Surya Prasad Dahal¹*, Krishna Kaphle² and Ankita Shrestha¹

¹Institute of Agriculture and Animal Sciences, TU, Rampur, Chitwan, Nepal
²Associate Professor, Department of Theriogenology and Clinical Obstetrics, IAAS, TU, Nepal

*Corresponding Author: Surya Prasad Dahal, Institute of Agriculture and Animal Sciences, Rampur, Chitwan, Nepal.

Received: May 12, 2021; Published: June 05, 2021

Abstract

Horses, donkeys, and mules are the most reliable and commonest method of means of transportation serving as an integral part of most underdeveloped and developing countries of the world. They are known as the economy booster for the marginalized people mainly among poor, backward, and marginal peoples of various countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Nepal is also among the country in which equines contributes greatly for increasing and improving the livelihood of remote people of Hilly, Himalayan and Terai region for the people who earn less than a dollar per day. It is estimated that there are 112 million working equines among these developing countries that benefit 3.5 to 13 million people worldwide. The number of working equine population counts more than a lakh in Nepal. Kathmandu holds more than 1500 working equines at various 125 brick kilns and the Lalitpur district alone holds more than 650 working equids in brick kilns. 85% of donkeys outside the capital valley have open wounds in their body due to excessive workloads. It is estimated that only 3 - 5% of working equines are at the reach of veterinary specialists all along with Nepal. Guidelines notes to accompany working equine welfare assessment developed by Bristol University were followed to conduct the welfare status of the equine. A total of 175 equines were accessed by a single observer at various six sites of three districts of Nepal. The study revealed that working equids in Nepal especially for carriage and at brick kilns are far below in terms of welfare, health and behavior standards. Unequipped and miserable shelters, low-level diet, lack of appropriate care, excessive workload, uneducated owners, lack of health services were common with working equines whereas, the equines owned by Nepal Army had a fair high-level welfare standard as recommended by OIE.

Keywords: Working Equids; Health; Welfare; Equine Standards; Nepal

References

1. Bettencourt E M V., et al. “The livestock roles in the wellbeing of rural communities of Timor-Leste”. Revista de Economia e Sociologia Rural 53 (2015): S063-S080.
2. Swanepoel F., et al. “The role of livestock in developong communities: Enhancing multifunctionality”. In proceedings of the satellite symposium” (2008).
3. Fernando P and Starkey P. “Donkeys and development : socio-economic aspects of donkey use in Africa”. Donkeys, People and Development (2004): 31-44.
4. Burn CC., et al. “Environmental and demographic risk factors for poor welfare in working horses, donkeys and mules in developing countries”. Veterinary Journal3 (2010): 385-392.
5. Blench R. “Traditional Livestock Breeds: Geographical Distribution and Dynamics in Relation to the Ecology of West Africa Working Paper 122, Traditional livestock breeds: Geographical distribution and dynamics in relation to the ecology of west Africa, Roger Blench”. January (2015).
6. Ali A B A., et al. “Are mules or donkeys better adapted for Egyptian brick kiln work? (Until we can change the kilns)”. Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research2 (2015): 158-165.
7. Animal Nepal. “Status of working animals in Nepal post earthquake”. Animal Nepal 9 (2015).
8. Asebe G and Gelayenew B. “The general status of animal welfare in developing countries: The Case of Ethiopia”. Journal of Veterinary Science and Technology3 (2015).
9. Zenebe T. “Health and Welfare Related Assessment of Working Equine in and Around Batu Town, East”. January 2015 (2016).
10. Popescu S., et al. “The interrelations of good welfare indicators assessed in working horses and their relationships with the type of work”. Research in Veterinary Science2 (2014): 406-414.
11. Lawrence P R and Pearson R A. “Use of draught animal power on small mixed farms in Asia”. Agricultural Systems 71 (2002): 99-110.
12. Whaytt H R., et al. “Animal-based measures for the assessment of welfare state of diary cattle, pigs and laying hens: Consensus of expert opinion”. Animal Welfare 12 (2003): 205-217.
13. Sommerville R., et al. “A standardised equine-based welfare assessment tool used for six years in low and middle income countries”. Plos One (2018): 1-21.
14. Whitham J and Wielebnowski N. “Animal-Based welfare monitoring: Using keeper ratings as an assessment tool”. Zoo Biology 28 (2009): 545-560.
15. Bracke M B M and Hopster H. “Assessing the importance of natural behavior for animal welfare”. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 19 (2006): 77-89.
16. Costa E D., et al. “Welfare assessment of horses : The AWIN approach”. Animal Welfare4 (2016): 481-488.
17. Pritchard J C., et al. “Assessment of the welfare of working horses, mules and donkeys, using health and behaviour parameters”. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 69 (2005): 265-283.
18. Carroll C L and Huntington P J. “Body condition scoring and weight estimation of horses”. Equine Veterinary Journal 20 (1988): 41-45.

Citation

Citation: Surya Prasad Dahal., et al. “Assessment of Welfare Status of Working Equids of Kathmandu Valley and Chitwan District Using Health and Behavioral Parameters". Acta Scientific Veterinary Sciences 3.7 (2021): 02-08.

Copyright

Copyright: © 2021 Surya Prasad Dahal., et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.