Connected Equine Ireland

31/10/2026

Such a brilliant post from Wholehearted Harmony . Absolute truth 👌👌👌

AT WHAT POINT DO WE STOP PUSHING OUR HORSES TO PERFORM?

Welcome to The Biological Rabbit Hole, where biology leads the conversation, established thinking gets questioned, and sometimes the answers take us somewhere a little uncomfortable.

Grab your coffee, tea, or water, because today we're going somewhere that I believe deserves far more attention in the horse world.

In light of some recent observations, including posts I've seen and a client's recent experience, I want to have a conversation about something that has been weighing heavily on me. In my many years around horses, I've witnessed hundreds, probably thousands, of horses with permanent physical limitations. One of those horses is my own. And something I've learned through those experiences is that not every horse can be fixed. But that doesn't mean the horse cannot be helped.

Sometimes the damage has already occurred. Sometimes structures have undergone permanent changes. Sometimes bones have fused, joints have deteriorated, or injuries have left restrictions that no amount of bodywork, nutritional support, medication, or rehabilitation can reverse.

And age has absolutely nothing to do with whether those limitations deserve to be respected. A young horse can have irreversible damage. An older horse can remain remarkably sound and capable. Biology doesn't determine physical limitations by looking at a horse's birthday.

But here's the first question I want us to consider. When the damage cannot be undone, why are we sometimes still trying to make the horse perform as though nothing has changed?

WHEN ONE PART OF THE BODY CAN NO LONGER FUNCTION NORMALLY, THE REST DOESN'T GET A CHOICE.

Let's get into biomechanics. When a horse develops a permanent structural limitation, its body must adapt to the movement that remains available. A fused joint, advanced degeneration, or an old injury can change how forces travel through the limbs, pelvis, back, and supporting tissues.

And this isn't simply a theory. Published equine biomechanical research has demonstrated measurable changes in movement and loading beyond the original site of lameness.

Let's look at the the nervous system. Every movement depends on proprioception, sensory feedback, muscular recruitment, and coordinated adjustments to posture and balance. When the available movement changes, the nervous system must coordinate the horse's activity around those restrictions.

Over time, some muscles may be recruited differently, certain structures may experience altered loading, and secondary tension or discomfort can develop in areas that were never originally injured. The original damage may no longer be the primary source of discomfort. The surrounding body may now be struggling with the demands created by that limitation.

Now, not every structural restriction means ongoing pain. A permanently fused joint, for example, can sometimes be comfortable because painful joint movement has been eliminated. Horses can adapt remarkably well to certain permanent changes, but that doesn't mean their physical capacity is unlimited.

AND SOMETHING ELSE PEOPLE OVERLOOK? HORSES GET TIRED!

Yes, horses get tired! Fatigue involves more than muscular soreness. As exertion continues, muscles may become less capable of sustaining force, and neuromuscular coordination and movement mechanics can change.

Now imagine asking a horse with an established physical limitation to jump another course, perform another demanding dressage test, complete another barrel pattern, or execute another sliding stop. The horse may be capable of performing the movement initially, but as fatigue develops, maintaining the same control, stability, and distribution of forces may become increasingly difficult. And when physical demands exceed what the horse can sustainably tolerate, additional tissue strain, discomfort, or injury may follow.

Just because a horse can perform a movement doesn't mean its body can continue absorbing the consequences of that movement. This is where we need to recognize the difference between what a horse can accomplish once and what its body can comfortably sustain over time.

SO THIS ONE I SAY LOUDLY... LET'S TALK ABOUT PERFORMANCE, MEDICATIONS, AND INJECTIONS.

This is where the conversation becomes uncomfortable. Anti-inflammatories, joint injections, and other interventions can reduce discomfort and improve function. When appropriately used, they can be valuable components of care, but reducing pain does not automatically reverse structural damage.

An injection cannot restore normal mobility to a permanently fused joint. Pain medication cannot rebuild an irreversibly damaged structure simply because the horse begins moving more comfortably. Yet how often does improvement in comfort become the justification for returning a horse to demanding work?

Are we treating the horse to improve its quality of life, or are we treating the horse so it can continue meeting our performance expectations? Because those are not the same goals and what makes this conversation even more concerning is what researchers are finding about competition horses.

HOLD ON TO YOUR HATS, BECAUSE THIS IS DISTURBING.

At the 2023 American Association of Equine Practitioners convention, researchers presented findings involving 84 voluntarily enrolled FEI-level horses competing in eventing, show jumping, and dressage. Approximately **88% demonstrated some degree of lameness during clinical assessment**, generally mild, and many showed abnormalities involving multiple limbs. 88% out of 84 horses!!!

But you know what's really disturbing? The researchers found no statistically significant relationship between the horses' lameness assessments and their competition results. Um, WHAT!!!!??? Think about that. Within this particular group, successful competition results did not reliably distinguish horses with measurable lameness from those without it.

That doesn't mean every abnormal movement was evidence of severe injury, and the study was too small to represent all competition horses, but it certainly challenges the assumption that a horse performing successfully must be physically sound.

But wait, there's more. Another study published in 2024 involved 1,358 horses competing in dressage and eventing. Researchers identified lameness in approximately 41% of the horses assessed, despite those horses being considered fit for competition by their owners or riders. Yeah, that's a problem, don't you think? And these weren't all horses competing at the same level. The research included Grand Prix dressage, five-star eventing, and lower-level eventing.

Now consider this. A veterinary survey discussed at the 2025 AAEP convention found that **66% of 407 responding equine veterinarians considered frequent joint treatments an industry problem. 66%!!!! That's approximately 269 of the veterinarians surveyed.

That's not a handful of horse owners expressing concern. That's a substantial proportion of the equine veterinarians surveyed acknowledging a problem involving the frequency of joint treatments. SO WHY AREN'T WE HEARING MORE ABOUT THIS?

Now, I'll admit, these studies don't establish how many horses are being medicated unnecessarily or how many are being pushed beyond their physical limits and it doesn't prove every measurable gait abnormality necessarily indicate severe pain or permanent structural damage.

But they raise some very serious questions about how we evaluate soundness, the goals behind repeated treatment, and what we're willing to accept in the pursuit of performance and to clarify, this isn't exclusive to hunters, jumpers, dressage horses, western performance horses, or racehorses because the biological consequences of exceeding a horse's physical capacity do not care what discipline that horse participates in.

Here's something else I want people to understand. As an equine body worker, I can work with a horse experiencing secondary muscular tension, discomfort, or fascial restrictions. Appropriate bodywork may help improve comfort, reduce tension, and support more comfortable movement.

And you know I have to mention species-appropriate foundational nutrition, suitable environmental conditions, appropriate exercise, and individualized support. Those things matter tremendously, but sadly, none of those things means I've reversed an irreversible structural change.

Improvement after bodywork does not automatically mean that horse is ready to return to its previous workload and the same principle applies to relief following medication or an injection.

We have to distinguish between what has improved and what remains physically limited. There's a difference between rehabilitation that restores sustainable function and interventions that temporarily reduce discomfort without changing the underlying limitation.

The horse may complete the task, but what is that task costing the rest of its body?

Sadly, sometimes the damage is done. We cannot undo it. But we can still help the horse. We can support comfort. We can address secondary tension. We can improve the conditions in which the horse lives. We can provide an appropriate nutritional foundation, companionship, freedom of movement within the horse's abilities, and opportunities to engage in natural behaviors. We can pay attention to the horse's nervous system, fatigue, movement patterns, and changing capacity.

And most importantly, we can recognize when continued performance is no longer an appropriate goal. A horse doesn't have to return to the show ring to demonstrate that its care has been successful and a horse doesn't have to become rideable again to deserve continued attention, comfort, and a fulfilling life. Sometimes accepting a permanent limitation is not giving up, because it should be about respecting what the horse's body is telling us.

Of course, there are circumstances where discomfort can no longer be adequately managed, and quality-of-life decisions become much more difficult. That reality is also part of responsible care, but where a horse can live comfortably and enjoy life within its limitations, why should we consider that outcome a failure simply because the horse cannot perform?

SO AT WHAT POINT DO WE STOP?

I think we need to become much more thoughtful about what we're measuring when we evaluate the success of a horse's care. Are we measuring comfort? Sustainable movement? Appropriate function? Quality of life? Or are we measuring how quickly that horse can return to doing what we want?

A horse's willingness or ability to complete a performance is not proof that its body can safely sustain the demands being placed upon it and sometimes the most important intervention isn't another injection, another medication, another treatment, or another rehabilitation program.

Sometimes it changes our expectations. Again, not every horse can be fixed. But every horse deserves to have its physical limitations understood and respected and sometimes the greatest success isn't restoring performance. It's helping a horse live comfortably within the life its body can still sustain.

So here's my biggest question:

AT WHAT POINT DO WE STOP ASKING WHETHER A HORSE CAN PERFORM AND START ASKING WHETHER THAT HORSE SHOULD?

---

# # # THE SCIENCE BEHIND THE RABBIT HOLE

**Contino, Daglish & Kawcak (2023) — The Prevalence of Lameness in FEI Equine Athletes and Its Correlation to Performance**

Presented at the AAEP Annual Convention. Evaluated 84 FEI-level horses and examined the relationship between lameness assessments and competition performance.

https://aaep.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Proceedings-69th-Annual-Convention-2023.pdf

**Dyson & Pollard (2024) — Ridden Sports Horses and Lameness at Competitions**

Examined 1,358 horses at dressage and eventing competitions, including relationships between lameness and pain-associated behaviors.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11200720/

**Maliye, Voute & Marshall (2015) — Compensatory Load Redistribution in Lame Horses**

Demonstrated how naturally occurring forelimb lameness can alter pelvic movement and hindlimb loading.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25862395/

**Maliye & Marshall (2016) — Hindlimb Lameness and Compensatory Movement**

Documented compensatory changes affecting other limbs in horses with hindlimb lameness.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27700267/

**Loving (2026) — Survey of Equine Veterinarians and Intra-Articular Corticosteroids**

Reports veterinary survey findings, including the proportion concerned about frequent joint treatment.

https://equimanagement.com/research-medical/treatments-medications/survey-reveals-changing-sentiments-toward-ia-corticosteroids-among-equine-veterinarians/

**Merck Veterinary Manual — Overview of Fatigue and Exercise in Horses**

Explains the physiology of equine muscular fatigue and the limits of exercise-related compensation.

https://www.merckvetmanual.com/metabolic-disorders/fatigue-and-exercise-in-horses/overview-of-fatigue-and-exercise-in-horses

---

**Wholehearted Harmony | Biology-First • Whole-System Understanding • Root-Cause & Resolution-Focused**

27/10/2026

Brilliant post from Wholehearted Harmony

I DON'T SPECIALIZE IN BEHAVIOR. SO WHY IS UNDERSTANDING IT ESSENTIAL TO MY PROFESSION?

Welcome to The Biological Rabbit Hole, where one simple question can lead to a whole lot of biology, research, and occasionally some very uncomfortable questions about what we think we know.

Grab your coffee or tea, because today we're exploring something that could fundamentally change how we understand, care for, train, and work with animals. This may be triggering to some people, I ask that you read with an open mind.

Someone can ride horses for thirty years, train hundreds of dogs, breed animals, or even build an entire professional career around them. But does experience alone mean that person understands the species' biology, physiology, nervous system, learning processes, and natural needs?

Not necessarily and before anyone gets defensive, this isn't about dismissing experience, professional credentials, or the value of specialized education. Quite the opposite. It's more about understanding why education matters, what that education should encompass, and why having knowledge isn't necessarily the same as knowing how to apply it.

BIOLOGICAL DESIGN COMES FIRST. Before we can understand what an animal needs from us, we need to understand what that animal is biologically designed to need.

We know, or we should know that horses are social, grazing prey animals. Their digestive systems, sensory abilities, movement requirements, social relationships, and nervous-system responses are interconnected with the environments in which they evolved.

Understanding that dogs have an entirely different evolutionary history. Their olfactory capabilities, social behavior, predatory behavioral patterns, communication, nutritional physiology, and environmental needs cannot simply be interpreted through an equine lens.

And humans? Well, we have our own complex relationships among physiology, cognition, emotion, learning, and the environment.

But the bottom line is, each species has a biological foundation that must be understood before we can responsibly evaluate how human management affects it.

But what if we exam the next layer: environment, nutrition, movement, social interaction, handling, training, previous experiences, and the opportunities the individual has to express normal species-specific behaviors. Those factors don't exist separately from biology. They continually interact with it.

A horse that resists handling isn't necessarily being disrespectful. A dog that growls isn't automatically aggressive by nature. And an animal that becomes unusually quiet isn't necessarily calm or comfortable. Those are observations. Understanding what contributes to them requires considerably more knowledge.

BUT HOW WELL DO WE REALLY UNDERSTAND THE ANIMALS WE WORK WITH?

This is where scientific research becomes uncomfortable. Are you ready because I was honestly shocked. In research published online in 2024, Watney, Lancaster, and Randle surveyed 1,847 horse owners across 17 countries to investigate their understanding of fundamental equine care. Participants answered an average of just 68% of the knowledge questions correctly. Their weakest area involved behavioral interactions, particularly pain recognition and learning theory but 52% of those respondents held some form of equine knowledge certification, yet overall scores were not significantly different between certified and uncertified participants. Certified individuals did, however, perform better on certain more complex questions.

So having a certificate didn't automatically guarantee comprehensive understanding. Another study involving 394 Australian equestrians found that only 24.6% correctly identified three fundamental principles of learning theory: positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, and punishment. Now consider that those principles influence how horses are trained every single day.

And it gets more interesting. In an earlier study involving 206 accredited Australian equestrian coaches, only 11.9% correctly explained negative reinforcement, while just 2.8% correctly explained positive reinforcement. These weren't simply people who had never handled a horse. They were qualified instructors. I am sorry but that's kind of scary.

If the people responsible for teaching others how to work with horses struggle to explain fundamental learning principles, shouldn't we be questioning what constitutes sufficient professional education?

The dog world isn't immune either. In its 2024 National Dog Survey, Dogs Trust reported that 80% of dog owners felt confident interpreting canine body language, yet only 24% consistently identified worried dog behaviors in the assessment. Think about that distinction. People believed they understood what their dogs were communicating, but many struggled when asked to interpret actual examples.

There was an American study published in 2024 examined dog-training practices among nearly 800 Arizona State University undergraduate respondents. Approximately 70% reported either training their dogs themselves or not pursuing formal training. Although many described their approach as reward-based, 57% indicated that they would use physical or auditory corrections when presented with particular problem behaviors.

These studies don't mean every horse or dog owner lacks knowledge. They represent particular groups of respondents, but the gaps they reveal deserve serious consideration. Why? Because confidence, familiarity, and years of experience are not necessarily proof of biological understanding.**

EVEN FUTURE VETERINARIANS HAVE SOMETHING TO LEARN and this might be one of the most revealing studies of all. In 2020, Lilly and colleagues investigated animal-behavior knowledge among 156 first-year veterinary students before completing their introductory animal-behavior course, students averaged approximately 49% on questions involving dogs, cats, horses, body language, motivation, learning, and common behavioral misconceptions. Following the course, the average increased to 84.3%. Let that sink in. These were individuals entering a veterinary education program, and formal instruction substantially improved their demonstrated understanding of animal behavior.

The researchers also found that prior animal ownership was not associated with higher initial knowledge scores. Simply having animals does not automatically mean we understand them. But meaningful education can make a measurable difference and that is precisely why education shouldn't be viewed as merely collecting certifications.

UNDERSTANDING BEHAVIOR REQUIRES UNDERSTANDING THE BODY. A qualified behavior specialist doesn't simply observe an animal and decide what its actions mean. Behavioral science incorporates learning theory, neurobiology, sensory processing, physiology, development, and environmental influences and there's an important biological reason for that. Physical discomfort can influence behavior. But repeated frightening or painful experiences can also influence how the nervous system responds to future situations.

For example, a horse that has experienced painful saddling may learn to anticipate discomfort before the saddle ever touches its back. A dog that has repeatedly experienced frightening handling may begin reacting defensively when someone approaches. The nervous system learns through experience, and those learned responses can involve real physiological changes and sometimes the original discomfort is resolved, yet the learned expectation remains.

This is only one example of why understanding behavior requires more than interpreting outward communication. Other influences can include digestive, musculoskeletal, endocrine, neurological, and metabolic function, along with nutrition, management, and previous experiences.

If we don't understand those relationships, how can we confidently decide whether an animal needs training, medical investigation, environmental changes, nutritional support, or some combination of approaches and how can we be certain that making an unwanted behavior disappear means we've actually improved the animal's well-being?

SO WHERE DOES EDUCATION FIT INTO ALL OF THIS? I believe, yes it's just my opinion, that every person who assumes responsibility for an animal should have a meaningful foundation in that species' biology but that doesn't mean every horse or dog owner needs a professional certification. That said, someone teaching, training, evaluating, treating, or providing specialized services has a greater responsibility to understand the science behind what they're doing.

A trainer should understand how an animal learns, how its nervous system responds to pressure and fear, and what training demands of its body.

A breeder should understand development, reproductive physiology, inherited characteristics, and the environmental and social needs of the animals they're raising.

A bodyworker needs more than the ability to identify muscles. They need to understand anatomy, biomechanics, physiology, pain responses, and how tissues function together.

A practitioner involved in nutritional or botanical support needs to understand the species design and the physiological systems being influenced and how the individual's environment and management may affect the outcome.

And, anyone who educates others about animal behavior, communication, or welfare should have a sound understanding of species-specific biology, physiology, and learning processes, so the information they share is grounded in more than observation alone.

Professional behavioral specialists play an important role because investigating and addressing complex behavioral concerns is their area of expertise. Their knowledge and experience deserve recognition, but understanding foundational biological and behavioral principles shouldn't be exclusive to specialists. It should be part of the education appropriate to anyone whose work can affect an animal's welfare.

FORMAL EDUCATION OR INDEPENDENT LEARNING?

Here's another distinction worth considering. Formal education can provide structured study, examinations, feedback, supervised practical experience, case studies, and clinical studies and opportunities to identify gaps in understanding while independent learning can be extraordinarily valuable, especially when someone already possesses a strong educational foundation and wants to explore subjects beyond a particular curriculum.

And today we have access to scientific publications, digital research libraries, continuing education, and even AI-assisted (I know, I know but it needs to mentioned) learning tools that can help us investigate complex subjects, but access to information isn't the same as understanding it.

Someone may memorize terminology without understanding how to apply it. Another person may have decades of hands-on experience yet struggle to explain the physiological consequences of their methods and a certificate alone doesn't guarantee competence.

That's why practical assessments, documented case studies, feedback, continuing education, and the ability to recognize and correct mistakes are so important. The goal shouldn't be to collect the greatest number of letters behind someone's name, it should be to develop the knowledge and competence necessary to do the work responsibly.

And perhaps most importantly, to recognize that education should never stop simply because someone has completed a course.

THE SCIENCE BEHIND THIS CONVERSATION
Equine knowledge and professional education

Watney, M., Lancaster, B., & Randle, H. (2024, online publication). *Horse Owners' Knowledge of Fundamental Care and Their Perceptions on the Implementation of a Mandatory Certificate of Knowledge.*
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39193831/

*Does a Working Knowledge of Learning Theory Relate to Improved Horse Welfare and Rider Safety?* (2023).
https://doi.org/10.1080/08927936.2023.2166713

Warren-Smith, A., & McGreevy, P. (2008). *Equestrian Coaches' Understanding and Application of Learning Theory in Horse Training.*
https://doi.org/10.2752/175303708X305800

**Canine knowledge and training**
Dogs Trust (2024). *National Dog Survey — Results and Canine Communication.*
https://www.dogstrust.org.uk/about-us/research-expertise/national-dog-survey/results-2024

Johnson, A. C., & Wynne, C. D. L. (2024). *Training Methods Used by Dog Guardians in the United States: Prevalence, Sources of Information, and Reasons for Use.*
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11083790/

**Veterinary education**
Lilly, M. L., et al. (2020). *Evaluation of Companion Animal Behavior Knowledge Among First-Year Veterinary Students Before and After an Introductory Animal Behavior Course.*
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32364461/

Now, why does this all matter to my work? As I mentioned, I don't specialize in traditional behavioral consultation, but understanding behavior is very much part of my profession. My formal education in biological sciences established a foundation that I've continued to expand through research, observation, and practical experience.

Because my work focuses on investigating underlying imbalances rather than simply chasing symptoms, understanding the individual's biology, physiology, behavior, and environment is essential and you cannot meaningfully consider whole-system wellness while ignoring the biological design of the individual you're trying to help.

27/10/2026

I found a video today of day 3 or 4 with Whisper, She had just started taking food from my hand and learning my bridge signal " yes" through target training. It was during this impromptu session that I found out who she was😊❤️ She is clever,She is brave, She will make someone very happy when She is ready. I am really looking forward to working with her again ( when my bones heal! 😉) Remember that at this stage I hadn't actually touched her yet.

27/10/2026

Truth

26/10/2026

This is my first time since the accident bringing Bobby in for his feed and his hay, my injuries were extensive and I am probably about half way through recovery time, I miss being involved with my horses and have had to take a step back from day to day ordinary "horse jobs" for obvious reasons. I took the opportunity to ask Bob to wait when asked even though he was keen to get to his stable, it was also quite windy 😅 This may seem like nothing, but it really is the little things that make the bigger picture all the better 🖤❤️

24/10/2026

When positive reinforcement training isn't "positive ". I really feel this is important, I am seeing more and more use of R+ on social media and it's slowly growing popularity is a good thing 😊 I am concerned though that a lot of what I am seeing isn't really good training and is obviously being shared by people who don't seem to have a good grasp of the theory behind it, my video is a little long winded ( what else is new!! ) 😅 . When badly applied R+ can turn very negative for the horse. It is such a wonderful and powerful way to train horses, but we need to make sure we have the foundations ( for ourselves) in place before we start using it with our horses.

22/10/2026

It is very rare to see a good positive reinforcement trainer showcasing the behavioural before and after, they in fact would be inclined to not do that for the sake of sensationalising their training at the horses expense. A spade is always a spade and all that glitters is not gold! Turn down the volume and listen to the horse.

22/10/2026

Truth

I've been around horses for fifty years, and I've always looked at them differently. Their biological design has always fascinated me. Not simply what they do, but WHY they do it, how their bodies function, what influences their responses, and how much we still don't understand.

And one thing I've learned throughout those fifty years is that we humans have become incredibly comfortable deciding what a horse is thinking or feeling.

A horse pins its ears, and it's uncomfortable. A horse walks away, and it's setting an emotional boundary. A horse acts aggressively, and someone must have mistreated it. A horse steps between two other horses, and suddenly it's protecting one of them.

But wait a minute. How do you KNOW? I'm not suggesting horses don't communicate. Quite the opposite. Horses have complex social relationships, individual personalities, emotions, preferences, and temperaments. They communicate through movement, posture, facial expressions, physical responses, and interactions with their environment.

But communicating and having that communication correctly interpreted are two very different things and until a horse can actually sit down and tell us exactly what it's thinking or feeling, we're interpreting. Hopefully, we're interpreting through knowledge, experience, biology, and careful observation.

But interpretation is not an automatic fact. Sometimes a horse is communicating discomfort. Sometimes it's establishing space, interacting socially, responding to its surroundings, or expressing a preference. And sometimes it's simply being a horse.

I can walk into my pasture, start grooming one of my horses at liberty, and five minutes later, the horse walks away. Does that mean he doesn't like me? That he's traumatized? That grooming is suddenly painful? Or maybe he's had enough of me for the day and would rather eat grass and be a horse. 😂

Why does every behavior have to become something more complicated than that?

NOW, LET'S TALK ABOUT AGGRESSION.

What does aggression actually mean to you? A horse that bites? Kicks? Charges? Pins its ears whenever someone approaches? Snakes its neck toward another horse? Threatens without ever making physical contact? Because aggression doesn't begin with a bite or a kick. Threatening postures and gestures can also be expressions of aggression.

And here's where language becomes interesting. One person calls a horse mean. Another calls it defensive. Someone else calls it reactive, dominant, fearful, or strong-willed. Sometimes they're watching the exact same behavior but interpreting it differently.

We already know that pain, fear, abuse, trauma, flooding, inappropriate handling, and learned defensive responses can contribute to aggression. Those are well-recognized factors, and I'm certainly not dismissing them, but what about everything else?

What about genetics? Neurological development? Birth complications? Nutrition? Hormonal influences? Sensory processing? Or a horse whose inherited temperament makes it respond very differently from another horse experiencing the same circumstances? What about the horse that has received excellent care, appropriate handling, and a good environment but remains exceptionally reactive?

Are we automatically going to assume something terrible happened to that horse? And what about ordinary herd interactions that someone has decided must have a complicated psychological explanation? This is where I believe we need to look considerably deeper into biological design.

GENETICS. LET'S GO THERE.

Did you know researchers have identified associations between specific genetic variations and behavioral responses in horses?

In 2013, Ninomiya and colleagues studied variations in the dopamine D4 receptor gene, DRD4. They observed horses during feeding and found that a particular genetic variation was significantly associated with differences in frustration-related behavior. The study didn't establish that this gene makes horses aggressive. It demonstrated that genetic differences can be associated with measurable differences in behavioral responses. Now think about what that means. Two horses can experience similar management conditions yet respond differently, partly because of their individual biology.

In 2004, Hausberger and colleagues evaluated 702 horses through standardized behavioral tests. They found that genetic factors, including sire and breed, were particularly associated with reactions to unfamiliar situations. Environmental factors influenced other aspects of behavior, and the researchers identified interactions between genetics and environment. In other words, a horse's environment matters, but so does the horse's inherited biological starting point.

Research by Léa Lansade and colleagues also demonstrated that fearfulness and certain other temperament characteristics can remain relatively stable across situations and developmental stages. Some horses are naturally more sensitive, vigilant, reactive, or cautious than others. Can training and appropriate handling change how those horses respond? Absolutely. But changing a behavioral response doesn't necessarily eliminate every underlying predisposition.

And this is where I think we need to stop assuming that every difficult horse was made difficult by someone. Sometimes the horse's inherited temperament is an important part of the explanation. That doesn't mean genetics determine everything. It means genetics deserve a place in the conversation.

WHAT ABOUT BEFORE THE HORSE EVER TOOK ITS FIRST BREATH?

Now here's a subject that I believe deserves considerably more attention. Birth-related neurological disturbances. Difficult deliveries, oxygen deprivation, congenital abnormalities, developmental differences, and conditions affecting the brain and spinal cord are real biological considerations.

Veterinary research documents neonatal encephalopathy, sometimes called neonatal maladjustment syndrome. Affected foals can show altered awareness, abnormal responses to stimuli, difficulties nursing, and neurological dysfunction. And here's something particularly interesting: not every affected foal has an obviously difficult birth. Neurological and developmental differences can also involve spinal cord compression, altered proprioception, impaired coordination, and changes in sensory processing.

And neurological dysfunction does not necessarily mean pain. A nervous system can have difficulty coordinating movement or processing information without pain being the primary problem. Now, does that mean every reactive adult horse experiences birth trauma? Of course not. Does it mean we have established that an unresolved birth-related restriction causes aggression years later? No. That specific connection still needs research, but the existence of congenital and neonatal neurological conditions raises an important question.

How much of an individual horse's biological history do we actually know? What happened during gestation? During delivery? During neurological development? Were there complications, subtle developmental differences, or physical abnormalities that were never recognized? Many affected foals recover and develop normally, but others experience significant neurological problems. We cannot assume either outcome for an individual horse without evidence.

My point is not to diagnose birth trauma by looking at a horse's behavior. My point is that biological development is another dimension worth understanding before confidently declaring why a horse behaves a certain way. There is an enormous difference between considering a possibility and pretending you've established the cause.

AND THEN THERE'S NUTRITION.

Oh, one of my favorite subjects. 😂 Most know I am really into a true species appropriate foundation (no not just forage pellets) We spend an enormous amount of time discussing training, behavior, and handling. But how often do we stop and look at what a horse is consuming every single day?

Horses are biologically designed around the consumption and digestion of forage and a diversity of plants. Their digestive systems depend heavily on fiber and the microbial populations involved in hindgut fermentation. Yet feeding practices can vary dramatically, and nutrition can influence considerably more than weight and body condition.

In 2015, Bulmer and colleagues compared high-starch and high-fiber diets in horses. The researchers documented differences in physiological and behavioral reactivity, including increased heart-rate responses during certain handling and unfamiliar-stimulus tests when horses consumed the high-starch diet. Now, increased reactivity isn't automatically aggression, but the study demonstrated something worth considering: what a horse eats can influence how its body responds to its environment.

Think about the connection between nutrition, gut function, metabolism, energy regulation, and nervous-system activity. And we haven't even discussed every potential endocrine or neuroendocrine influence on behavior. A horse exhibiting irritability or heightened reactivity may deserve an evaluation that considers more than its training history or whether someone can identify an obvious source of pain.

I don't assume every difficult behavior is caused by food. I don't assume every horse needs the same dietary intervention, either, but nutrition is one of the biological foundations I consider, because the body doesn't operate as a collection of completely separate systems.

HERE'S ANOTHER THING. THE HUMAN VARIABLE.

There's a difference between observing your own horses and observing unfamiliar horses. And there's certainly a difference between watching horses interact naturally in a pasture and actively working with one.

For me, that might mean performing equine integrative bodywork, conducting a physical or somatic evaluation, or using my Phytosomatic Integration Method™ (PIM) to assess biological communication through responses to botanical stimuli.

These are not identical situations, and I don't interpret them in exactly the same way. When I'm working with a horse, I will sometimes step back three or four feet and simply watch. Why? Because I understand that my presence can influence the very response I'm trying to observe. Sometimes removing myself from the horse's immediate space tells me more than remaining directly beside it.

I also believe in giving horses the opportunity to move, reposition themselves, and walk away whenever the circumstances safely allow it. Those choices can provide information, too. Think about how often horses are worked on or evaluated while standing in cross ties. A practitioner might be performing bodywork, applying pressure, manipulating tissue, or simply standing within the horse's personal space. The horse may remain perfectly still.

But is that stillness relaxation? Comfort? Acceptance? Or is the horse simply remaining where it's been positioned because its ability to move away is restricted? A horse that isn't leaving isn't necessarily a horse that wants you there. That doesn't mean every horse standing quietly in cross ties is uncomfortable. It means we shouldn't automatically interpret stillness as a positive response.

If I'm observing a horse while interacting with it, I consider whether its responses are related to what I'm doing, where I'm standing, the pressure I'm applying, or how close I am. Sometimes I change my position. Sometimes I change what I'm doing. Sometimes I stop entirely and allow the horse to show me what happens next. But there's another important distinction.

When I'm watching horses I've known for years, I have a baseline. I understand their personalities, routines, social relationships, preferences, and typical responses. That doesn't mean I know everything they're thinking or feeling. It means I have years of context for interpreting what I'm seeing.

When someone observes a horse they barely know, that context is often missing. They may not know the horse's history, inherited temperament, previous experiences, health, or what constitutes normal behavior for that particular individual and their presence may influence the horse's responses, particularly if they enter its space or attempt to interact.

Think about wildlife researchers. They often begin observing animals from a distance, minimizing their interference so they can study behavior without unnecessarily influencing it. If your purpose is to observe natural behavior, shouldn't you consider whether you're becoming part of the behavior you're observing?

And let's not forget that different activities require different interpretations.

In my work, my PIM™ involves deliberately presenting botanical stimuli and systematically documenting somatic responses. My purpose is to evaluate patterns that I interpret through my herbal education and experience as possible indicators of internal imbalances. That is a specific assessment framework, not the same thing as casually watching herd behavior.

Bodywork involves physical interaction and observation of responses to touch, movement, and changes in tissue engagement.

Watching my horses socialize in the pasture is something different again. The context matters. The individual matters. And the purpose of the observation matters.

A tail flick isn't automatically a negative response. An eye crinkle doesn't automatically indicate discomfort. A horse that moves away isn't necessarily rejecting the interaction for the reason we assume. And some horses simply have facial expressions that make them look permanently irritated with the entire world. 😂 But that doesn't establish what they're actually feeling.

SO, WHERE DOES ALL OF THIS LEAVE US?

After fifty years around horses, I still find their biological design, individuality, and communication fascinating and the more I study and observe, the more interested I become in everything that contributes to what we're seeing.

Genetics. Neurological development. Nutrition. Internal regulation. Physical function. Environment. Learned experiences. Social relationships. Individual preferences. And the influence we humans have when we enter their space.

Not every behavior requires a medical explanation. Not every difficult interaction is a training failure. Not every reactive horse has experienced abuse, and not every apparent expression of aggression means what someone assumes it means. Sometimes the explanation is straightforward. Sometimes it's a combination of influences. And sometimes we simply don't have enough information to know.

That's why I don't believe one facial expression, one movement, or one interaction tells us everything about the individual standing in front of us. Understanding biological communication isn't simply about recognizing a behavior. It's about understanding the biology, the circumstances, and the individual expressing it and even with all that information, we must recognize the difference between an observation and an interpretation.

I don't expect everyone to investigate horses the way I do. But I do think we could all benefit from questioning how quickly we decide that we know exactly what they're telling us because sometimes a horse is communicating something important. Sometimes we're overlooking a much bigger biological picture and sometimes the horse is just being a horse.

So here's my question.

Are we truly observing the horse in front of us, or are we becoming so attached to our interpretation that we've stopped considering everything else?

*SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH & REFERENCES

**Ninomiya et al. (2013)** — *Polymorphisms of the Dopamine D4 Receptor Gene in Stabled Horses are Related to Differences in Behavioral Response to Frustration.* Animals.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4494454/

**Hausberger et al. (2004)** — *Interplay Between Environmental and Genetic Factors in Temperament/Personality Traits in Horses (Equus caballus).* Journal of Comparative Psychology.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15584780/

**Lansade, Bouissou & Erhard (2008)** — *Fearfulness in Horses: A Temperament Trait Stable Across Time and Situations.* Applied Animal Behaviour Science.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2008.06.011

**Lansade & Bouissou (2008)** — *Reactivity to Humans: A Temperament Trait of Horses Which Is Stable Across Time and Situations.* Applied Animal Behaviour Science.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2008.04.012

**Bulmer et al. (2015)** — *The Effects of a High-Starch or High-Fibre Diet on Equine Reactivity and Handling Behaviour.* Applied Animal Behaviour Science.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2015.01.008

**Merck Veterinary Manual (2026)** — *Neonatal Encephalopathy in Foals.*

https://www.merckvetmanual.com/horse-owners/brain-spinal-cord-and-nerve-disorders-of-horses/neonatal-encephalopathy-in-foals

**UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine (2021)** — *Cervical Vertebral Compressive Myelopathy (CVCM).*

https://ceh.vetmed.ucdavis.edu/health-topics/cervical-vertebral-compressive-myelopathy-cvcm