Abstract
Simple SummaryAnimal welfare assessment is an essential tool for maintaining positive animal wellbeing. Validated welfare assessment protocols have been developed for farm, laboratory, zoo, and companion animals, including horses in managed care. However, wild and free-roaming equines have received relatively little attention, despite populations being found worldwide. In the UK, free-roaming ponies inhabit areas of Exmoor, Dartmoor, and New Forest, England, and Snowdonia National Park in Wales, amongst others. Visitors and local members of the public who encounter free-roaming ponies occasionally raise concerns about their welfare, as they are not provided with additional food, water, or shelter. In this study, we evaluated the feasibility, reliability, and repeatability of welfare indicators that can be applied to a population of free-roaming Carneddau Mountain ponies to address such concerns. Our findings indicate that many of the trialed indicators were successfully repeated and had good levels of inter-assessor reliability. Reliable and repeatable welfare indicators for free-roaming and semi free-roaming ponies will enable population managers and conservation grazing schemes to manage the welfare of free-roaming horses and ponies.Validated assessment protocols have been developed to quantify welfare states for intensively managed sport, pleasure, and working horses. There are few protocols for extensively managed or free-roaming populations. Here, we trialed welfare indicators to ascertain their feasibility, reliability, and repeatability using free-roaming Carneddau Mountain ponies as an example population. The project involved (1) the identification of animal and resource-based measures of welfare from both the literature and discussion with an expert group; (2) testing the feasibility and repeatability of a modified body condition score and mobility score on 34 free-roaming and conservation grazing Carneddau Mountain ponies; and (3) testing a prototype welfare assessment template comprising 12 animal-based and 6 resource-based welfare indicators, with a total of 20 questions, on 35 free-roaming Carneddau Mountain ponies to quantify inter-assessor reliability and repeatability. This pilot study revealed that many of the indicators were successfully repeatable and had good levels of inter-assessor reliability. Some of the indicators could not be verified for reliability due to low/absent occurrence. The results indicated that many animal and resource-based indicators commonly used in intensively managed equine settings could be measured in-range with minor modifications. This study is an initial step toward validating a much-needed tool for the welfare assessment of free-roaming and conservation grazing ponies.
Highlights
Knowledge of the welfare of animals under human care is integral to their successful management; important is an understanding of the welfare of free-living animals to guide how we interact with wildlife and their habitats [1]
Using a multifactorial approach including animal-based indicators (AB) and resource-based indicators (RB) for assessment enables the evaluator to quantify levels of individual welfare [6]
There was a good degree of reliability between the two observers for body condition score (BCS) of the 34 ponies tested in the preliminary phase using the modified Henneke score
Summary
Knowledge of the welfare of animals under human care is integral to their successful management; important is an understanding of the welfare of free-living animals to guide how we interact with wildlife and their habitats [1]. Welfare assessment has moved from resource-based or simple indicators of environmental parameters to include indicators that monitor the behavioral responses and physiological conditions of individual animals over time [4]. Animal-based indicators are relevant in the welfare assessment of wild or free-ranging animals. Indicators related only to environmental parameters do not allow for the assessment of the behavioral or physical responses to the prescribed condition and are not representative of the animal’s welfare state [4]. Using a multifactorial approach including animal-based indicators (AB) (physical/physiological outcomes) and resource-based indicators (RB) (what is available in the environment) for assessment enables the evaluator to quantify levels of individual welfare [6]. There are few protocols for extensively managed animals [3,15,16] or, free-living wild populations [1]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
