Neglect, Abuse, Starvation . . . . .this is the "other" big problem facing horseman and horse rescues--along with the horse slaughter issue. Sometimes neglect and starvation is blatant and purposeful, sometimes people are "just" ignorant of their new animals' needs, or in this economy, are in over their heads. The result is the same. Horses don't get adequate nutrition, they get thin, they suffer. They tend to languish in their fields, stables and backyards-- sometimes their owners finally take them to auction or offer them for sale and giveaway, when their condition is degraded and their value is worthless, or nearly so, in the open market. At that point, the horses' main and often only option, is the kill pen.....IF the meat dealer will take a horse that's a bag of bones (a "skinner"). These horses aren't worth anything to the meat-dealers either - - who wants to slaughter a horse for meat when there isn't any? No-One. Often those horses are refused at auction too. Where do they wind up?
Over the years, body condition scoring scales have been devised to evaluate a horse's condition. These scales are useful in the case of a starved/neglected horse situation, in helping law enforcement determine if abuse is occuring and if laws are being broken.
I am listing here two scales that are used. The first,The Henneke Scale, as you will see, was devised in Texas and is pretty much used universally by most states and organizations in determining a horses body condition. The second, is referred to as the Carroll & Huntington Body Condition Scoring System. This is the system that is utilized by our home State of New Jersey, per NJ State Statute, to determine body condition. This system was developed abroad, I have been advised by Dr. Nancy Halpern of the New Jersey Department of Agriculture that this standard was "specifically adopted because of the accompanying schematics that allow for ACO's and SPCA agents not knowledgable about equine health to make a determination of body score." I am in the process of procuring the exact schematics so that everyone can be on the same page, so to speak. So that when neglect is suspected, we are all discussing the same number scale. When I receive the 'schematic standards', I shall list them here as well.
The Henneke Scale: Determining the condition of a horse
Don R. Henneke, Ph.D., of Tarleton State Texas University, developed the Henneke Body Scoring Condition Chart in 1983. The original purpose of the system was to determine the fertility of thin mares. It is a scientific method of evaluating a horse's body condition regardless of breed, body type, sex or age. It is now widely used by law enforcement agencies as an objective method of scoring a horse's body condition in horse cruelty cases. The chart is accepted in a court of law.
The chart covers six major parts of the horse; neck; withers, (where the neck ends and the back begins) the shoulder area; ribs, loins, and the tailhead area. The chart rates the horses on a scale of 1 to 9. A score of 1 is considered poor or emaciated with no body fat. A nine is extremely fat or obese. A horse that is rated a 1 on the Henneke Chart is often described as a walking skeleton and is in real danger of dying. Courts in the United States have upheld the seizure of such horses by law enforcement citing exigent circumstances, meaning there was a very strong possibility the horse would die unless immediate action was taken. Horse veterinarians consider a body score of between 4 and 7 as acceptable. A 5 is considered ideal.
Observers are trained to visually inspect the horse and also to palpate each part of the horse with their hands to feel for body fat. The observer then assigns each area of the body the numerical score that corresponds with the horse's condition. When a horse has a long haircoat it is imperative that the person scoring the horse use their hands to feel the horse. The horse's long haircoat will hide the protrusion of bones, all except in the most extreme cases.
The scores from each area are then totaled and divided by 6. The resulting number is the horse's rating on the Henneke Body Scoring Condition Chart.
People working in this field will refer to the horse as being a "1 on the Henneke" or a "3 on the Henneke". The Henneke Chart is a standardized scoring system, whereas the terms, "skinny", "thin", "emaciated", or "fat" are all subjective terms that have different meanings to different people.
Defense attorneys cross examining veterinarians and horse experts argue that the chart is not scientific. As one full time equine vet stated, "No it is not scientific, but it is as close as we are going to get."
The body condition score system described here is mainly based on the system described by Carroll and Huntington (1988)(1). Palpation and visual inspection of the ribs, tailhead area, neck and withers, and behind the shoulders, facilitates the comparison of horses with differing amounts of stored body fat, independent of body size or breed of horse.
Figure 2 shows the profile lines for the various body condition scores. The profile of BCS 0 and 1 follow the anatomical skeleton and describe stages of emaciation and extremely thin respectively. A score of 3 has a smooth appearance to the skeletal structure and represents a horse in optimum body condition for maintenance and is neither gaining nor losing weight. Horses scoring 3+ to 4 have a rounded appearance to their skeletal structure. They are in above average flesh but this should not impair their reproductive ability, especially if they are being maintained in outdoor housing during the winter.
A long hair coat can be misleading. Some conformational differences make it difficult to apply certain criteria to a specific animal. For example, animals with prominent withers, or flat across the back and mares heavy in foal (weight of the foal pulls skin taut over the ribs) may cause body condition scores to be lower than they actually are. However, when properly applied, the scoring system is independent of size or conformation of the horse.
Figure 2. Lumbar Vertebra-Anterior View Indicating Profile Lines for Each Body Condition Score
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 Very thin | bone structure easily felt- no muscle shelf where neck meets shoulder | bone structure easily felt | 3 points of vertebrae easily felt (see Figure 2) | each rib can be easily felt | tailhead and hip bones projecting |
1 Thin | can feel bone structure- slight shelf where neck meets shoulder | can feel bone structure | spinous process can be easily felt | slight fat covering, but can still be felt | can feel hip bones |
2 Fair | fat covering over bone structure | fat deposits over withers - dependent on conformation | fat over spinous processes | can't see ribs, but ribs can still be felt | hip bones covered with fat |
3 Good | neck flows smoothly into shoulder | neck rounds out withers | back is level | layer of fat over ribs | can't feel hip bones |
4 Fat | fat deposited along neck | fat padded around withers | positive crease along back | fat spongy over and between ribs | can't feel hip bones |
5 Very fat | bulging fat | bulging fat | deep positive crease | pockets of fat | pockets of fat |
As a guide to learning the scoring system and interpreting the results, examples of "typical" condition scores are listed below. There will be a range of condition within each score so it is sometimes convenient to assign +'s and -'s or half point scores as in 2.5 or 3.5.
Score 0 | Emaciated |
|
Score 1.0 | Poor |
|
Score 2.0 | Moderate |
|
Score 2.5 |
| |
Score 3.0 | Good |
|
Score 3.5 |
| |
Score 4.0 | Fat |
|
Score 5.0 | Very Fat |
|
A consistent method of body condition scoring is a useful management tool. It will improve communication between stable employees, owners and veterinarians by providing a descriptive method, which is affected by changes in nutrition, physiological level of activity, or environmental conditions. It promotes a better awareness of feed utilization and allows for changes to feeding regimes based on individual and/or herd responses.
i. For purposes of (a)2ii above, a 'reasonable period of time' refers to the amount of time it would be expected to take to restore an animal to an acceptable body condition, using diligent efforts to do so.ii. A score of 1.0 is permitted at market.
Logan arrived a "1.0" on the BCS-Scale, by the time he arrived here, his fetlocks were hitting the ground from his tendons collapsing due to starvation. Logan fully recovered & now carries more weight than in this 'after' photo.
Now, he's probably a "4.0"
Hoof Neglect ---
![]()
Tabitha was humanely euthanized on October 19 due to complications and after-effects of her neglected and damaged feet.
June 21, 2010~, I received a phone call about two ponies in Ocean Cty that needed placement. I went out to see them on 6/23. On 6/26 I received word ~ #1 that they were out of hay; and #2 that they had to be OUT by this Weds.--the electric in the barn had been shut off by the landowner.Dr. Perris met us here in the afternoon to examine the ponies. Blood was pulled for Coggins', xrays were taken of the little mare's feet and we cut;took xrays again; and cut again. At this point, we've put together a treatment protocol for her, so it looks like she's staying a while. We've taken off a TON off hoof; We need to start bringing down the heels next week; she's sore-footed and has foundered, started her on Bute to get her more comfortable.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kcOCGLd4qw![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Footnote-- Tabitha succumbed to the damaging effects of this long-term neglect on Oct. 10, 2010. Rest in Peace sweet girl.