LAUSR

Considering welfare-compromising impact of obesity, knowledge on levels of adiposity and their consequences on equine welfare is important. This study aimed to survey judges’ views on the level of adiposity in horses and ponies in conformation, model, or halter competition, and their ability to distinguish different levels of adiposity from pictures. The survey was created using Qualtrics and was deemed exempt by the University's Institutional Review Board. The survey was sent by email to more than 1000 hunter judges using the United States Hunter Jumper Association (USHJA), American Quarter Horse Association, and Equine Canada's database. The survey included 31 questions about judges’ background experience, judging consequences of thin or obese animals, including 13 photographs of horses and ponies to be categorized as thin, average, overweight or obese. There were 211 completed surveys with the majority (77%) being USHJA judges and with 50% of all respondents indicating they had more than 20 years of judging experience. The majority considered themselves either very experienced or moderately experienced at judging both horses (73%) and ponies (67%) in such competitions. The vast majority (95%) stated that either too much or too little fat coverage would compromise the score of a horse or pony in a show competition. Based on a 2-proportion z-test using R software, at 5% significance level, the proportion of judges agreeing to penalize a horse or pony if they were too thin (p1 = 93.83%, n1 = 211) is significantly greater than the proportion of those who would give similar penalty due to a horse or pony being too fat (p2 = 87.98%, n2 = 208) (P = 0.028), CI95% = [0.008, 1]) though the majority agreed to penalize either. When asked if they accepted more fat coverage on a pony than a horse, 19.5% of respondents agreed, and 38% answered “maybe.” Of the 13 photographs presented in the survey, 5 animals were deemed obese, 3 overweight, 3 thin and 2 average by 2 experts. For 3 of the obese horses, the majority of the judges deemed them at least overweight, with a smaller portion correctly identifying them as obese. The majority (89%, 87%, and 77%) also chose “average” for 3 overweight horses. In contrast, 91% of respondents deemed a horse “thin” for one with only a faint outline of ribs visible that was considered average by the experts. These data suggest that judges may be more lenient on overweight horses than lean horses, and are less likely to identify some overweight and obese animals. Finally, 64% of judges indicated they would like educational material and concrete guidelines in the rules regarding appropriate levels of fat coverage.