When Science Meets Instinct: Bridging Evidence-Based Practice With Horsemanship
In equine rehabilitation, there’s a tension I feel almost every day. On one side: the growing body of evidence-based practice, supported by peer-reviewed studies, clinical guidelines, and a professional commitment to measurable outcomes. On the other: the instinctive, horse-centered knowledge that comes from years of living alongside horses… watching them in herds, feeling their tension under your hand, or listening to the stories their owners share.
The real magic of effective care lies not in choosing one over the other, but in learning how to bridge the two.
Evidence-Based Practice: The Backbone of Modern Care
The veterinary and rehab fields have rightly emphasized evidence-based practice (EBP): clinical decisions guided by the best available research, practitioner expertise, and client values. It’s the gold standard in medicine because it helps us move past tradition, anecdote, and guesswork.
When I design a rehab program, I lean on published data:
Studies on the biomechanics of the equine spine
Research on muscle activation during core stability work
Controlled trials on modalities like therapeutic ultrasound or laser therapy
Systematic reviews that help us sort what truly works from what’s just marketing hype
This foundation matters. Horses deserve approaches that are more than “what we’ve always done.” Evidence-based protocols ensure consistency, accountability, and credibility with the wider veterinary field.
But here’s the challenge: horses are not research papers. They are living, breathing, social beings each with their own history, temperament, and unique circumstances. And no study, no matter how robust, can fully account for the individual horse in front of you.
Horsemanship: The Other Half of the Equation
Horsemanship is harder to define. It’s not published in journals, and it doesn’t come with p-values or control groups. But anyone who has worked with horses long enough knows what I mean.
It’s the way you notice the cribber whose stress decreases 90% after joining a herd
It’s feeling the moment a horse braces before you even apply an aid
It’s recognizing the subtle shift in an ear, an eye, or a breath - the signs of trust, or tension, or fear
It’s respecting that every horse is an individual, not just a case file
Horsemanship is built on empathy and observation. It’s the willingness to see the horse as a partner, not just a patient. And it’s often informed by instincts honed over thousands of quiet, ordinary interactions.
The truth is, horsemanship fills the spaces where science is still catching up. For example:
Research confirms social housing improves welfare, but horsemanship shows us the small day-to-day ways herd dynamics calm or stress an individual.
Studies suggest exercise intensity for tendon rehab, but horsemanship helps us sense when a horse is mentally ready to progress.
Evidence highlights the benefits of groundwork for core strength, but horsemanship reminds us some horses need groundwork to rebuild trust before they can rebuild muscle.
Where Science Alone Falls Short
Here’s the risk when we lean too heavily on science without horsemanship:
Overgeneralization. A study might show that a particular rehab exercise improves strength across a population. But that doesn’t mean it’s the right exercise for this horse today, with this pain history, in this environment.
Data without context. Research tells us what’s statistically significant, not always what’s practically meaningful. A 10% improvement in stride length might matter in a lab, but if the horse is still stressed and shut down, we haven’t succeeded in rehab.
Neglecting the horse’s voice. Horses don’t read research papers. They communicate through behavior, posture, and willingness. If we ignore those signals in the name of “protocol,” we risk undermining welfare and losing trust.
Where Instinct Alone Falls Short
On the other hand, relying only on instinct has its pitfalls too:
Confirmation bias. We may see what we expect to see, reinforcing long-held beliefs that aren’t supported by data.
Tradition as truth. Practices get passed down because “that’s how it’s always been done,” even when evidence suggests better options.
Inconsistency. Without a scientific framework, outcomes vary wildly between practitioners, making it hard to know what really works.
Instinct without science risks leaving us in the dark. Science without instinct risks leaving the horse behind.
The Bridge: Integrative, Horse-Centered Care
The goal is not to choose sides but to bridge evidence and instinct. Here’s what that looks like in practice:
1. Start With the Science
When approaching a new case, I first lean on research-supported best practices. This gives structure, ensures I’m not missing red flags, and provides a baseline for outcome tracking.
2. Layer in Horsemanship
Once I have a framework, I adjust based on what the horse shows me:
Is the horse anxious with stall rest? Modified turnout may be part of the “treatment.”
Does the horse brace against a prescribed exercise? I adapt the approach or slow down progression.
Is the owner struggling to implement the plan? I adjust to fit their reality, because rehab that isn’t feasible won’t succeed.
3. Listen to the Horse’s Feedback
Behavioral changes, attitude shifts, willingness to participate: these are all data points, even if they don’t show up in peer-reviewed journals.
4. Collaborate With the Care Team
Evidence-based rehab thrives in a collaborative environment. When vets, physios, farriers, bodyworkers, trainers, and even the “woo woo” side like energy workers and animal communicators share insights, we see the whole horse more clearly. Instincts get checked against data, and data gets interpreted through lived experience.
A Case That Taught Me This Balance
A gelding came to me with chronic back pain and a history of “difficult” behavior under saddle. His X-rays showed early kissing spine changes. Evidence-based protocols told me: strengthen the core, address posture, create stability.
But when I watched him, I saw a horse who was emotionally volatile, socially isolated, and distrustful of people. He didn’t want me to look at him, much less put my hands on him or ask him to move in new ways. My instinct told me rehab wouldn’t succeed unless those needs were met first.
We built him a program that combined both:
Evidence-based core stabilization exercises.
Herd turnout to restore social regulation.
Groundwork that focused as much on emotional regulation as physical conditioning.
Months later, he wasn’t just stronger - he was calmer, more willing, and safer to handle. Science gave us the framework; horsemanship gave us the bridge.
Why This Matters for the Future
As equine rehab and veterinary practice grow, we face increasing pressure to be “scientific,” and rightly so. But if we reduce horses to data points, we risk losing the soul of horsemanship.
At the same time, if we dismiss science in favor of “just knowing horses,” we deny ourselves tools that could profoundly improve welfare and outcomes.
The path forward isn’t either/or. It’s both/and.
Evidence-based practice anchors us in rigor. Horsemanship keeps us grounded in empathy. Together, they create a care model that is not only effective, but also ethical: one that honors both the science of equine rehabilitation and the lived reality of horses themselves.
Take-Home Message
When science meets instinct, we find the sweet spot:
Protocols rooted in evidence.
Adjustments and modifications informed by empathy.
Horses seen as individuals, not averages.
This is the bridge our industry needs: not a divide between “scientific” and “intuitive” approaches, but a partnership where each informs and strengthens the other.
Because at the end of the day, horses don’t care whether we call it “EBP” or “instinct.” They care how it feels in their bodies, their minds, and their relationships.
Our responsibility - and our privilege - is to make sure it feels like partnership. 🐴💙