Abstract: In the last decade an increasing number of studies has been oriented towards equine social learning and their social behavior within the herd (Kruger‚ 2006-2008). In social species, social learning is important to learn and gain useful skills to move and live in their own social and environmental context. Group housing has been recognized as an important element to fulfill the physical and behavioral needs of horses, especially their need for social contact (Søndergaard‚ 2011). Still‚ when it comes to horse training, the social aspect and‚ in general‚ cognitive abilities of the horse are rarely taken into account. Although it is widely accepted that social isolation is stressful for horse (Mal et al, 1991a and 1991b) still isolating a young horse is the first step when it comes to training methods. Due to tradition and culture and our performance-oriented society it is both difficult to accept and apply a different social/cognitive training approach. Training sessions are focused on immediate results whereas in cognitive learning part of the process is latent and will not be visible immediately‚ but taking the cognitive skills into account plays an important role in avoiding tension both in the horse as in the human-horse interaction (Baragli and De Giorgio, 2011). In this study we tested the possibility to apply social learning by creating a social environment‚ favoring a cognitive learning approach‚ for the training of six young horses. The group existed in three males and three females, between two and three years old. All six showed initial difficulties and defense to human interaction. They were housed in two groups in adjacent spacious paddocks where they had ample opportunity to move and express their individual and social behavioral repertoire. Each horse had one training session per week without isolating it from the others. The training sessions were held following a cognitive-relational model defined as the equine-zooanthropologic approach (De Giorgio, 2010 – Marchesini, 2011). The learning objectives were to be able to handle each horse‚ conduct it‚ saddle and ride it within a maximum time-frame of two years. Every time a defensive or alert behavior would occur the training activity was re-arranged to not over-pressure the horse. Therefore the persons working with the horses carried out the activities without tight expectations focusing on the horses’ positive attention. After eighteen months all six horses were used to the saddle and to riding. None of the horses ever fled or showed defense behavior and in the case of unexpected events they showed no emotional reactivity/reactive behavior. Today the horses show the same calm behavior whenever worked individually. This preliminary study highlights how social learning applied to equestrian activity can be fundamental for safety and welfare and the establishment of a more problem-free relationship between horse and human. Safety as the defensive behavior seems to have been reduced and welfare as the horses have been trained in a social context without being isolated and thus without being stressed during the training experience.

Abstract: We hypothesized that in an open environment, horses cope with a series of challenges in
their interactions with human beings. If the horse is not physically constrained and is free to move
in a small enclosure, it has additional options regarding its behavioral response to the trainer. The
aim of our study was to evaluate the influence of 2 different training strategies on the horse’s behavioral
response to human stimuli. In all, 12 female ponies were randomly divided into the following 2
groups: group A, wherein horses were trained in a small enclosure (where indicators of the level of
attention and behavioral response were used to modulate the training pace and the horse’s control over
its response to the stimuli provided by the trainer) and group B, wherein horses were trained in a closed
environment (in which the trainer’s actions left no room for any behavioral response except for the one
that was requested). Horses’ behavior toward the human subject and their heart rate during 2 standardized
behavioral tests were used to compare the responses of the 2 groups. Results indicated that the
horses in group A appeared to associate human actions with a positive experience, as highlighted by
the greater degree of explorative behavior toward human beings shown by these horses during the tests.
The experience of the horses during training may have resulted in different evaluations of the person, as
a consequence of the human’s actions during training; therefore, it seems that horses evaluate human
beings on daily relationship experiences.

Abstract: Unwanted oral investigative in horses has been anecdotally attributed to the practice of hand-feeding. Fears over such behaviour developing as a consequence of using food rewards, for example in clicker training, have been implicated as a common reason for not employing food-based positive reinforcement training techniques. This study used data generated as part of a larger research project, and explored associations between five common oral investigative behaviours and the practices of hand-feeding and clicker training. Data were from a convenience sample of UK leisure horse owners using two self-administered Internet surveys. Ninety-one percent of respondents reported giving their horse food by hand and this practice was significantly associated with three of the five oral investigative behaviours, licking hands (P = 0.006), gently searching clothing (P < 0.001) and roughly searching clothing (P = 0.003). Nipping hands and biting clothes were not associated with hand-feeding, suggesting that risk factors for these behaviours originate outside of this practice. Clicker training techniques were employed by 14% of respondents and their use was not associated with the incidence of any of the five oral investigative behaviours. These findings suggest that horse owners should not be deterred from using food-based positive reinforcement techniques with their horses, as fears that this practice will result in unwanted oral investigative behaviours from their horses appear unfounded.

Abstract: This article traces the history of scientific and empirical interval training. Scientific research has shed some light on the choice of intensity, work duration and rest periods in so-called 'interval training'. Interval training involves repeated short to long bouts of rather high intensity exercise (equal or superior to maximal lactate steady-state velocity) interspersed with recovery periods (light exercise or rest). Interval training was first described by Reindell and Roskamm and was popularised in the 1950s by the Olympic champion, Emil Zatopek. Since then middle- and long- distance runners have used this technique to train at velocities close to their own specific competition velocity. In fact, trainers have used specific velocities from 800 to 5000m to calibrate interval training without taking into account physiological markers. However, outside of the competition season it seems better to refer to the velocities associated with particular physiological responses in the range from maximal lactate steady state to the absolute maximal velocity. The range of velocities used in a race must be taken into consideration, since even world records are not run at a constant pace. Copyright 2001 Adis International

Abstract: Soiled bedding influences cleanliness and disease levels in dairy cows and there is no evidence of an inherent latrine behaviour in cattle. If cows were trained to use a concrete area of the housing system as a latrine, a cleaner bed could be maintained. Thirteen group-housed, 14-16-month-old Holstein-Friesian heifers, were clicker trained with heifer-rearing concentrate pellets as a reward. Training was carried out in four phases. (Phase 1) Association of feed reward with clicker, criterion: 34/40 correct responses. (Phase 2) Simple task (nose-butting a disc) to reinforce phase 1 association, criterion: 17/20 correct responses. (Phase 3) Association of eliminative behaviour with reward where criterion was four sessions with only one incorrect response: criteria for each heifer in phases 1-3 were set using binomial tests. (Phase 4) Shaping eliminative behaviour to occur on concrete. Possible responses were, eliminating on concrete (C) or straw (S), or moving from one substrate to another immediately before eliminating: C --> S, S --> C. Heifers were rewarded for the desired behaviours C and S --> C and ignored when S and C --> S occurred. If learning was achieved, C should increase as C --> S decreased and S --> C should increase as S decreased: tested with Spearman rank correlations. All heifers achieved criterion by day 4 of phase 1 (P = 0.001); day 1 of phase 2 (P = 0.001) and day 10 of phase 3 (P < 0.009). Responses changed throughout phase 3 beginning with (i) looking at the trainer whilst voiding then moving to trainer after the click, and later including (ii) moving to trainer immediately before- or (iii) during voiding. No relationship was found between S and S --> C (rs = -0.14; P = 0.63) or C and C --> S (rs = -0.33; P = 0.25). All group members eliminated more often on concrete (580) than on straw (141) but four heifers with consistently longer lying bouts also showed more C --> S before lying down (Mann-Whitney, P = 0.007). The present study is believed to be the first reported work to show that cattle can be trained to show an awareness of their own eliminative behaviour. This was not successfully shaped to latrine behaviour, however, and it is suggested that floor type may not have been a sufficiently salient cue. Voiding on straw occurred largely with response C --> S (0.73) and general behaviour suggested that this was strongly linked to lying patterns of individual heifers.