Academic Writing - Critical Review of Weaving as an Indicator of Poor Welfare in Horses - Edited 

​

​

The behaviour of horses in their natural habitat is often used as an assessor of the welfare of the domestic horse (Rivera et al., 2002). This is based on the notion that the restriction of natural behaviours such as socialising and foraging are impacted due to up to 90% of horses living in individual boxes, and this can be a welfare concern (Yarnell et al., 2015; Ruet et al., 2020). Stereotypical behaviours have been found to develop as a result of an animal adapting to an abnormal or unnatural situation, or by the state of the animal being bored, frustrated, or stressed  due to suboptimal housing conditions (Cooper and Albentosa, 2005; Hanis et al., 2020).

​

Stereotypical behaviour patterns are repetitive, unchanging and apparently functionless and have often been suggested to indicate welfare issues (Roberts et al., 2017). In a comprehensive meta-analysis, Mason and Latham (2004) observed significant patterns of increased stereotypical behaviours associated with other indicators of poor welfare. Visser et al., (2008) stated that the most likely pathogenesis for stereotypical behaviours in the horse is that these behaviours generally develop in times of trauma, however the behaviour does not always discontinue once the trauma has passed or been resolved. It is also due to this assumption that stereotypies are often used as an indicator of poor animal welfare (Young et al., 2012), although cannot be solely used to assess an animal’s welfare standard (Roberts et al., 2017). Locomotor stereotypies are mostly seen as frustrated attempts to move towards a desired goal, be that other horses, food, or an outdoor space with an example of a locomotor stereotype being weaving (Henderson, 2007).

​

Weaving behaviour of the horse involves the repetitive lateral swaying motion of the head, neck, forequarters, and on occasion, hindquarters and is considered a stereotypical behaviour (Nicol, 1999). Visser et al., (2008) found that weaving may be a behaviour derived from frustration as a horse attempts to gain social contact with other horses or in an attempt to reach a desired place (Sarrafchi and Blokhuis, 2013). Additionally, Cooper et al., (2000) observed increased incidence of weaving when horses were denied social interaction with neighbouring stabled horses. However, it is worth noting that the horses in this study were feral before being stabled and therefore had no experience in a confined stable prior to this investigation that horses bred in domestication would have had, and this experience may have caused a different reaction to the isolation. Despite this, horses are naturally social animals who thrive in heard environments, therefore stabling them, away from social contact, can negatively impact their welfare and so contribute to the development of stereotypical behaviours (Yarnell et al., 2015). A similar study conducted by Clegg et al. (2008) found that weaving behaviour was most concentrated in the hour before turnout or before an evening feed. This furthers the assumption that weaving can be related to frustration-based behaviour and may not always be a direct indicator of poor welfare as being given an evening feed or getting regularly turned out into a field would be considered aspects of good welfare (Hanis et al., 2020).

​

Much of the published research related to weaving behaviour as an indicator of poor welfare is somewhat conflicting. Some studies find that weaving is more a frustration-based behaviour which is only performed in anticipation of an event (Clegg et al., 2008). Whereas other studies saw weaving to be indicative of boredom or lack of social contact and stimulation, which when considering horses are roaming herd animals by nature, should be seen as a sign of a suboptimal welfare state (Sarrafchi and Blokhuis, 2013). However, modern day ownership practices often require horses to be stabled for some part of the day (Visser et al., 2008), frequently due to adverse weather that would be considered to be more of a negative impact on a horses welfare than stabling and the subsequent potential stereotypies that could occur (Arena et al., 2021). Considering all of this, it can be said that while behavioural stereotypies such as weaving can be suggestive of reduced welfare, they should not be solely used to assess an animal’s welfare.

​

​

References

Arena, I., Marliani, G., Sabioni, S., Gabai, G., Bucci, D., & Accorsi, P. A. (2021). Assessment of horses’ welfare: Behavioral, hormonal, and husbandry aspects. Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 41, 82–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jveb.2021.01.006

​

Clegg, H. A., Buckley, P., Friend, M. A., & McGreevy, P. D. (2008). The ethological and physiological characteristics of cribbing and weaving horses. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 109(1), 68–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2007.02.001

​

Cooper, J. J., McDonald, L., & Mills, D. S. (2000). The effect of increasing visual horizons on stereotypic weaving: Implications for the social housing of stabled horses. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 69(1), 67–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(00)00115-5

​

Cooper, J. J., & Albentosa, M. J. (2005). Behavioural adaptation in the domestic horse: Potential role of apparently abnormal responses including stereotypic behaviour. Livestock Production Science, 92(2 SPEC. ISS.), 177–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livprodsci.2004.11.017

​

Hanis, F., Chung, E. L. T., Kamalludin, M. H., & Idrus, Z. (2020). The Influence of Stable Management and Feeding Practices on the Abnormal Behaviors Among Stabled Horses in Malaysia. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science, 94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jevs.2020.103230

​

Henderson, A. J. Z. (2007). Don’t fence me in: Managing psychological well being for elite performance horses. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 10(4), 309–329. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888700701555576

​

Mason, G., & Latham, N. (2004). Can’t stop, won’t stop: is stereotypy a reliable welfare indicator. Animal Welfare, 13(S57-69), 57–69. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org

​

Rivera, E., Benjamin, S., Nielsen, B., Shelle, J., & Zanella, A. J. (2002). Behavioral and physiological responses of horses to initial training: The comparison between pastured versus stalled horses. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 78(2–4), 235–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(02)00091-6

​

Roberts, K., Hemmings, A. J., McBride, S. D., & Parker, M. O. (2017). Causal factors of oral versus locomotor stereotypy in the horse. Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, 20, 37–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jveb.2017.05.003

​

Ruet, A., Arnould, C., Levray, J., Lemarchand, J., Mach, N., Moisan, M. P., … Lansade, L. (2020). Effects of a temporary period on pasture on the welfare state of horses housed in individual boxes. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2020.105027

​

Sarrafchi, A., & Blokhuis, H. J. (2013). Equine stereotypic behaviors: Causation, occurrence, and prevention. Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, 8(5), 386–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jveb.2013.04.068

​

Visser, E. K., Ellis, A. D., & Van Reenen, C. G. (2008). The effect of two different housing conditions on the welfare of young horses stabled for the first time. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 114(3–4), 521–533. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2008.03.003

​

Young, T., Creighton, E., Smith, T., & Hosie, C. (2012). A novel scale of behavioural indicators of stress for use with domestic horses. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 140(1–2), 33–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2012.05.008

​

Yarnell, K., Hall, C., Royle, C., & Walker, S. L. (2015). Domesticated horses differ in their behavioural and physiological responses to isolated and group housing. Physiology and Behavior, 143, 51–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2015.02.040