Merkies Katrina, Copelin Caleigh, Small Nicolas, Young Joelene
Department of Animal Bioscience, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON N1G 2W1, Canada.
Campbell Centre for the Study of Animal Reproduction, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON N1G 2W1, Canada.
Animals (Basel). 2022 Oct 6;12(19):2685. doi: 10.3390/ani12192685.
Recent concerns regarding horse welfare during competition has highlighted the occurrence of overtightened nosebands on competition horses. Current rules are often vague—e.g., “nosebands may never be so tightly fixed as to harm the horse.” To investigate the need and acceptance prior to any rule changes Equestrian Canada (EC) launched a pilot noseband measuring project. Nineteen officiating stewards measured noseband fit using the ISES taper gauge (TG) at 32 equestrian events of various disciplines in 2021. Additionally, stakeholder surveys collected data from 1528 EC members and 27 stewards regarding opinions and perceptions on noseband use, fit, measurement and rules. Descriptive and qualitative statistics along with Pearson chi-squared examined relationships between specific variables. Of the 551 horses tested with the TG, 71% passed the 1.5 cm (two-fingers) measurement and an additional 19% passed the 1 cm (one-finger) measurement. Stewards unanimously agreed that overtightened nosebands present a welfare issue although 63% believed this to represent only a small subset of riders. While 60% of stewards believed the current rules were sufficient, 40% did not. Despite the fact that 84% of stewards believe there should be a standardized fit across disciplines, 52% felt the use of the TG should be at their discretion. The top three reasons riders indicated for using nosebands were discipline expectation (41%), requirement for competition (39%) or for control/safety (32%). Open comments referred to an option to not wear a noseband in competition. Professional riders believed overtightened nosebands were less of a welfare issue than amateur riders (76% vs. 88% respectively; p < 0.025) and correspondingly did not feel the TG was a fair method (44% vs. 68% respectively; p < 0.001). Slightly more than half of the respondents (51.5%) believed that measuring noseband fit on the frontal nasal plane was the appropriate location. To advance equestrian practice, more education is needed to inform stakeholders of the reasons for noseband measurements and appropriate fit.
近期对比赛期间马匹福利的关注凸显了比赛用马鼻带过紧的问题。当前的规则往往含糊不清,例如“鼻带绝不能系得太紧而伤害马匹”。为了在进行任何规则更改之前调查需求和接受度,加拿大马术协会(EC)启动了一项鼻带测量试点项目。2021年,19名裁判 steward 在32场不同项目的马术赛事中使用国际盛装舞步裁判协会锥度规(TG)测量鼻带的贴合度。此外,利益相关者调查收集了1528名加拿大马术协会成员和27名裁判关于鼻带使用、贴合度、测量和规则的意见和看法。描述性和定性统计以及皮尔逊卡方检验研究了特定变量之间的关系。在使用TG测试的551匹马中,71% 通过了1.5厘米(两指宽)的测量,另有19% 通过了1厘米(一指宽)的测量。裁判们一致认为鼻带过紧存在福利问题,尽管63% 的人认为这只占骑手的一小部分。虽然60% 的裁判认为现行规则足够,但40% 的人不这么认为。尽管84% 的裁判认为各项目应该有标准化的贴合度,但52% 的人认为是否使用TG应由他们自行决定。骑手表示使用鼻带的前三大原因是项目要求(41%)、比赛需要(39%)或控制/安全需要(32%)。开放性意见提到了在比赛中不戴鼻带的选择。职业骑手认为鼻带过紧对福利的影响比业余骑手小(分别为76% 和88%;p < 0.025),相应地,他们也不认为TG是一种公平的方法(分别为44% 和68%;p < 0.001)。略超过一半的受访者(51.5%)认为在鼻额平面测量鼻带贴合度是合适的位置。为了推动马术实践,需要进行更多教育,让利益相关者了解测量鼻带的原因和合适的贴合度。