Talk:Mustang/Sandbox

Please use cite book or cite web templates and include ISBN - if on google books, also add URL. Doing one to demonstrate. The template puts everything into the proper format

As I said on the talk page, I plan to.

• Amaral, Anthony (1977). Mustang: Life and Legends of Nevada's Wild Horses. Reno: University of Nevada Press.

• Berger, Joel (1986). Wild Horses of The Great Basin Social Competition and Population Size. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press. ISBN 0-226-04367-3.

• Denhardt, Robert M. (1975) [1947]. The Horse of the Americas. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.

• De Steiguer, J.Edward (2011). Wild Horses of the West: History and Politics of America's Mustangs. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. ISBN 9780816528264.

• Dobie, J. Frank (2005) [1934]. The Mustangs. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. ISBN 0-803-26650-2.

Primarily useful for the history of the original Spanish mustangs.

• McKnight, Tom, The Feral Horse in Anglo America Geographical Review Vol. 49, No. 4 (Oct., 1959)

Available in jstor, can read for free but must sign up for an account. Estimated, on page 519, a population of 17,330-33,660 in 1958. Ryden used only the high number in the 1970 version of America's Last Wild Horses.

• Morin, Paula (2006). Honest Horses: Wild Horses in the Great Basin. Reno and Las Vegas: University of Nevada Press. ISBN 0874176735.

• Roe, Frank Gilbert (1974) [1955]. The Indian and the Horse. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.

Although this book is cited frequently in many of the other sources on this page, it is relevant chiefly because it shows the dispersal of Spanish horses throughout most of the West. However, that part of book is based primarily on Francis Haines The Northward Spread of the Horse Among the Plains Indians, which is online and should probably be used as a substitute source for WP.

• Ryden, Hope (2005) [1970]. America's Last Wild Horses. Lyons Press. ISBN 1592288731. {{cite book}}: Check |url= value (help)

Montanabw: This source has several revisions, has generally a strongly pro-"wild" horse tone. Has some good content, but must be used with care.

Lynn: the 1970 version is also the source of the oft-repeated but implausible "at the beginning of the 20th century, an estimated 2 million wild horses roamed America’s ranges." (GAO, 1990) The page (297) and graph (p 311) that asserted that fallacy were removed in the next (1978) version, but in 1990, the GAO published a report using the redacted information from the 1970 version. The GAO retracted the quoted assertion in a later 2008 report. Page 297 of the 1970 version also provides some numbers for later in the century: 150,000 in 1934, which Ryden attributes to Walker Wyman, and 33,000 in 1958, which is attributed to Thomas McKnight. Both of these figures were a misrepresentation of the source material.

• Sherrets, Harold, 1984 "Impacts of Wild Horses on Rangeland Management" U. S. Dept. of Interior, Bureau of Land Management Idaho State Office, "The Taylor Grazing Act, 1934-1984, 50 Years of Progress".

Sherrets states that in 1934, there were 150,000 horses on the public domain. He apparently got that year and number from the 1970 version of Ryden's America's Last Wild Horses. Ryden inaccurately referenced Walker Wyman's numbers and year. He had stated that there were 50,000 to 150,000 horses in 1930 (page 361).

• Young, James A.; Sparks, B. Abbott (1992) [1985.]. Cattle in the Cold Desert Expanded Edition. Reno and Las Vegas: University of Nevada Press.

• Wyman, Walker D. (1966) [1945.]. The Wild Horse of the West. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

http://www.rangemagazine.com/features/winter-11/wi11-range-mustang.pdf

• (this source is highly biased against Mustangs and in favor of the ranching industry with a highly misogynist tone mentioning "crying women" in a number of places Has some useful content, but must be used with care.)

http://contentdm.library.unr.edu/cdm/ref/collection/nevagpub/id/1088

http://www.sunset.com/travel/wild-horses

https://www.blm.gov/adoptahorse/herdareas.php?showAll=yes&showAllNoStates=no&herd_areas_seq=&herd_states_seq=

Using Science to Improve the BLM Wild Horse and Burro Program: A Way Forward

The Preservation of the Colonial Spanish Horse

http://www.audubon.org/magazine/january-february-2011/saddle-sores?page=show

http://archive.audubonmagazine.org/incite/incite0609.html

The original mustangs were Colonial Spanish horses, but many other breeds contributed to the modern Mustang as horses in the east came west with European settlement. In the late 1800s, horses used by the United States Cavalry also contributed to the mix. While there are different phenotypes of horses found under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) today, light riding horse type predominates and many bands retain Spanish horse traits. Some feral horses of draft horse conformation exist, but they are kept separate from other Mustangs and confined to specific areas.^[1]

The American Mustang Association developed a breed standard for those horses that carry morphological traits associated with the early Spanish horses. These include a well-proportioned body with a clean, refined head with wide forehead and small muzzle. The facial profile may be straight or slightly convex. Withers are moderate in height and the shoulder is to be "long and sloping." Mustangs are to have a very short back, deep girth and muscular coupling over the loins. The croup is rounded, neither too flat nor goose-rumped. The tail is low-set. The legs are to be straight and sound. Hooves are round and dense. Not all mustangs fit this description, but mustangs of all body types are described as surefooted and having good endurance. They may be of any coat color.^[2]

Several bands have had DNA testing and are verified to have significant Spanish ancestry. These include the Kiger Mustang, the Cerbat Mustang,^[1] and the Pryor Mountain Mustang.^[3] A 2010 study of the Pryor herd also showed that those mustangs shared genetic traits with other domestic horse breeds and thus were not a unique species which had survived in North America from prehistoric times.^[3] Other free-ranging bands, such as those found in Idaho, descend from assorted domestic horses that escaped to or were turned out on the public lands, some contain animals with known descent from Thoroughbred and Quarter Horse stallions turned out in the area.^[4]

Name	Description	Location	Est. Pop
Cerbat Mustang	Spanish type, origins disputed.[5]	Arizona
Kiger Mustang	Spanish type, predominantly dun, often gaited, quick and agile. May have arrived in oregon via the Shoshone.[6]	Oregon
Pryor Mountain Mustang	Colonial Spanish horse type, averaging 14 hands (56 inches, 142 cm), compact, often dun-colored.[7]	Montana, northern Wyoming	BLM: 90-120 AML
Antelope Hills	Predominantly bay or brown, genetic markers consistent with Spanish Colonial horse breeds.[8]	Wyoming	AML 60-82 adult horses
Carter Reservoir	Phenotype consistent with Spanish horses, including many dun horses with primitive markings. Size is 14–16 hands (56–64 inches, 142–163 cm) and weight 900–1,100 pounds (410–500 kg).[9]	Nevada/California	25-35

Name	Description	Location	Est. Pop
Draft type	Herd management areas containing some horses with draft horse characteristics	California: Devils Garden Wild Horse Territory HMA,[10] Fox Hog HMA[11] (more)

Horses under the management of the BLM comprise over 33,000 horses located in in 270 separate herd management areas (HMAs) across 10 states. There are also approximately 6,800 burros under BLM management in these states as well.^[12][13] Additional horses and burros are managed in cooperation with the BLM on 37 Wild Horse and Burro Territories in six states under the auspices of the United States Forest Service.^[14] As of March 1, 2014^[update] the BLM estimated that there were about 49,209 horses and burros roaming free on BLM-managed lands. This population exceeds the target population of 26,684 that the BLM considers to be the "appropriate management level" (AML). Another 48,447 equines are kept in holding facilities in various locations throughout the west and midwest.^[15] Excess numbers that exceed the AML for a herd management area are rounded up and either adopted or placed in long-term holding facilities.^[16]

The BLM distinguishes between "herd areas" where horses existed at the time of the passage of the 1971 Act, and "Herd Management Areas" (HMA) where the land is managed today for the benefit of horses and burros, though not exclusively for them. Other areas may contain feral horses but for a number of reasons—including size of herd, habitat, and land ownership—are not managed for equines by the BLM.^[17]

As of 2015^[update] almost half of all the free-roaming horses and burros under the management of the BLM live in Nevada, where there are 83 separate herd management areas.^[18]Population of free-ranging horses is a concern because, unlike wildlife or livestock, horses are not hunted, do not face significant natural predators, nor are their numbers human-controlled by means of grazing permits. Because of the lack of population control, their numbers can double every four years.^[16] Excess animals are removed from the range and placed in holding facilities where they can be placed for adoption with private owners. Since 1971, about 220,000 horses and burros have been adopted through the BLM.^[18]

State	Comment	Horse HMAs	Est. Pop[a]	Ref
Arizona	Arizona also manages over 3,500 burros;the largest burro population in the country	2 for horses (7 more for burros)	250-538	[13][14][19]
California	State HMAs include horses descended from ranch estrays, cavalry remounts, Spanish type, and draft types in a few areas	22 (both horses and burros)	3,241; AML 1,756	[13][14][20]
Colorado	Colorado adopts about 150 horses and burros a year, runs the Wild Horse Inmate Program (WHIP) to pair prison inmates with Mustangs to train for adoption. Has about 1,000 animals available for adoption at any given time.	4	1,040	[13][21]
Idaho	"Idaho's wild horses are descendants of domestic horses that escaped to or were turned out on the public lands prior to passage of the Horse and Burro Act in 1971." Several HMAs contain animals with known descent from Thoroughbred and Quarter Horse stallions turned out in the area.	6	554-775 in 2013	[13][4]
Montana	Pryor Range originally set aside as a wild horse refuge in 1968, expanded after 1971. BLM partners with the Pryor Mountain Wild Mustang Center located in Lovell, Wyoming. Range has a 100% adoption rate	1	158; AML 90-120	[22][23]
Nevada	Nevada holds about half of the wild horses and burros managed by the BLM	83 (both horses and burros)	18,764 (AML 12,700 total horses and burros combined)	[13][14][24]
New Mexico	BLM Region also manages the regional holding facility in Pauls Valley, Oklahoma. New Mexico has additional free-ranging horses on several Forest Service Wild Horse and Burro territories.	2	120	[13][14][25]
Oregon	Three to five herds are gathered each year, Oregon is home to the Kiger Mustang	17 HMA, 2 USFS territories	2,674	[14][13][26][27]
Utah	Two HMAs are also managed for burros. Numbers within each HMA vary from 35 to over 400.	20	3,245	[13][14][28]
Wyoming	HMAs managed by Wyoming BLM exclude the Pryor Range, which is managed by BLM in Montana	16	3,459	[13][12]

Consensus and discussion here. Corrections can be made as consensus develops. Montanabw^(talk) 21:30, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so here's my take on all of this. The UoO page is based on the 1995 version of Hendricks, so they are basically the same source. And Hendricks page on the "American Mustang" is specific to horses registered to the American Mustang Association (AMA), which I'm guessing is a defunct organization, that, like the Spanish Mustang Registry, was once focused on registering the few remaining true Spanish type mustangs. Maybe in 1995 the AMA was still viable, but if it was it was pretty much inactive, and I doubt there are any horses alive today that were registered in the "registry". The "breed" probably should have been taken out of the 2007 edition. So, 1) it is misleading to put in a breed standard for a defunct breed that less than 5 percent of the mustangs out there would have been eligible for registration and 2) If there must be one put in, it should be Sponenberg's Colonial Spanish Horse. But the bottom line is, there is no breed standard for run-of-the-mill mustangs, because there is no breed. I think that a simple sentence such as "A few herds still retain the traits of the Colonial Spanish Horse", and link to Sponenberg's characteristics on the SCH page, which is where all the discussion of bloodtyping and DNA should be. "But most mustangs, regardless of background, exhibit the characteristics of having to survive on their own in harsh circumstances, and are 'surefooted and enduring'" (with a citation back to page 303 of Hendricks).

And, I'm going to repeat this now. It is an oft repeated fallacy that today's mustang herds were once all Spanish, but were diluted down by adding in other types of horses. That is true of few herds, but for the most part, the herds that are out there today were never Spanish. From about 1875 to 1925, the Spanish mustangs were being eliminated from their footholds in the Southern Great Plains and other regions, but new and different mustang herds were forming in the Great Basin and other desert regions where the horses had not been found previously. These horses came with the Americans that settled in those areas and who turned the horses loose on the public domain to fend for themselves until needed, and they started going feral. By 1930, the typical mustang was pretty much a mixed breed horse running free on the desert, with any Spanish blood in it coming from horses that had been captured elsewhere and sold to settlers. That's why some individuals, such as those that founded the Spanish Mustang Registry started trying to find and preserved the remaining "Spanish" mustangs, hence the name of the registry. Lynn (SLW) (talk) 14:44, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We will not engage in OR or SYNTH. Period. That is the policy of Wikipedia. I'm tired of "guessing" and of unsourced, speculative theories and WP:OR. Source it. We can debate sources, but we can't just pull facts out of the air. Okie State is actually improved and changed a lot from what it was even five years ago. Hendricks and Okie state used to mirror each other closely, but they do not do so now. Hendricks 2007 is also more thorough and better-written than earlier editions used to be. There are a bunch of these registries, and they do come and go, but the point is that there is a concerted effort to identify and record the various groups of Mustangs. I need to find additional support for this link, but Sponenberg is no doubt the expert on what's happening with these various bloodline groups. As for the rest, if you don't like it, then find better sources. Montanabw^(talk) 21:27, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is fair to add some characteristics from the Mustang section from Hendricks, though. "Surefooted and enduring" can work. Montanabw^(talk) 21:41, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, since you're plowing along with your table, you'll see what I'm saying soon enough-that the vast majority of the herds have no Spanish background and that there's no justification for giving undue weight to the Colonial Spanish Horse. There are already articles on the Pryor Mustang and Kigers, their uniqueness does not need to be overrepresented here in order to try to introduce a breed standard because you are trying to reinforce your paradigm that "mustang" constitutes a breed. Even your main source, Hendrikson, does not try to produce a breed standard for mustang. You are trying to fit a round peg in a square hole here, to the point that you are WP:CHERRYPICKING Lynn (SLW) (talk) 12:22, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Given that you clearly have a POV that the only place that matters is Nevada and, apparently , that all mustangs are feral crap and should be wiped off the range, I hesitate to take your "cherrypicking" accusations very seriously. Or am I mistaken in your actual agenda? Do you work for the Farm Bureau? Have you read WP:COI? I have busted my ass for years trying to fend off both the animal-rights people and the "shoot 'em all" types and keep the article neutral and explaining all sides. I appreciate your providing the additional links. Wish you'd bother to format them, but oh well... Montanabw^(talk) 05:42, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing like going on the offense to try to divert attention from a valid criticism. Lynn (SLW) (talk) 21:39, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Antelope Valley HMA "In the Antelope Valley HMA, horses have been part of the range environment in the Great Basin since contemporary livestock grazing began in the mid 1800‘s. The wild horses in the Antelope Valley HMA are descendants from horses used by homesteaders, ranchers and miners."

• Diamond Hills HMA "Wild horses found in the North Diamonds HMA today originated from privately owned horses and likely have many domestic bloodlines in their background. In addition to bay, black, brown and sorrel colors, other colors present are buckskin, roan, palomino and grays."

• Little Humboldt HMA "The wild horses in the HMA are descendants of Cavalry Remounts kept in the southern portion of the HMA in the early 1900’s or escaped from nearby ranches. The dominant colors are gray bay, black, brown and roan."

• Goshute HMA "In the Goshute HMA, wild horses have been part of the range environment in the Great Basin since contemporary livestock grazing began in the mid 1800‘s. The wild horses in the Goshute HMA are descendants from horses used by homesteaders, ranchers and miners. There is some evidence that the Army Remount Service was active in at least part of the area during the early 1900‘s to the early 1940‘s."

• Spruce Pequop HMA "In the Spruce-Pequop HMA wild horses have been part of the range environment in the Great Basin since contemporary livestock grazing began in the mid 1800‘s. The wild horses in the Spruce-Pequop HMA are descendants from horses used by homesteaders, ranchers and miners. There is some evidence the Army Remount Service was active in at least part of the area during the early 1900‘s to the early 1940‘s."

• Rock Creek HMA "The wild horses in the HMA are descendants of Cavalry Remounts kept in the southern portion of the HMA in the early 1900’s or escaped from nearby ranches."

• Owyhee HMA "In the northern portion of the HMA, the horses are descendants of horses turned loose by Desert Ranch in the 1930’s, In the southern portion of the HMA, these horses are descendants of Cavalry Remounts turned loose in the early 1900’s or escaped from nearby ranches."

• Maverik Medicine HMA "The majority of horses in the Maverick-Medicine HMA are descendants of horses turned loose from local ranches."

• Adobe Town HMA "The present population has been influenced by the routine escape of domestic saddle stock from the surrounding populated areas."

• Antelope Hills HMA "This HMA has genetic markers that would reflect a similarity to the New World Spanish horse breeds."

• Conant Creek, Dishpan Butte, Muskrat Basin & Rock Creek HMAs No speculation on origin

• Divide Basin HMA "The Wyoming horses have a diverse background of many domestic horse breeds. They are most closely related to North American gaited breeds such as Rocky Mountain Horse, American Saddlebred, Standardbred, and Morgan."

• Fifteenmile HMA No speculation as to origin.

• Flanigan Herd Management Area (HMA) "Most of the horses within the Flanigan HMA are dark in color. Some are very handsome, featuring large bones and resembling a small draft or war horse such as the Friesian. The larger horses are over 16 hands (162 cc or 64 inches measured from the ground to the top of their withers)."

• Pine Nut Mountains HMA "It is generally accepted that these horses originated from escaped ranch stock."

If you can learn to use proper syntax and sourcing, you'd be of immense help to help build the chart. Hendricks 303 DOES list "mustang" actually. The goal of the chart is to sort things out. Clearly, the Spanish type is given greater preservation efforts than the part-draft stuff - and they pretty much all are - at least colloquially - called "mustangs." Montanabw^(talk) 05:42, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So, in other words, you're just going to plow along not caring if you get concensus, instead, resorting to personal attacks uncivil remarks on those that have objections? This is supposed to be a collaborative effort, not a "here's how I want it, now just shut up and do it the way I say" assignment.Lynn (SLW) (talk) 11:41, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You will never agree with me on anything, so why waste my breath on you? I do think your Great Basin bit has potential, and I said so. Collaboration means that everyone works together in good faith. Good faith means, among other things, not making stuff up or POV-pushing (and accusing others of the same when they disagree with you). Montanabw^(talk) 19:01, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Really? So, you're saying that my portion has potential, but you don't think it's ready yet, but you're going to try to force in what you wrote, despite other's reservations? You aren't the owner of this article. You are acting like "well I'll take what you say into consideration, but really, the final decision is mine". Ain't so. Lynn (SLW) (talk) 00:15, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I told you what has to happen per WP: MOS - full citations so that all editors can verify what you're doing and be sure you aren't just making stuff up or "extrapolating" like you did in the past. Make a protected edit request, I might surprise you. There is a "we" out there - it's several other editors who have commented at the talk page. Just because I'm the main person editing here doesn't mean I'm dictating content. I'm only exercising quality control. Make edits in line with wikipedia's MOS and policies, and you will be amazed at my ability to collaborate. Montanabw^(talk) 04:09, 2 June 2015 (UTC) Make a protected edit request, I might surprise you. There is a "we" out there - it's several other editors who have commented at the talk page. Just because I'm the main person editing here doesn't mean I'm dictating content. I'm only exercising quality control. Make edits in line with wikipedia's MOS and policies, and you will be amazed at my ability to collaborate. Montanabw^(talk) 04:09, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In other words, do everything the way you think it should be done, and you're sweet as pie.Lynn (SLW) (talk) 09:13, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The U.S. military did not use "heavy warmbloods" in the 1800s. Given the nature of their procurement system during this period, it's virtually impossible to say exactly what they used (and contrary to their persistent claims, Morgans were NOT part of the remount system at this time). Remounts were drawn from horse auctions, and the military at the time only recognized two general types of horse: "American" (typically something closer to a Thoroughbred) and "California" (a smaller type of animal common in regiments posted to Arizona and other parts of the Southwest). In point of fact, mustangs likely comprised at least a portion of many regiment's remounts (especially those units stationed in Kansas and Texas). Intothatdarkness 14:06, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Although large numbers of mustangs were documented in the warmer and relatively moister arid regions of the Western U.S. in the early to mid 1800s, the paucity of them was documented in the colder desert regions during that same time period. There are no known documented early sightings of mustangs in the eastern part of the Great Basin (the Lake Bonneville basin in Utah). Although Fremont noted thousands of horses in California, it does not appear he saw any in the Great Basin, to which he gave its name.^[1]Jedediah Smith, in his 1827 trek across the Great Basin saw "some horse sign" along the West Walker River, but did not mention any other such sightings^[2] The first known sighting of a horse in the Great Basin was by John Bidwell near the Humboldt Sinks in 1841. In 1861, another party saw seven free-roaming horses near the Stillwater Range^[3]. All three of these sightings were along the western edge of the Great Basin in Nevada, but for the most part, mustangs herds in Nevada were established in the late 1800's from escaped settlers' horses (most notably draft horses^[4])^[5][1] In the 21st century, most mustangs are found in the inhospitable desert regions of the Great Basin and the Red Desert of Wyoming.^[6], where ranchers once allowed their horses to run free on the public rangelands to be rounded up as they needed them for sale or use.^[7]

Like the concept of breaking out regions, will save comment until you've had a chance to refine it a bit. This may need to be a subsection in History rather than Characteristics. Need full cite for "Young and Sparks" and "deSteiguer" - preferably with URL to Google Books if there is one. It will also save time later if the citation templates are used (click "cite" in the edit window, then pull down the "templates" menu - usually use "cite web" though "cite book is good where you have an ISBN and such). Montanabw^(talk) 22:06, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tell you what. Since you seem to think that I have too high a percentage of my edits on talk pages and sandboxes, when the actual article is unprotected in a couple of days I'll put it in and edit it there. Lynn (SLW) (talk) 16:34, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If it looks like this, it won't be ready; your citations are inadequate. I suggest getting it ready. Montanabw^(talk) 05:36, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And how much of this is actually due to the late Anglo exploration of this region? If we're going to explore this, I'd suggest looking at Native history and sources regarding the expansion of the buffalo culture. Intothatdarkness 14:10, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very well versed in the Native history of the region. There were no bison there. It's a desert and not suitable habitat. If you have reliable sources that say differently, please feel free to share them. Lynn (SLW) (talk) 15:00, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

While Wysong is right that there aren't a lot of bison in Nevada, the scope of this article isn't just the BLM or just Nevada, though we have kind of gone there due to availability of sources. Montanabw^(talk) 17:15, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If that's the case, it's worth including a note about that so that we don't appear to be cherry-picking sources. Intothatdarkness 15:06, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ITD, what we need are more and better sources in general. I'd love to see some of the source material you have on the remounts. There are, literally, 270 separate HMA articles on the BLM servers, and pretty much all of them have different tales to tell. The "heavy warmblood" bit is from Hendricks, but I've also see some passing refs to it elsewhere, don't know what study they got it from, but what matters to me here is getting it right. Any help is appreciated. Montanabw^(talk) 17:15, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I used some of them in the Remount Service article. There was no systematic system for breeding remounts until the early 1900s. The Army might have looked at larger horses for the field artillery (and the Morgan was mentioned in this context), but in terms of cavalry service the bulk of the argument was between the suitability of Thoroughbreds and Arabians. And as far as Nevada goes, the Navaho had a reasonably developed horse culture. Not to the Plains level, perhaps, but there. My point is simply that relying on explorers' reports might create a false impression. Does anyone have access to French reports or sources on the French-Canadian fur trade, for example? There may be some information there. Intothatdarkness 17:27, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Navajo weren't in the Great Basin, much less Nevada. Nor did the French fur trade get that far southwest. Lynn (SLW) (talk) 18:35, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You can tell it's Monday. I was thinking of New Mexico. You are, of course, correct about them not being in Nevada. The Shoshone, however, were. Intothatdarkness 18:45, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but the Shoshone bands that were in the central Great Basin did not have horses or a horse culture. The Eastern Shoshone and Bannock/Northern Shoshone bands did, but not all of them. Lynn (SLW) (talk) 20:53, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Then maybe that's worth clarifying for general readers as part of the history, then. If we're discussing the history at all. Intothatdarkness 13:42, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've been trying to do that for months. It's hard to make a change, even if well referenced, when it forces others to change their paradigms. Lynn (SLW) (talk) 14:40, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lynn, just work on Nevada, then. It's clearly your primary interest. But don't over-generalize that Nevada is the entire west, either. @Intothatdarkness: has a lot of background on military matters, and at least one of the California HMAs does state that some of the horses there are estrayed remounts from the WWI era. Montanabw^(talk) 18:44, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That would likely have originated in the Sacramento area, then, if the animals were in fact associated with the the Remount Service (which didn't actually start functioning as a breeding program until after the war). Prior to that it was really an organized purchasing board. Intothatdarkness 13:42, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]