MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043350180 · doi:10.2527/jas.2010-3250

Unwanted horses: The role of nonprofit equine rescue and sanctuary organizations1

2010· article· en· W2043350180 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
K. E. Holcomb, Carolyn Stull, Philip H. Kass

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Farm Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnforcementAnimal welfareBusinessQuarter (Canadian coin)MedicinePolitical scienceGeographyLawBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Closure of US equine slaughter facilities in 2007 along with the concomitant economic recession have contributed to a sharp increase in the number of unwanted horses throughout the United States, with estimates totaling 100,000 horses per year. The objective of the study was to obtain comprehensive data regarding nonprofit organizations caring for unwanted horses, along with the characteristics and outcome of horses relinquished to these organizations. Nonprofit organizations that accept relinquished equines were contacted to participate in a 90-question survey. Responding organizations (144 of 326 eligible) in 37 states provided information on 280 cases representative of the 7,990 horses relinquished between 2007 and 2009. Data collected characterized these organizations as being in existence for 6 yr, financially supported through donations and personal funds, dedicated to the care of only 10 to 20 horses on a property of just over 30 acres, and reliant on volunteers for help. Funding was the greatest challenge to continued operation of nonprofit equine organizations, with maintenance costs for the care of a relinquished horse averaging $3,648 per year. Financial hardship, physical inability, or lack of time to care for the horses by owners were the most common reasons for relinquishment, followed by seizure through law enforcement agencies for alleged neglect or abuse. Relinquished horses consisted of mostly light horse breeds (79.3%), with Thoroughbreds and Quarter Horses as the most represented breeds. The age of relinquished horses ranged from 3 d to 42 yr old (12.4 ± 0.5 yr). About one-half of the horses entered in the survey were considered unhealthy due to illness, injury, lameness, or poor body condition. For every 4 horses relinquished to a nonprofit organization, only 3 horses were adopted or sold between 2006 and 2009, and many organizations had refused to accept additional horses for lack of resources. The estimated maximum capacity for the 326 eligible registered nonprofit equine rescue facilities of 13,400 is well below the widely published estimate of 100,000 horses that become unwanted in the United States every year. Nonprofit equine rescue and sanctuary facilities have historically played an important role in safeguarding the welfare of horses in society, but funding and capacity are limiting factors to their potential expansion in continuing to care for the current population of unwanted and neglected horses in the United States.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicAgriculture and Farm SafetyFrench-language works237,207