From Human Perception of Good Practices to Horse (Equus Caballus) Welfare: Example of Equine-Assisted Activities.
Authors: Grandgeorge Marine, Lerch Noémie, Delarue Alizée, Hausberger Martine
Journal: Animals : an open access journal from MDPI
Summary
# Editorial Summary Equine-assisted intervention (EAI) programmes have grown substantially, yet research examining their impact on equine welfare remains limited despite these animals bearing the welfare consequences of facility management decisions. Researchers surveyed 51 facility managers about their practices and philosophies, then conducted detailed observations across eight facilities housing 174 horses to identify correlations between management approaches and measurable welfare outcomes. Facilities where EAI was the primary focus demonstrated heightened awareness of equine needs—particularly regarding housing and feeding—and adopted gentler working modalities such as groundwork and bitless systems; conversely, facilities mixing EAI with conventional activities showed significantly compromised welfare profiles, suggesting that traditional ridden work is poorly adapted to the demands placed on therapy horses. Management philosophy directly predicted welfare status: there was clear alignment between how managers conceptualised "good practice" and the actual welfare consequences experienced by their horses, with working modality emerging as a critical factor influencing both equine comfort and human-horse interaction quality. These findings highlight that EAI providers must deliberately reconsider conventional training and working practices if they wish to align therapeutic goals with genuine equine welfare, and that facility managers' perceptions—however well-intentioned—require evidence-based refinement to prevent welfare compromise in animals expected to work therapeutically with vulnerable human populations.
Read the full abstract on PubMed
Practical Takeaways
- •If offering EAI services, reassess your conventional working equipment and methods (bits, saddles, riding-focused training) as they may create unnecessary discomfort for horses working with vulnerable populations; groundwork and bitless alternatives should be prioritized
- •Facility management decisions directly impact horse welfare—facilities with dedicated EAI focus that prioritize proper housing and feeding see measurable welfare improvements, so clearly define your facility's primary purpose rather than attempting mixed activities
- •Your perception of 'good practice' as a facility manager shapes real welfare outcomes; seek training and peer feedback on EAI-specific horsemanship, particularly if your background is traditional riding-focused management
Key Findings
- •Managers of EAI facilities showed greater awareness of equid housing and feeding needs compared to non-EAI facilities, particularly when EAI was the primary activity
- •Equid welfare profiles directly correlated with facility management profiles, with clear relationships between specific management decisions and observable welfare consequences
- •Facilities practicing groundwork and bitless methods (more common in EAI) showed better welfare outcomes than facilities using conventional working modalities with mixed activities
- •Equids in facilities with mixed activity involvement (not dedicated EAI) exhibited the most compromised welfare, suggesting conventional equipment and methods are poorly adapted to EAI client needs