As a lay person and non-scientist, I enjoyed reading this. Easy to follow and gave me lots to think about. I used to enjoy watching equestrian sports, but the more I learn about horses and about how those sports are conducted, the less enjoyment I get out of watching. And yet, I still love to be with horses and ride them. I don’t care about competing, but I do like to ride. So. How to make the relationship one that is fulfilling for the horse as well. So your articles are helping me understand.
Hi many thanks for your piece it was interesting and timely. However I would like to make an appeal for everyone involved with animals but in this case especially horses to get up to date with the science on cognitive processes. You included this section in your piece `Morgan’s canon, formulated by the 19th-century ethologist Lloyd Morgan, stipulates that we should never ascribe higher cognitive processes to an animal if a behaviour can be explained with lower cognitive processes³. It is the ethological version of Occam’s razor, and a very useful tool for researchers to think critically about animals’ mental abilities.` We need to stop using very old research to underpin what we do and don`t do with horses and get up to date ....As a scientist I was asked earlier this year to sign the 2024 New York Declaration on Animal Consciousness, signed by a diverse group of eminent scientists, which marks an important acknowledgment of the growing scientific evidence that a wide range of animals, including all vertebrates and many invertebrates, are likely conscious and able to subjectively experience the world including wellbeing and crucially suffering. Behaviours like learning, planning, problem-solving, and self-recognition provide compelling evidence that mammal and invertebrate minds are more complex than commonly assumed. Our current speciesist attitudes, which discount the experiences of animals and treat them as mere resources, are ethically untenable (https://www.animal-ethics.org/the-new-york-declaration-on-animal-consciousness-stresses-the-ethical-implications/#:~:text=The%20New%20York%20Declaration%20on%20Animal%20Consciousness%2C%20signed%20on%20April,likely%20conscious%20and%20able%20to0). The default should never be from the 19th century when we have important new science which underpins clear welfare issues with seeing horses as `resources` as you quite rightly point out in your piece. Lets get up to date scientifically!!
Hi, thank you for your comment, but I think you misunderstand what Morgan's canon is. It's not a scientific study, it's simply a critical thinking tool to make sure we don't jump to conclusions about animal cognition based on our personal hopes and wishes. If you've read some of the other things I have written - including the footnote to that very section - you'd know that I think the canon needs updating to correspond with our understanding of the evolution of mental traits and the 'gradualist principle', as described by de Waal (2019). But that doesn't mean it isn't a useful tool to employ when thinking critically about cognitive abilities. Current research into equine cognition does not support the assumption that they understand competitions or want to win. I also think we need to be careful of the 'so like us' trap where we over-correct from thinking non-human animals have no higher mental traits to thinking they have the same traits we do but in a slightly simpler format. Given the divergent strands of evolution and diverse ecological adaptations of different species' physical traits, I think it is very likely that we can find the same diversity in mental traits as well. It's possible, for example, that horses have evolved unique cognitive and emotional capacities that we haven't. Understanding behaviour in animals is full of anthropocentric pitfalls, which is why we need to approach it with rigour and scepticism, and Morgan's canon (and the principle it espouses) are one tool we can use.
No there is no suggestion from the research thus far that horses like to win in human sports, however I think we need to resist the desire to look too far back and just accept ideas or critical ways of thinking either particularly if they always ask us to reduce the capacity of animals to understand and fully experience their lives emotionally and physically. Not being anthropomorphic does not mean that its OK to not care about the horses `lifeworld` or experiences moment by moment.
I didn`t say you had did I? I commented on the use of a particularly historical critical thinking tool, which you suggested applying ...Morgan’s canon, formulated by the 19th-century ethologist Lloyd Morgan, which stipulates that we should never ascribe higher cognitive processes to an animal if a behaviour can be explained with lower cognitive process. A paper recently published suggests higher order, executive function in horses, a species previously thought (by scientists!) to possess only moderate cognitive capabilities (Evans et al., 2024). Evans, L., Cameron-Whytock, H., Ijichi, C. 2024 Whoa, No-Go: Evidence consistent with model-based strategy use in horses during an inhibitory task, Applied Animal Behaviour Science, Volume 277, 106339, ISSN 0168-1591, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2024.106339. We must follow the up to date science is my point.
There is no contradiction between new research and Morgan's canon, quite the opposite. All good research will maintain a robust and critical approach to the data, and not over-interpret the results. As for Louise Evans' paper, I wrote about it and about my ethological perspective on equine cognition when it first came out, if you want to know my thoughts you can find it here: https://theequineethologist.substack.com/p/can-horses-really-plan-and-strategise
Yes as a scientist I am aware of not over interpreting results, but ethically one should also not in the way one presents the results disadvantage ones participants in this case the horses. It comes under the concept of `doing no harm` through research.
Hi Renate - additional thoughts. I imagine many people would agree that animals of many types add immeasurably to our lives. During the thirty-seven years my mare Babe was with us, I felt she was truly my friend and trusted companion. I don’t pretend to know what she really thought of me, but she did show affection. I used to ride all over the Colorado foothills - just the two of us, and we had a partnership. I wanted to believe that she enjoyed our rides as much as I did, but of course there’s no way to know. Still, without halter or rope, she would approach me in the corral and place her (very heavy) head on my shoulder and stand there while I told her things large and small. I’m sure that in some way, she understood if not my words, then just the essence of my thoughts. What I do know for sure is that our lives would be far less rich without other animals be they horses, dogs, cats, or whatever.
Renate - I look forward to your articles, and this one is particularly interesting. I’m elderly, so no longer ride, but I was privileged to have horses for many years, especially one marvelous half-
Arab mare who came to us at age three and remained until her passing at age forty. (I’ve written to you about this mare previously). Anyhow, I mainly rode for pleasure and in NATRC long-distance (60 mile) competitive trail rides which were timed, not races. While this mare, Babe, wasn’t my only horse, she became my trusted friend and I loved her dearly. One of my daughters is an accomplished rider and had enjoyed cross-county jumping and dressage but became disenchanted by the increasing cost of competitions and mainly by the extreme methods used to coerce horses into ‘so-called’ proper head and neck flexion as demonstrated in the photo accompanying your article. What I’ve come to wonder is should we be riding horses at all? Certainly, these majestic animals prefer to spend time grazing on green grass in the company of other equines. I now find it unnerving to watch movies which mostly show horses galloping across the screen or to watch competitions where horses plainly appear distressed due to a rider’s tight grip on the reins, aggressive use of spurs and whips. All of this makes me wonder why horses ever allowed us puny humans to ride them in the first place. Sure, we humans forced horses to tolerate our ‘dominance’. Even so, a horse is far stronger than even the most muscled human. So what is it about equines that they accept us? Some of it must be fear, or perhaps its just that they give in to stop the abuse? Surely, they don’t enjoy those hunks of metal forced into their mouths. (I rode mostly in mild hackamores on the long trail rides, but even then, hackamores can exert pressure of sensitive tissues.) While it’s unrealistic to propose that all equines be released to ‘live free’ in some mythical land of everlasting green grass, articles like yours do suggest that it’s high time we humans consider what the horses in our care really need and want and what we can and should do to improve their lives. Many people love horses, and that is wonderful, but we can all do much better.
Really well written, Thank You for providing well thought-through posts!
Thank you for your kind feedback, I really appreciate it!
Really well written and great thoughts. Thank you!
Thank you, so glad you liked it!
As a lay person and non-scientist, I enjoyed reading this. Easy to follow and gave me lots to think about. I used to enjoy watching equestrian sports, but the more I learn about horses and about how those sports are conducted, the less enjoyment I get out of watching. And yet, I still love to be with horses and ride them. I don’t care about competing, but I do like to ride. So. How to make the relationship one that is fulfilling for the horse as well. So your articles are helping me understand.
Hi many thanks for your piece it was interesting and timely. However I would like to make an appeal for everyone involved with animals but in this case especially horses to get up to date with the science on cognitive processes. You included this section in your piece `Morgan’s canon, formulated by the 19th-century ethologist Lloyd Morgan, stipulates that we should never ascribe higher cognitive processes to an animal if a behaviour can be explained with lower cognitive processes³. It is the ethological version of Occam’s razor, and a very useful tool for researchers to think critically about animals’ mental abilities.` We need to stop using very old research to underpin what we do and don`t do with horses and get up to date ....As a scientist I was asked earlier this year to sign the 2024 New York Declaration on Animal Consciousness, signed by a diverse group of eminent scientists, which marks an important acknowledgment of the growing scientific evidence that a wide range of animals, including all vertebrates and many invertebrates, are likely conscious and able to subjectively experience the world including wellbeing and crucially suffering. Behaviours like learning, planning, problem-solving, and self-recognition provide compelling evidence that mammal and invertebrate minds are more complex than commonly assumed. Our current speciesist attitudes, which discount the experiences of animals and treat them as mere resources, are ethically untenable (https://www.animal-ethics.org/the-new-york-declaration-on-animal-consciousness-stresses-the-ethical-implications/#:~:text=The%20New%20York%20Declaration%20on%20Animal%20Consciousness%2C%20signed%20on%20April,likely%20conscious%20and%20able%20to0). The default should never be from the 19th century when we have important new science which underpins clear welfare issues with seeing horses as `resources` as you quite rightly point out in your piece. Lets get up to date scientifically!!
Hi, thank you for your comment, but I think you misunderstand what Morgan's canon is. It's not a scientific study, it's simply a critical thinking tool to make sure we don't jump to conclusions about animal cognition based on our personal hopes and wishes. If you've read some of the other things I have written - including the footnote to that very section - you'd know that I think the canon needs updating to correspond with our understanding of the evolution of mental traits and the 'gradualist principle', as described by de Waal (2019). But that doesn't mean it isn't a useful tool to employ when thinking critically about cognitive abilities. Current research into equine cognition does not support the assumption that they understand competitions or want to win. I also think we need to be careful of the 'so like us' trap where we over-correct from thinking non-human animals have no higher mental traits to thinking they have the same traits we do but in a slightly simpler format. Given the divergent strands of evolution and diverse ecological adaptations of different species' physical traits, I think it is very likely that we can find the same diversity in mental traits as well. It's possible, for example, that horses have evolved unique cognitive and emotional capacities that we haven't. Understanding behaviour in animals is full of anthropocentric pitfalls, which is why we need to approach it with rigour and scepticism, and Morgan's canon (and the principle it espouses) are one tool we can use.
No there is no suggestion from the research thus far that horses like to win in human sports, however I think we need to resist the desire to look too far back and just accept ideas or critical ways of thinking either particularly if they always ask us to reduce the capacity of animals to understand and fully experience their lives emotionally and physically. Not being anthropomorphic does not mean that its OK to not care about the horses `lifeworld` or experiences moment by moment.
I don't think there's anything in my post or any of my other writing to suggest I don't care about the horses' experiences?
I didn`t say you had did I? I commented on the use of a particularly historical critical thinking tool, which you suggested applying ...Morgan’s canon, formulated by the 19th-century ethologist Lloyd Morgan, which stipulates that we should never ascribe higher cognitive processes to an animal if a behaviour can be explained with lower cognitive process. A paper recently published suggests higher order, executive function in horses, a species previously thought (by scientists!) to possess only moderate cognitive capabilities (Evans et al., 2024). Evans, L., Cameron-Whytock, H., Ijichi, C. 2024 Whoa, No-Go: Evidence consistent with model-based strategy use in horses during an inhibitory task, Applied Animal Behaviour Science, Volume 277, 106339, ISSN 0168-1591, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2024.106339. We must follow the up to date science is my point.
There is no contradiction between new research and Morgan's canon, quite the opposite. All good research will maintain a robust and critical approach to the data, and not over-interpret the results. As for Louise Evans' paper, I wrote about it and about my ethological perspective on equine cognition when it first came out, if you want to know my thoughts you can find it here: https://theequineethologist.substack.com/p/can-horses-really-plan-and-strategise
Yes as a scientist I am aware of not over interpreting results, but ethically one should also not in the way one presents the results disadvantage ones participants in this case the horses. It comes under the concept of `doing no harm` through research.
I agree really well written. I wish the FEI would take note
Hi Renate - additional thoughts. I imagine many people would agree that animals of many types add immeasurably to our lives. During the thirty-seven years my mare Babe was with us, I felt she was truly my friend and trusted companion. I don’t pretend to know what she really thought of me, but she did show affection. I used to ride all over the Colorado foothills - just the two of us, and we had a partnership. I wanted to believe that she enjoyed our rides as much as I did, but of course there’s no way to know. Still, without halter or rope, she would approach me in the corral and place her (very heavy) head on my shoulder and stand there while I told her things large and small. I’m sure that in some way, she understood if not my words, then just the essence of my thoughts. What I do know for sure is that our lives would be far less rich without other animals be they horses, dogs, cats, or whatever.
Renate - I look forward to your articles, and this one is particularly interesting. I’m elderly, so no longer ride, but I was privileged to have horses for many years, especially one marvelous half-
Arab mare who came to us at age three and remained until her passing at age forty. (I’ve written to you about this mare previously). Anyhow, I mainly rode for pleasure and in NATRC long-distance (60 mile) competitive trail rides which were timed, not races. While this mare, Babe, wasn’t my only horse, she became my trusted friend and I loved her dearly. One of my daughters is an accomplished rider and had enjoyed cross-county jumping and dressage but became disenchanted by the increasing cost of competitions and mainly by the extreme methods used to coerce horses into ‘so-called’ proper head and neck flexion as demonstrated in the photo accompanying your article. What I’ve come to wonder is should we be riding horses at all? Certainly, these majestic animals prefer to spend time grazing on green grass in the company of other equines. I now find it unnerving to watch movies which mostly show horses galloping across the screen or to watch competitions where horses plainly appear distressed due to a rider’s tight grip on the reins, aggressive use of spurs and whips. All of this makes me wonder why horses ever allowed us puny humans to ride them in the first place. Sure, we humans forced horses to tolerate our ‘dominance’. Even so, a horse is far stronger than even the most muscled human. So what is it about equines that they accept us? Some of it must be fear, or perhaps its just that they give in to stop the abuse? Surely, they don’t enjoy those hunks of metal forced into their mouths. (I rode mostly in mild hackamores on the long trail rides, but even then, hackamores can exert pressure of sensitive tissues.) While it’s unrealistic to propose that all equines be released to ‘live free’ in some mythical land of everlasting green grass, articles like yours do suggest that it’s high time we humans consider what the horses in our care really need and want and what we can and should do to improve their lives. Many people love horses, and that is wonderful, but we can all do much better.