Study links strip grazing to poorer welfare signals in ponies
Bottom line
Restricted grazing systems used for weight control may not be equal from a welfare standpoint. In a 35-pony crossover study published in Equine Veterinary Journal, researchers found ponies on a track system moved more, traveled farther over 24 hours, and showed less overt agonistic behavior than when the same herds were managed with strip grazing. The paper, first accepted in August 2024 and later published in the journal’s May 2025 print issue, compared four weeks in each system and found no meaningful difference in grazing rhythm between the two approaches. The authors were affiliated with Redwings Horse Sanctuary, the University of Lincoln, the University of Cambridge, SRUC, and the University of Edinburgh. (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
Why it matters: For equine veterinarians and welfare-focused teams, the study adds evidence that weight-management plans for ponies should consider behavior and social dynamics, not just calorie restriction. Obesity remains a major equine welfare concern and is linked with equine metabolic syndrome and laminitis, but this work suggests strip grazing may increase conflict and reduce movement even when accessible grazing area is matched. That could influence how clinicians counsel yards and pet parents managing native breeds and other easy keepers at pasture. (pure.sruc.ac.uk)
What to watch: Longer-term studies will be important to determine whether the apparent welfare advantages of track systems translate into better metabolic, body condition, or laminitis-related outcomes over time. (rcvsknowledge.org)
A new Equine Veterinary Journal study is sharpening the conversation around pony weight management by suggesting that how grazing is restricted matters as much as the fact that it is restricted. In a within-subject crossover trial involving 35 pasture-kept ponies, researchers found that track grazing was associated with more movement, greater distance traveled, and less overt agonistic behavior than strip grazing, raising fresh welfare questions about a common management tool used to control obesity risk. (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
The backdrop is a familiar one for equine clinicians. Equine obesity is a persistent welfare and medical issue, with links to equine metabolic syndrome and endocrinopathic laminitis, and management advice often centers on restricting pasture intake. But many of the practical tools used in the field, including strip grazing, grazing muzzles, dry lots, and track systems, have been adopted faster than their welfare effects have been studied. The authors explicitly framed their work around that gap, noting that little was known about the welfare impact of these commonly used approaches. (pure.sruc.ac.uk)
The study followed four established herds in the East of England over the summer, with each herd spending four weeks on a strip-grazing system and four weeks on a track system in random order. The grazing areas were matched by hectare, and ponies remained on pasture around the clock without supplemental feeding. Behavior was assessed using 24-hour video surveillance, activity was tracked, and bodyweight, body condition score, and cresty neck score were measured weekly. On the track system, ponies spent a higher proportion of time moving, covered a greater median distance over 24 hours, and showed less overt antagonistic behavior than on strip grazing. The authors concluded that strip systems may reduce movement and increase conflict, potentially because of perceived space restriction or concentration of resources, even when total accessible area is equivalent. (rcvsknowledge.org)
There are important caveats. Exposure to each system lasted only four weeks, which likely limited the ability to detect meaningful changes in bodyweight or condition. That makes this more of a behavioral and welfare signal than a definitive metabolic-management trial. Still, the findings line up with adjacent research showing that space-restricted grazing can alter equine time budgets, and with broader work on pasture-track housing that has focused on movement and management tradeoffs in horses at risk of obesity and laminitis. (pure.sruc.ac.uk)
Industry coverage and secondary commentary have largely treated the findings as a practical reminder that welfare costs can accompany restrictive feeding strategies. RCVS Knowledge’s evidence summary said the study provides evidence that strip grazing can negatively affect pony welfare and behavior, and emphasized that grazing-system choice should be part of weight-management planning. Coverage in equine trade media similarly highlighted the track system’s association with greater movement and fewer antagonistic interactions. Those reactions don’t replace independent expert commentary, but they do suggest the paper is resonating with clinicians and equine welfare audiences concerned about balancing metabolic control with natural behavior. (rcvsknowledge.org)
Why it matters: For veterinary professionals, the practical message is that pasture restriction shouldn’t be treated as a one-variable intervention. If a clinician recommends reduced grass intake for an overweight pony, the choice of system may affect locomotion, competition around forage, and day-to-day welfare, all of which can influence adherence and outcomes. In cases involving native ponies, easy keepers, or animals with prior laminitis risk, that may mean discussing track layouts, herd compatibility, forage distribution, and monitoring for social tension, rather than defaulting to strip grazing because it is familiar or simple to set up. This is an inference from the study’s behavioral data and the wider obesity-management context, but it is a clinically reasonable one. (pure.sruc.ac.uk)
What to watch: The next step is longer-duration research that pairs welfare measures with harder clinical endpoints, including weight change, insulin dynamics, and laminitis risk. It will also be worth watching whether future guidance from welfare organizations, equine charities, or continuing education programs begins to distinguish more clearly between restricted grazing methods, rather than treating them as interchangeable tools for pasture control. (rcvsknowledge.org)