Abstract: Rescued equids are often exposed to rehabilitation and training (or retraining) programmes to improve their physical and psychological well-being as well as to facilitate the re-homing process. Training uses either positive or negative reinforcement learning procedures and it is considered here that, there may be welfare implications associated with using the latter technique as it has the potential to overlay acute stress on animals with a chronic stress life history. The aim of this study, therefore, was to compare these training strategies (negative versus positive reinforcement) on equine behaviour and physiology as the first step in establishing an optimal rehabilitation approach (from a welfare perspective) for equids that have been subjected to chronic stress in the form of long-term neglect/cruelty. Over a 7-week period, 16 ponies (aged 6–18 months) were trained using either positive (‘positive’) (n = 8) or negative reinforcement (‘negative’) (n = 8) techniques to lead in hand, stand to be groomed, traverse an obstacle course and load into a trailer. Heart rate was measured (5 s intervals) on days 1 and 4 of each training week, ‘Pre’- (1 h), ‘During’ (0.5 h) and ‘Post’- (1 h) training session. Ethograms (10.00–20.00 h) outside of the training period were also compiled twice weekly. In addition, weekly arena tests (as a measure of reactivity) were also performed 1 week before and during the 7 weeks of training. Results showed significant differences between the two training schedules for some measures during the latter stages of the trial and suggested that animals trained under a positive reinforcement schedule were more motivated to participate in the training sessions and exhibited more exploratory or ‘trial and error’ type behaviours in novel situations/environments. In this context, the incorporation of positive reinforcement schedules within a rehabilitation programme may be of benefit to the animal from a welfare perspective.

Abstract: Current scores for equine personality traits assessed during performance tests are characterised by high means and inadequate variation, hampering genetic selection for these traits. A number of temperament and related behaviour tests have been developed in order to make assessment of equine personality more objective. However, rarely these tests have been validated for their use as a selection tool. Thus, as a first step the aim of the present study was to integrate a temperament tests into horse performance tests, in order to assess variability and repeatability of horses’ reactivity under the rider and the reliability of the judges’ assessment thereof. The temperament test was comprised of three novel stimuli, including a visual stimulus (BALL), a visual and tactile stimulus (GATE), and a visual and auditory stimulus (CANS). A total of 224 mares and stallions were subjected to the test during their participation in station performance tests for riding horses, and 133 of these horses were subjected to the test a second time either 2–3 weeks or 18 weeks after the first test. Horses were ridden in the test by professional riders, and their reactions to the stimuli were evaluated each by two judges and the rider using scores on a scale from 1 (task not concluded) to 10 (completely calm but attentive horse). Mean scores (±SD) ranged between 6.6 ± 2.4 (GATE) and 7.8 ± 2.1 (BALL), demonstrating lower means and considerably higher standard deviations than the same horses’ scores from present evaluation of the trait labelled temperament (8.1 ± 0.9) or related personality traits (e.g. character: 8.3 ± 0.8). Using variance components from mixed model analysis, inter-observer agreement between the two judges was for the individual stimuli very high (0.95 (BALL), 0.96 (GATE), 0.89 (CANS)), and there was likewise high agreement between the judges’ and the riders’ combined scores (0.93). Repeatabilities of horses’ scores were 0.72 (BALL), 0.75 (GATE), and 0.69 (CANS). Correlations to traits from the present evaluation of personality were low or non-existent, indicating that these traits are not a reflection of anxiety or fear reactivity as assessed by novel object tests. Horses’ improvement in judges’ combined scores from first to second test was not (P > 0.1) influenced by differences in time between tests, but differed between breed-types and individual riders. Also, not surprisingly, the higher horses’ scores in the first test were, the lower their improvement in the second test was (-0.45 ± 0.06 per additional score in the first test). Temperament tests using novel stimuli presented to horses under a rider may be a practical and valid tool for improving the current assessment of equine personality traits during performance tests. Considering a combination of absolute scores and horses’ improvement in scores of repeated tests, rather than measuring only absolute scores yields relevant information about horses’ personality, and at the same time it may prevent owners from deliberately training their horses for low reactions to the test-stimuli.

Abstract: 'Rollkur' or 'overbending' is the low and deep riding of a dressage horse during training or warming up. Lately, this technique has been criticized, and not necessarily objectively, on welfare grounds. To be able to evaluate these criticisms, more needs to be known about the workload and stress of horses being ridden 'rollkur'. The aim of the present study was to compare the workload of eight riding-school horses when being ridden deep and round with a draw rein ('rollkur') and when being ridden in a natural frame with only light rein contact ('free'). Workload (as measured by heart rate and blood lactate concentration) was slightly higher when horses were ridden 'rollkur' than when they were ridden 'free'. There were no differences in packed cell volume, or glucose and cortisol concentrations. No signs of uneasiness or stress could be determined when the horses were ridden 'rollkur'. Subjectively, all horses improved their way of moving during 'rollkur' and were more responsive to their rider.

Abstract: A good horse-rider ‘match’ is important in the context of equine welfare. To quantify the influence of repetition and horse-rider matching on the stress of horses encountering challenging objects, 16 Warmblood horses were ridden in a test-setting on three occasions. On each occasion the horse was ridden by a different rider and was challenged by three objects (A–C). Heart rate (HR), heart rate variability (HRV) of horse and rider, and behaviour score (BS) of the horse were obtained for each object and as a total for each test. The horse-rider interaction was evaluated with each combination and assessed as ‘matching’ or ‘mismatching’, and the horses were categorised as ‘compliant’, ‘partly-compliant’ or ‘non-compliant’. Horses exhibited a decreased HR (P = 0.015) and a decreased BS (P = 0.004) within and across different tests. ‘Matching’ horse-rider combinations exhibited less stress as indicated by reduced HR (‘match’ 69 ± 10 vs. ‘mismatch’ 72 ± 9, P = 0.001) and BS (‘match’ 1.9 ± 1.1 vs. ‘mismatch’ 3.8 ± 1.4, P = 0.017) of the horse. ‘Compliant’ (68 ± 8, P < 0.001) and ‘partly-compliant’ (71 ± 9, P = 0.002) horses had significantly lower HR than ‘non-compliant’ (75 ± 9) animals. The findings of the study indicate that HR and BS measurements support a subjective ‘match’ diagnosis and HR measurement may be a valuable tool in assessing horse compliance.

Abstract: Determined behavioral audiograms for 3 horses and 2 cows. Horses' hearing ranged from 55 Hz to 33.3 kHz, with a region of best sensitivity from 1 to 16 kHz. Cattle hearing ranged from 23 Hz to 35 kHz, with a well-defined point of best sensitivity at 8 kHz. Of the 2 species, cattle proved to have more acute hearing, with a lowest threshold of –21 db (re 20 μN/m–2) compared with the horses' lowest threshold of 7 db. Comparative analysis of the hearing abilities of these 2 species with those of other mammals provides further support for the relation between interaural distance and high-frequency hearing and between high- and low-frequency hearing. (39 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)