Was barefoot, now mustangs

["Heidi Smith" <heidi@sagehillcmk.com>]

Title: Re: Darolyn & Barefootin'

I won't belittle you for posting, but I will suggest that you check your history.  I'd recommend the book THE WILD HORSE CONTROVERSY and suggest that you delve into its fairly lengthy and comprehensive bibliography.  The fact that there were no free-roaming horses in this hemisphere until horses escaped from the Spaniards in the late 1600's is not my opinion--it is a well-documented fact.  The entire Native American population was afoot until that time, which can also be well-documented.  Their travois were pulled by dogs.  So while it may be true that the feral horses are not just the result of cowboys turning horses loose, they are still nonetheless the result of European horses having gotten loose from explorers or settlers.  (Although in recent years, many are a result of actual breeding programs by western ranchers, who turned out Remount stallions of various breeds.)

 

Also, I get a bit wigged at the political implications that the free-roaming horses were not owned.  The Indians clearly thought they owned them, unlike the truly wild animals, even though their culture did not utilize fences and brand books to denote ownership.  I find it odd that on one hand we are expected to accept our Native American counterparts as equals, but on the other hand, are expected to completely ignore how their culture worked and how they defined property.  I maintain that the Native Americans were human beings with a unique culture, and it is clear that they felt they could dip into "their" herds to count out horses to pay debts and to give gifts--they honored future in-laws with gifts of horses, they recognized that horses of another tribe were property to the point that stealing them back and forth was a recognized activity, etc.  Horses were not only owned, they were the currency with which the western tribes did business.  Nowhere have I ever seen it mentioned that they paid their debts with live deer, or elk, or bear, or any other truly wild animal.  Nope, the horses were considered to be property, and as such, different than wild animals, even by the Native  Americans.  To consider them otherwise is quite disrespectful of Native American culture.  Some tribes (the Nez Perce come to mind) even practiced gelding and selective breeding to some extent.

 

Also, the genetic typing of these horses is greatly misunderstood by many--there is no way to prove that a horse is or is not of a specific "breed" by DNA testing.  What CAN be done is demonstrate relationships or lack of relationships via genetic markers, and follow dam lines with mitochondrial DNA.  Many breed share genetic markers, because many breeds are interrelated.  LIkewise, mitochondrial DNA types can be common to multiple breeds, since they often descend from the same horses.  I'd suggest that you contact a geneticist such as Michael Bowling for references to better understand this process.

 

As to the feet of burros--burros are not horses, even though they are related.  They have a rather different structure and growth pattern to their feet, and actually are far better adapted to rocky conditions unshod than are horses.

 

My reference to being off-topic was only because we were talking about the relevance of shoes on horses--I've changed the subject line here, since the topic has clearly changed.

 

Heidi

----- Original Message -----

From: Terry W

To: ridecamp@endurance.net

Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:26 AM

Subject: RC: Re: Re: Re: Re: Darolyn & Barefootin'

Heidi,

 

Sorry if I seemed to have been "off topic" to you, but mustanging was brought up as well as a mention on them having draft blood in them,  as far as the Nevada mustangs that were mentioned.  I believe the mustangs were exhausted and dehydrated to be captured/roped,  and not with sored hooves but possible lamed by broken bones.  I think I should be allowed to state that opinion just as you have yours. 

 

<snip>

I must believe that it is still the old mentality that America's wild horses are feral and let out by the ranchers, etc., instead of the reality that they were here when the west was settled.  The settlers captured the wild horses.  Those that they could use, they did.  Those that they could not, were re-freed. 

 

It is interesting to listen to horse people when they see a wild horse.  In that horses they see characteristics of specific man-made breeds but what they are actually seeing is the horse from which man-made breeds evolved and not vice versa."

 

What about burros hooves?  They never wear shoes,  have you ever seen a sore burro?  I live in the Arizona desert near wild burros and I also own a mustang.