Your data on MRCVSonline
The nature of the services provided by Vision Media means that we might obtain certain information about you.
Please read our Data Protection and Privacy Policy for details.

In addition, (with your consent) some parts of our website may store a 'cookie' in your browser for the purposes of
functionality or performance monitoring.
Click here to manage your settings.
If you would like to forward this story on to a friend, simply fill in the form below and click send.

Your friend's email:
Your email:
Your name:
 
 
Send Cancel
Is branding horses the best method of identification?
New study reveals answers

Despite increasing evidence that branding foals causes the animals stress, many horse breeders still claim that this practice represents the best method for identifying the animals.

This issue has now been addressed by Jörg and Christine Aurich at the University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna. The results have just been made available online in The Veterinary Journal and may well spell the end for the traditional practice of branding horses.

There are many reasons why it is important to be able to identify farm animals, horses and small companion animals. Unique identification marks are essential for ensuring the accuracy of breeding programmes, for preventing the spread of disease and for eliminating the possibility of deceit in competitions or when animals are sold.

The traditional method of marking larger farm animals relies on branding with hot irons or on ear-tagging but this is considered inappropriate for use on dogs and cats, which are identified by the implant of a microchip. Until recently, horses were generally branded, but following concerns that the practice is unnecessarily cruel, there has been a gradual switch towards the use of microchips.

Brands on horses generally combine a symbol to indicate the particular breed with a two-digit number to identify the individual animal. To assess the readability of the markings, the researchers asked three experienced people to record the brands of about 250 horses participating in an equestrian tournament in Germany. All three testers were able to recognise the breed symbols on about 90% of the animals and for about 84% of the animals the symbol was recorded correctly by all three people. However, the situation for the two-digit numbers was dramatically different. While each of the three readers read the numbers correctly on about half of the horses, the correct number was recorded by all three of them for less than 40% of the animals.

To assess the legibility of brand marking under 'ideal' conditions, the researchers examined the markings on 28 horses that had been euthanised, in each case for reasons not related to branding. Surprisingly, the brand marks could be clearly identified on only nine of the animals, while for six horses neither the brand symbol nor the two-digit number could be worked out even after the site of branding had been shaved. This finding confirmed the unreliability of marking horses by branding.

Jörg Aurich sums up the results: "Branding is clearly associated with local tissue damage and the markings are often insufficiently clear, even by experienced observers or after the horse has died. There really isn't any reason to continue to mark horses in this outdated way."

Become a member or log in to add this story to your CPD history

Defra shares new Sanitary and Phytosanitary guidance

News Story 1
 Defra has published guidance for the vet sector ahead of a proposed UK-EU Sanitary and Phytosanitary agreement.

The agreement, which will change the movement and trade of animals and related products, could see reductions in checks, paperwork and certification. As well as describing regulatory developments, the advice highlights the importance of animal ID, registration and traceability in disease control and other compliance arrangements.

The guidance can be found here. More detail is expected as negotiations progress. 

Click here for more...
News Shorts
New form for online veterinary medicines retailers

The Veterinary Medicines Directorate (VMD) has produced a new online form for retailers wishing to sell veterinary medicines on the internet.

The form replace the previous Word version and is part of the VMD's ongoing commitment to digitise its processes. Anyone retailing prescription medicines online, including POM-V, POM-VPS and NFA-VPS categories, is lawfully required to register with the VMD before trading.

The change only applies to new applicants. Retailers already listed on the VMD's Register of Online Retailers or registered under the Accredited Internet Retailer Scheme (AIRS) do not need to do anything.