An analysis of equine round pen training videos posted online: Differences between amateur and professional trainers

September An analysis of equine round pen training videos posted online: Differences between amateur and professional trainers Erin Kydd 0 1 Barbara Padalino 0 1 Cathrynne Henshall 1 Paul McGreevy 0 1 0 Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Sydney , Sydney, NSW , Australia , 2 Department of Veterinary Medicine, University of Bari , Bari , Italy , 3 School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, Charles Sturt University , Wagga, NSW , Australia , 4 Hillydale Equine, Inverary Road, Bungonia, NSW , Australia 1 Editor: I. Anna S. Olsson, Universidade do Porto Instituto de Biologia Molecular e Celular , PORTUGAL - Competing interests: It should be noted that one of the authors, Cathrynne Henshall, is employed by Natural Horsemanship is popular among many amateur and professional trainers and as such, has been the subject of recent scientific enquiry. One method commonly adopted by Natural Horsemanship (NH) trainers is that of round pen training (RPT). RPT sessions are usually split into a series of bouts; each including two phases: chasing/flight and chasing offset/flight offset. However, NH training styles are heterogeneous. This study investigated online videos of RPT to explore the characteristics of RPT sessions and test for differences in techniques and outcomes between amateurs and professionals (the latter being defined as those with accompanying online materials that promote clinics, merchandise or a service to the public). From more than 300 candidate videos, we selected sample files for individual amateur (n = 24) and professional (n = 21) trainers. Inclusion criteria were: training at liberty in a Round Pen; more than one bout and good quality video. Sessions or portions of sessions were excluded if the trainer attached equipment, such as a lunge line, directly to the horse or the horse was saddled, mounted or ridden. The number of bouts and duration of each chasing and non-chasing phase were recorded, and the duration of each RPT session was calculated. General weighted regression analysis revealed that, when compared with amateurs, professionals showed fewer arm movements per bout (p<0.05). Poisson regression analysis showed that professionals spent more time looking up at their horses, when transitioning between gaits, than amateurs did (p<0.05). The probability of horses following the trainer was not significantly associated with amount of chasing, regardless of category. Given that, according to some practitioners, the following response is a goal of RPT, this result may prompt caution in those inclined to give chase. The horses handled by professionals showed fewer conflict behaviours (e.g. kicking, biting, stomping, head-tossing, defecating, bucking and attempting to escape), and fewer oral and head movements (e.g. headlowering, licking and chewing) than those horses handled by amateurs Overall, these findings highlight the need for selectivity when using the internet as an educational source and the importance of trainer skill and excellent timing when using negative reinforcement in horse training. Introduction Natural horse (NH) training methods are popular among amateur and professional horse trainers [ 1 ] and have been the subject of recent scientific enquiry [ 2,3,4 ]. One school of thought is that NH methods are more humane and result in a better human-horse relationship than other methods [ 2,5 ]. However, there is considerable variation in the specific training techniques applied by NH trainers [ 1,6,7,8,9,10 ] and in the descriptions they attract in the scientific literature [ 2,5,11,12,13 ].Nonetheless, common to all the NH methods reported in the scientific literature is the use of a training technique known as the ªchase-awayº [ 4,7,14 ] which takes place in a circular pen known as a round pen. The use of a round pen to facilitate training of horses dates back to ancient Roman times, when the so-called gyrus was used to train horses [ 15 ]. In contemporary round pen training (RPT), the horse is initially chased away from the handler by the application of aversive stimuli such as arm-waving, rope throwing and vocal cues. After a period of flight behaviour such as trotting, cantering or galloping, the intensity of the aversive stimuli is generally reduced. The ultimate goal of the method is to condition the horse to remain close to and follow the trainer (for review, see Henshall & McGreevy, [ 16 ]). The removal of the aversive stimulus as soon as the desired response emerges is an example of negative reinforcement [ 17 ]. As with any form of negative reinforcement, efficacy relies on the immediate removal of the aversive stimulus [ 18 ]. Failure to do so increases the risk of punishing the desired response instead and habituating the horse to the aversive stimulus with the likelihood that the intensity of the stimulus will be need to be increased to elicit the response in the future [ 19 ]. Furthermore, welfare implications arise from exposing horse (...truncated)