Abstract: Animal welfare, or well-being, is a social issue with ethical, scientific, political, and aesthetic properties. Answering questions about the welfare of animals requires scientific definition, assessment, solutions, and public acceptance. With respect to the actual well-being of the animal, most issues are centered on how the animal “feels” when managed within a specific level of confinement, during special agricultural practices (e.g., tail docking, beak trimming, etc.) and handling. Questions of this nature may require exploration of animal cognition, motivation, perception, and emotional states in addition to more commonly recognized indicators of well-being. Several general approaches have emerged for solving problems concerning animal well-being in intensive production systems: environmental, genetic, and therapeutic. Environmental approaches involve modifying existing systems to accommodate specific welfare concerns or development of alternative systems. Genetic approaches involve changing the behavioral and (or) physiological nature of the animal to reduce or eliminate behaviors that are undesirable within intensive system. Therapeutic approaches of a physical (tail docking, beak trimming) and physiological (drug and nutritional therapy) nature bring both concern and promise with regard to the reduction of confinement stress. Finally, the recent focus on commodity quality assurance programs may indirectly provide benefits for animal well-being. Although research in the area of animal well-being will provide important information for better animal management, handling, care, and the physical design of intensive production systems there is still some uncertainty regarding public acceptance. The aesthetics of modern intensive production systems may have as much to do with public acceptance as with science.

Abstract: N1 -

Abstract: Discrimination learning and concept formation abilities were investigated in four mature Arabian horses. A series of two-choice discrimination problems were presented on stimulus panels that could open to allow access to food bowls. Selection of the correct stimulus resulted in food reinforcement, and an incorrect choice was not rewarded. The positions of the correct and incorrect stimuli were varied randomly during each test session, and the criterion for learning each problem was 85% correct for two consecutive sessions of 30 or 40 trials. Testing progressed through six discrimination problems. The first four were simple pattern discriminations, but the last two incorporated several different triangles as correct stimuli and thus involved the concept of triangularity. Two of the subjects successfully completed only simple pattern discriminations, one showed evidence of learning in the first concept problem, and one completed all six tests, including the two concept formation problems. The results demonstrate complex pattern discrimination ability in horses, and suggest that they may also have the ability to form and use concepts in problem solving.

Abstract: Some of the techniques that may be used to study social, reproductive, and ingestive behavior in horses are described in this paper. One of the aspects of equine social behavior is the dominance hierarchy or patterns of agonistic behavior. Paired or group feeding from a single food source may be used to determine dominance hierarchies quickly. Focal animal studies of undisturbed groups of horses may also be used; this method takes longer, but may reveal affiliative as well as agonistic relationships among the horses. Reproductive behavior includes flehmen, the functional significance of which can be determined using combinations of field observations of harem groups and laboratory studies of stallions exposed to female urine or feces in the absence of the donor mare. Ingestive behavior may include food, salt, or water intake. Direct and indirect measurements of intake can be made and used to answer questions regarding the ability of horses to control their energy intake when the diet is diluted, the effect of feral equids on the ecology of an area, and the abilities of horses to compensate for dehydration and hypovolemia.

Abstract: In general, codes that have been designed to safeguard the welfare of animals emphasize the importance of providing an environment that will ensure good health and a normal physiological and physical state, that is, they emphasize the animals' physical needs. If mental needs are mentioned, they are always relegated to secondary importance. The argument is put forward here that animal welfare is dependent solely on the cognitive needs of the animals concerned. In general, if these cognitive needs are met, they will protect the animals' physical needs. It is contended that in the few cases in which they do not safeguard the physical needs, it does not matter from a welfare point of view. The human example is given of being ill. It is argued that welfare is only adversely affected when a person feels ill, knows that he or she is ill, or even thinks that he or she is ill, all of which processes are cognitive ones. The implications for welfare of animals possessing certain cognitive abilities are discussed. For example, the extent to which animals are aware of their internal state while performing behavior known to be indicative of so-called states of suffering, such as fear, frustration, and pain, will determine how much they are actually suffering. With careful experimentation it may be possible to determine how negative they feel these states to be. Similarly, the extent to which animals think about items or events absent from their immediate environment will determine how frustrated they are in the absence of the real item or event but in the presence of the cognitive representation.