|
|
McGreevy, P. D., & Nicol, C. J. (1998). Prevention of crib-biting: a review. Equine Vet J Suppl, (27), 35–38.
Abstract: Crib-biting is a common oral stereotype. Because of perceived deleterious effects on the health and appearance of subjects the prevention of crib-biting is regularly attempted. The resourcefulness of horses in satisfying their motivation to perform this behaviour often frustrates owners' efforts at prevention. This paper reviews the efficacy and observable consequences of attempting to prevent crib-biting by a variety of methods. These include attempts to prevent the grasping of objects, to interfere with air-engulfing and to introduce punishment for grasping and neck-flexion. Other approaches include the use of surgery, acupuncture, pharmaceuticals, operant feeding and environmental enrichment. A remedy that is effective for every crib-biter remains elusive. We conclude that, rather than concentrating on remedial prevention, further research should be directed at establishing why horses crib-bite and how the emergence of crib-biting can be avoided.
|
|
|
|
McGreevy, P. D., & Nicol, C. J. (1998). The effect of short-term prevention on the subsequent rate of crib-biting in thoroughbred horses. Equine Vet J Suppl, (27), 30–34.
Abstract: The results of an experimental study of the motivational consequences of short-term prevention of crib-biting are reported here. Eight test horses wore a cribbing collar for 24 h. This was effective in preventing crib-biting in 6 subjects. Using analysis of co-variance that accounted for baseline differences in crib-biting rate, test horses showed significantly more crib-biting than control horses on the first day after prevention (P < 0.05). There was also a highly significant increase in the crib-biting rate of test horses on the first day after prevention in comparison with their baseline rate (P < 0.01). This defines the increase as a post inhibitory rebound. An increase in the novelty of the cribbing bar and an increase in feeding motivation during the period of prevention are rejected as explanations of the rebound in this study. Instead, it is suggested that the rebound reflected a rise in internal motivation to crib-bite during the period of prevention. Behaviours that exhibit this pattern of motivation are generally considered functional; and it has been argued that their prevention may compromise welfare.
|
|
|
|
McGreevy, P. (2004). Equine behavior. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science, 24(9), 397–398.
|
|
|
|
Cooper, J., & McGreevy, P. (2002). Stereotypic Behaviour in the Stabled Horse: Causes, Effects and Prevention without Compromising Horse Welfare. In The Welfare of Horses (pp. 99–124).
Abstract: Apparently functionless, repetitive behaviour in horses, such as weaving or crib-biting has been difficult to explain for behavioural scientists, horse owners and veterinarians alike. Traditionally activities such as these have been classed amongst the broad descriptor of undesirable stable vices and treatment has centred on prevention of the behaviours per se rather than addressing their underlying causes. In contrast, welfare scientists have described such activities as apparently abnormal stereotypics, claiming they are indicative of poor welfare, citing negative emotions such as boredom, frustration or aversion in the stable environment and even suggesting prevention of the activities alone can lead to increased distress. Our understanding of equine stereotypics has advanced significantly in recent years with epidemiological, developmental and experimental studies identifying those factors closely associated with the performance of stereotypics in stabled horses. These have allowed the development of new treatments based on removing the causal factors, improving the horses“ social and nutritional environment, re-training of horses and their owners and redirection of the activities to less harmful forms. Repetitive activities conventionally seen as undesirable responses to the stable environment, their causal basis and the effectiveness of different approaches to treatment are discussed, both in terms of reducing the behaviour and improving the horse”s quality of life.
|
|
|
|
Waran, N., McGreevy, P., & Casey, R. (2002). Training Methods and Horse Welfare. In The Welfare of Horses (pp. 151–180).
Abstract: Many aspects of horse care and handling are based upon convenience and traditional practices. Many of these methods of management and practice do not take into account the natural behaviour of horses. This is despite the belief that although domestic horses are probably more docile, stronger, faster growing and faster moving than their ancestors, they are unlikely to have lost any natural behaviours. The performance or sport horse is expected to perform a wide variety of movements and tasks, some of which are unnatural or exaggerated and most of which must be learned. The term “training” is commonly used to describe the processes whereby the human handler introduces the horse to new situations and associations. Performance horses are often required to tolerate stimuli that are innately aversive or threatening, such as having a person on their backs. They are also trained to respond to a stimulus with often unnatural or over-emphasised behaviour, such as some of the dressage movements. Effective and humane training requires an understanding of the processes underlying behaviour. These include knowledge of behaviour under natural conditions, learning processes, the influence of early experience and motivational forces. Horses differ from the other main companion animal species, namely cats and dogs, in that they are a prey species. They most commonly flee from dangerous and painful situations. Horses readily learn to avoid potentially threatening situations and if their attempts to avoid associated stimuli are prevented, they will often exhibit problem behaviours. In this chapter the history of horse training, the application of learning theory and a knowledge of equine behaviour to training, and innovative training methods are all considered.
|
|
|
|
McGreevy, P. D. (2004).
|
|
|
|
McGreevy, P. D., McLean, A. N., Warren-Smith, A. K., Waran, N., & Goodwin, D. (2005). Defining the terms and processes associated with equitation. Proceedings of the First International Equitation Science Symposium, , 10–43.
|
|
|
|
Warren-Smith, A. K., & McGreevy, P. D. (2008). Preliminary investigations into the ethological relevance of round-pen (round-yard) training of horses. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 11(3), 285–298.
Abstract: Recently, training horses within round-pens has increased in popularity. Practitioners often maintain that the responses they elicit from horses are similar to signals used with senior conspecifics. To audit the responses of horses to conspecifics, 6 mare-young-horse dyads, this study introduced them to each other in a round-pen and videoed them for 8 min. These dyads spent significantly more time farther than 10 m apart than they did less than 1 m apart (p < .001). The time they spent less than 1 m apart decreased over the 8-min test period (p = .018). Mares occupied the center of the round-pen and chased youngsters for 0.73% of the test period (p < .001). Mares made all agonistic approaches (p < .001), and youngsters (p = .018) made all investigative approaches. Head lowering and licking-and-chewing were exhibited most when the youngsters were facing away from the mares (p < .001). The frequency of head lowering increased during the test period (p = .027), whereas the frequency of licking-and-chewing did not change. The results bring into question the popular interpretation and ethological relevance of equine responses commonly described in round-pen training and show that mares did not condition young horses to remain in close proximity to them.
|
|
|
|
McGreevy, P. D. Development and Resolution of Behavioural Problems with the. In Havemeier Workshop.
Abstract: The ideals of equestrian technique combine art and science. Therefore students of equitation
encounter measurable variables such as rhythm, tempo and impulsion alongside more ethereal ones
such as outline and harmony. This mixture accounts for many of the idiosyncrasies of equestrianism
including the subjective scoring of performance in dressage tests, the elusiveness of perfection even at
an elite level of competition and the difficulty of expressing equestrian technique in empirical terms
(Roberts, 1992).
This chapter will describe and offer examples of the unwelcome behavioural responses horses
produce under saddle. Two broad sections are then proposed to allow the reader to consider
unwelcome behavioural responses caused directly by humans as distinct from those attributable more
to the horse than the rider. Ultimately the responsibility for problems in the ridden horse lies with
humans since we have undertaken the domestication and exploitation of equids. Therefore it is
accepted that the dichotomy is not absolute. The chapter closes with a
|
|
|
|
Clarke, J. V., Nicol, C. J., Jones, R., & McGreevy, P. D. (1996). Effects of observational learning on food selection in horses. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 50(2), 177–184.
Abstract: Fourteen riding horses of mixed age and breed were randomly allocated to observer and control treatments. An additional horse was pre-trained as a demonstrator to walk the 13.8 m length of the test arena and select one of two food buckets using colour and pattern cues. Observer horses were exposed to correct performances of the task by the trained demonstrator, for 20 trials held over 2 days. Control horses were subjected to the same handling and placement procedures as the observer horses but without exposure to the behaviour of the demonstrator. The third day for all subjects was designated as a test day. Each subject was released individually in a predetermined place in the arena, and the latency to walk the length of the test arena to the food buckets, the latency to feed, the identity of the bucket approached and the identity of the bucket selected were recorded on ten consecutive trials. During tests both food buckets contained food to minimize the possibility of individual trial and error learning. On the first trial the mean latency to approach the goal area was 18 s for observer horses, compared with 119 s for control horses (t = 2.8, d.f. = 12, P < 0.01) and the mean latency to eat was 35 s for observer horses, compared with 181 s for control horses (t = 4.86, d.f. = 11, P < 0.001). However, observer horses were no more likely to choose the demonstrated bucket than control horses on the first trial. Twelve of the 14 horses decreased their latency to approach the goal area during the series of ten trials, but there were no significant changes in the buckets selected.
|
|
