Bachelor Thesis - Christina Kuenen - Hufpfleger

All interviewees ticked basic knowledge about horses, the investigation of hoof and leg care, the bare hoof
treatment and health, safety and protection as part of a uniform quality standard. Further almost all ticked
maintenance of working tools, client advising and co-operation with other experts. The alternative and
traditional farriery was also ticked of more than half of the participants. No significant differences can be
analysed between the groups (Chi-square, p > 0.05). The most often additional mentioned knowledge are
basics about different methods, biomechanics, alternative medicine and animal protection (figure 10). A
significant difference between the target groups was analysed in mentioning basics of different methods
(Fisher's, Chi-square = 9.643, df = 1, p =0.002).
A number of 59.3 % would prefer the examination through a representative of the law. Split up into groups:
80 % of the TE and 33.3 % of the AE ticked the governmental authority. A total of 18.5 % answered that they
would prefer the examination
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
education insitute
government
other authority
through the education institute. All
respondents who ticked this option
were AE (41.7 %). 14.8 % preferred
other authorities (figure11). The Chisquare
test analysed that there is a
significant difference between the
groups (Chi-square = 8.775, df = 3, p
= 0.032, n = 27).
The examination for alternative hoof
treatment practitioners should be
Figure 11: authority for examination of alternatives, interview practical and theoretical answered
92.6 % of the respondents. The
difference was tested to be not significant between the target groups (Chi-square, p > 0.05, n = 26). A number
of 85.2% think they should be compulsory. For this data also no significant difference between the target
groups was found (Chi-square, p > 0.05, n = 23).
48.1 % of the respondents do not see a need for a repetition of the basic examination. Whereas 18.5% ticked
a yearly and another 18.5 % a repetition after three years. 3.7% prefer a repetition after six years and 7.4%
after 10 years. Also no significant differences could be analysed between the target groups (Chi-square, p >
0.05, n = 26).
TE
AE
ALL
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
negative
very negative
neutral
positive
very positiv
TE
AE
Figure 12: experts' view into future
Most of the TE are looking negative (46.7%) or very negative (13.3 %) into the future, whereas most AE
have a positive (33.3%) or very positive (25.0%) view into the future. AE are more positive (mean rank
18.29) than TE (mean rank 10.57). As figure 12 lets assume, the difference between the groups was analysed
as being significant (Mann-Whitney, p = 0.009, n = 27).
40