Abstract: Horses maintain the social structure through the establishment of dominant-subordinate hierarchical relationships, both within and between groups. The object of study was the feral horse population, living on the Vodnyi Isl, Manych-Ghudilo Lake, on the territory of Rostov Region, S Russia the State Nature Biosphere Reserve “Rostov”. The social structure of this population is represented by the harem and bachelor groups, and their variety – the “mixed”groups, the presence and composition of which is atypical for the populations of feral horses. The main objectives of this work were to identify the hierarchical structure of different types of social groups and the role of the stallions in them, defining the dominance rank of animals. The method of continuous logging occurred aggressive reaction, ritualized interaction between stallions, take into account the direction of interactions between individuals. We observed 5 harem, 3 bachelor and 3 mixed groups. Each group was studied for a total of 60 h (8 h per group per days).Behavioral observations were carried out in summer 2009-2011. Based on the number and direction of aggressive interactions the hierarchical coefficient was calculated for individual horses (Ivanov et al, 2007). Harem group consists of an adult stallion (<5 years old) and a few mares with their offspring. Our observations of harem groups confirm the previously known information about this type of social groups (Berger, 1986; Carson, Wood-Gush, 1983, Keiper, 1983). Hierarchical system between mares is close to linear with reversal. The stallion is not included in the hierarchy of the mares; he is the leader and serves to maintain the integrity of the group and inter-group hierarchy, and has reproductive function. Bachelor groups consist of stallions 2-3 years and older who do not have their own harem. It is known that dominance hierarchy in these groups is linear, young males or males who recently had joined the group have low ranks (Berger, 1977; Houpt, Keiper, 1982; Kirillov Paklina, 1990). In observed bachelor groups dominant stallion have a significantly higher rank in the hierarchy. However, among other stallions is not always observed strict linear hierarchy – some individuals have very similar ranks. Function of managing the group and maintaining the intergroup hierarchy can be distributed among the all stallions in the group. Mixed groups are composed of several mature stallions, one or more mares (sometimes with the offspring). In the study population in this type of social groups animals may be mature (age 5 and older) and semi-mature (2-5 years). The hierarchy of these atypical groups has not been studied. In the studied 3 mixed groups stallions have very similar hierarchical rank, dominant and subordinate stallions share a function of managing the group, participation in ritualized interactions. Our studies have revealed the plasticity of the hierarchical structure of groups of horses and the need to further investigate the distribution of social roles among stallions.

Abstract: We observed the activity and movements of Konik horses (Equus caballus) in order to determine the initiators of movements and the individuals taking the lead in movements of the main groups. We conducted our observations between March-June 2010 along the shores of the Rhine river, in the Blauwe Kamer reserve, in the Netherlands. The horses were introduced to the reserve alongside with cattle to prevent the growth of the forest and maintain the grass habitat. We videotaped all observations on two digital video cameras, one providing the general view of the group and the other scanning and focusing on the individuals, to aid with identification. Horses were recognized based on individual profiles that were created for each one, consisting of photos of both sides and notes of the main characters, such as orientation and coloration of the mane, prominent scars and markings, etc. Twenty three horses (not counting foals) were organized in two harem groups with 11 individuals (two of which were dominant stallions) in the large group and six individuals (one of which was a stallion) in the second group. These two main groups were always within sight of each other, and two bachelor males moved usually in their vicinity. An additional group of three young bachelor males roamed elsewhere in the reserve. We divided the movements of the horses to local movements while grazing and to long-distance movements, in which the horses moved to a different grazing location, to a pond of water, resting area or groups of trees that were used by the horses for scratching themselves. During the local movements, any two of the three oldest females in the large harem group were enough to cause the whole group to follow them and gradually change position within the pasture. The smaller harem always followed the large harem’s movements. The long-distance movements of the large harem were sometimes initiated by one of the harem stallions that herded their group and at other times – by the oldest females. Soon after the movement was clearly initiated, the dominant stallions positioned themselves in the back of the group or in the center and had no influence on the direction of move that was only determined by the leading females. In the long-distance movements too, the small harem followed the large harem group, and the two bachelor males usually followed behind them. Social interactions included aggressive interactions between the two dominant males within the large harem or between dominant stallions and the two bachelor males accompanying the two harems. In addition, dominant males courting or attempting to mate with mares sometimes caused a turmoil that eventually initiated movement of the harems. KW -

Abstract: Removing a horse from its social group may be considered risky, both for the handler and the horse, because other horses can interfere in the catching process. The main aim of this study was to identify where and when these risk situations occur while removing a horse from its group. A potential risk situation was defined by the closeness of loose horses in the group or by any physical contact with them. Whether the number of horses following would be influenced by the social rank of the horse being led out, and whether more horses would follow to the gate when a larger proportion of the group was removed compared to when a single horse was taken out were also investigated. Thirty-two mares (1–2 years) were kept in groups of four. All horses were taken out of their home paddock twice alone (64 tests) and twice with a companion (32 tests). One handler (or two handlers when two horses were removed) was asked to approach (phase 1) and catch the target horse (phase 2), walk it to the centre of the paddock and remain stationary at a post for 30 s (phase 3), walk to the paddock entrance (phase 4) and through the gate (phase 5). The number of horses following, and the number of loose horses in proximity (<2 m, 2–5 m) to the target horse and handler was estimated, and horse–horse and horse–human interactions were recorded continuously for the five scoring phases. Significantly more loose horses were within 2 m of a single target horse during the phases approach (mean ± SD: 1.5 ± 0.8), catch (1.6 ± 0.9) and post (1.7 ± 0.7) than during walk (1.0 ± 0.5) and gate (1.1 ± 0.6). Rank did not influence the number of horses following to the gate (high rank: 2.4 ± 0.7; lower rank: 2.0 ± 1.0; P = 0.396) and interactions between horses were rare. A greater proportion of the loose horses followed when two horses (0.9 ± 0.2) were removed compared to when a single horse (0.7 ± 0.3) was taken out (P = 0.011). In conclusion, maintaining a distance to other horses in the group by reducing the time being relatively stationary, so giving loose horses fewer chances to approach, is likely to contribute to improved handler's safety. Removing a small proportion of the group may also decrease the probability of the other horses following.