Furtado T, King M, Perkins E, McGowan C, Chubbock S, Hannelly E, Rogers J, Pinchbeck G. An Exploration of Environmentally Sustainable Practices Associated with Alternative Grazing Management System Use for Horses, Ponies, Donkeys and Mules in the UK.
Animals (Basel) 2022;
12:ani12020151. [PMID:
35049774 PMCID:
PMC8772570 DOI:
10.3390/ani12020151]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/11/2021] [Revised: 12/07/2021] [Accepted: 01/04/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary
Equestrian land could be a potentially important environmental resource, given that pastureland can help to sequester carbon from the atmosphere, prevent soil erosion and provide diverse ecosystems for native plant and wildlife species. However, equestrian land has been overlooked in environmental research and policy. This study reports on the ways which horse, pony, donkey and mule keepers in the UK described environmental practices as part of their equid care. Through an analysis of survey responses (N = 758) from equid keepers using alternative grazing systems, we report on three very different management approaches which resulted in keepers aiming to promote healthy pastures and healthy animals. This study provides the basis for future research exploring attitudes to sustainability in equid keepers, as well as evaluating the impact of their efforts.
Abstract
Equestrian grazing management is a poorly researched area, despite potentially significant environmental impacts. This study explored keepers’ use of alternative grazing systems in the care of UK horses, donkeys and mules through an internet survey. The survey was available during the summer of 2020 and comprised closed and open questions, which were analysed with descriptive statistics and iterative thematic analysis, respectively. A total of 758 responses was incorporated into the analysis; the most popular system used were tracks (56.5%), Equicentral (19%), “other” (e.g., non-grass turnout) (12.5%), rewilding (7.5%) and turnout on either moorland (0.7%) or woodland (2.5%). The thematic analysis highlighted that equid keepers across the systems were highly engaged in exploring sustainable practices. Their approaches varied according to each system, yet all aimed to fulfil practices in three major categories, i.e., supporting diverse plant life (usually through restricting equid access to certain areas), supporting wildlife (through the creation of biodiverse environments) and sustainably managing droppings and helminths. Additionally, proponents of the Equicentral systems declared to be aiming to support soil health. These data provide a promising insight into equid keepers’ behaviour and attitudes to sustainability.
Collapse