich der Ausrichtung, Lage, Größe und ökonomischen Zielsetzung von Pferdehaltern eine große Heterogenität, gleichzeitig sind die Strukturen in diesem Sektor bislang kaum wissenschaftlich erfasst. Aus diesem Grund wird im vorliegenden Beitrag die Vielzahl unterschiedlicher Erscheinungsformen in der Pferdehaltung mittels einer empirisch gestützten Typologie systematisch beschrieben. Mittels einer standardisierten Onlinebefragung wurden 1.110 private, landwirtschaftliche und gewerbliche Pferdehalter sowie pferdehaltende Vereine befragt. Abgefragt wurden neben der Organisationsform, Bestandsgröße und der Ausrichtung auch Aspekte wie u. a. die Ausstattung der Anlage, die angewandten Haltungssysteme für die Pferde sowie Angaben zur zukünftige Entwicklung und den wahrgenommenen aktuellen sowie zukünftigen Herausforderungen in der Pferdehaltung. Mittels einer Clusteranalyse konnten sechs Typen herausgearbeitet werden: ländliche Hobbypferdehaltung, stadtorientierte Hobbypferdehaltung, Hobby-Zuchtpferdehaltung, Zuchtpferdehaltung, Pensionspferdehaltung und diversifizierte Pferdehaltung. Dabei sind die drei erstgenannten Typen der Liebhaberei zuzuordnen und die drei letztgenannten Typen werden mit Gewinnerzielungsabsicht betrieben. Die ermittelten Typen unterscheiden sich teilweise signifikant u. a. hinsichtlich ihrer Größe, den angewandten Haltungssystemen, der Anzahl an Betriebszweigen oder auch ihren zukünftig geplanten Entwicklungen. Die vorliegende Studie zeigt somit, dass beispielsweise bei der Entwicklung politischer Maßnahmen im Bereich der Pferdehaltung die Auswirkungen für einzelne Pferdehalter sehr unterschiedlich ausfallen können und es daher notwendig ist, die unterschiedlichen, real existierenden Betriebstypen zu berücksichtigen.
|
|
|
|
Hoelker, S. (2016). Typologie der deutschen Pferdehaltung – Eine empirische Studie mittels Two-Step-Clusteranalyse. Berichte über Landwirtschaft Zeitschrift für Agrarpolitik und Landwirtschaft, 94(3).
|
|
