The majority of horses, donkeys and mules (equids) are in low- and middle-income countries, where they remain a key source of labour in the construction, agriculture and tourism industries, as well as supporting households daily through transporting people and staple goods. Globally, approximately 600 million people depend on working equids for their livelihood. Safeguarding the welfare of these animals is essential for them to work, as well as for the intrinsic value of the animal’s quality of life. In order to manage animal welfare, it must be measured. Over the past decade, welfare assessment methodologies have emerged for different species, more recently for equids. We present the Standardised Equine-Based Welfare Assessment Tool (SEBWAT) for working equids. The tool is unique, in that it has been applied in practice by a non-governmental organisation (NGO) for six years across Low-Middle-Income Countries (LMICs). We describe the revision of the tool from an original to a second version, the tool methodology and user training process and how data collection and analysis have been conducted. We describe its application at scale, where it has been used more than 71,000 times in 11 countries. Case study examples are given from the tool being used for a needs assessment in Guatemala and monitoring welfare change in Jordan. We conclude by describing the main benefits and limitations for how the tool could be applied by others on working equids in LMICs and how it may develop in the future.

Equestrian sports, including racing (e.g., flat, steeple-chasing, harness or donkey derby); show-jumping; cross-country; dressage; polo; polocrosse; endurance; carriage driving; vaulting and hunting; are hugely popular in the UK, and they involve a significant number of people, both as participants and spectators, and tens of thousands of equids. In this paper, we discuss animal welfare as a complex and disputed issue, clarifying what the term means and how it can be measured. We review many aspects of welfare risk to equids used for sport, addressing issues encountered throughout their lives, including housing, feeding, veterinary intervention, shoeing, handling, training, breeding and equipment. This is followed by a unique exploration of the institutions and social processes influencing equine welfare. The institutional components comprise the rules of competition, the equids, attributes of the stakeholders and the space where participants strive to achieve a common purpose. We endeavour to untangle the most significant elements that create barriers or provide opportunities for equine welfare improvement. We expose the challenges faced by a broad range of stakeholders with differing ethics, attitudes and values. Evidently, there are many welfare risks to which equids used in sports continue to be exposed. It is also evident that significant improvements have occurred in recent times, but there remains a barrier to reducing the risks to an acceptable level. We conclude with recommendations regarding a process for change, involvement of stakeholders and management of knowledge to improve equine welfare that involves identifying and prioritising the risk factors and ultimately leading to interventions, further research and/or education.

No abstract

This chapter will explore the welfare challenges working animals face and how to ameliorate these through the application of animal welfare science and supporting others to develop this knowledge.

Bits used for cart horses in Senegal are typically made of recovered construction iron and often have defects related to design, shape, fit and metal quality. Consequently, there is widespread presence of bit-related oral injury amongst these equids. It was hypothesised that improving bit design would ameliorate bit-related welfare issues for working cart horses. This study aimed to develop locally made alternative bit prototypes and test their efficacy as less harmful to working horses, and their acceptability to their drivers. Eight animal-based welfare indicators (four physical and four behavioural) were designed to measure positive or negative effects of the new bits. Following a testing phase to appraise and mitigate potential animal welfare risk associated with the alternative bit designs, a total of 540 driver/horse combinations were opportunistically selected across five municipalities in Senegal. Welfare indicators were observed when new bits were introduced and again after 21 weeks of daily use. The results indicated statistically significant improvements in all welfare indicators measured (i.e., lesions on lip commissures, tongue, buccal mucosa and bars; and open mouth, tongue loll, head toss/shake, and head tilt/turn behaviours). None of the drivers reported any difficulty with horse control, nor chose to revert back to their original bits. Whilst acknowledging the limitation of inability to control all potential confounding variables, these preliminary findings suggest the bit itself as an important contributor to oral injury, and the possibility to improve this through alternative bit design that is low-cost, locally produced and acceptable to drivers.