The North American Horse Holocaust Act II

Horse fossils have been found at most Pleistocene fossil sites, proving they were once common and widespread throughout North America as well as Europe and Asia.  Paleontologists assigned new species names to many late Pleistocene horse fossils.  However, it’s likely the great variation in size within the horse population confused the scientists, and all late Pleistocene horse fossils can be lumped together into just 2 species–horse and donkey.  A DNA analysis of 12,000 year old horse bone from Idaho determined that the late Pleistocene horse was the exact same species as the modern domesticated horse.  Between ~15,000 BP and ~7,000 BP, humans gradually overhunted these beautiful beasts into extinction on the North American continent.  Obviously, climate change could not have been a factor in their extinction across the entire continent because when Europeans reintroduced horses in the 15th century, they thrived everywhere including Florida and Georgia.  We can’t fault the Indians for their extinction.  They had no way of knowing they were roasting the last of the American horses over the campfire.  For millennia the Indians wandered into new territory, wiped out the big game, and moved on, not knowing there were no new territories left with herds of horses.  Act I of the North American horse holocaust is understandable, but there is no excuse for Act II.

The Bureau of Land Management claims there are 38,000 wild horses roaming western lands, though horse advocacy groups insist that number is closer to 10,000.  The BLM is the government agency charged with managing America’s wild horses.  When they determine the range is being overgrazed, they conduct helicopter round-ups.  The horses are driven into crowded corrals and eventually are sold at auction.  Some people keep them as pets and attempt to tame them.  Some of the horses allegedly are sold to meat processors who transport them across the Mexican or Canadian border where they are slaughtered, and the meat is sold to fancy French restaurants.  Horses that remain unsold are euthanized.  Wild horse advocacy groups and humane societies are understandably upset about this.  They accuse the BLM of cruelty, and many believe the ultimate goal of the agency is to annihilate all wild horses, so greedy mining companies and cattle ranchers can have all the public land to themselves.  I’ve come to the conclusion that the wild horse advocates are right.

I think the BLM stands for the Bureau of Lying Morons.  Because activist groups are critical of the BLM’s inhumane and destructive management of wild horses and burros, the BLM has a webpage where they defend their department from some of the accusations.  It’s in the style of a myth vs. fact structure.  As the following photos show, the so-called myths are true and the so-called facts are lies.  George Orwell’s 1984 comes to mind.

Myth #2: Horses are held in crowded “holding pens.”

Fact: This assertion is false.  The BLM’s short-term holding corrals provide ample space to horses along with clean feed and water.

BLM corral.  Looks like a miserable crowded holding pen to me.

Myth #7: Gather of horses by helicopter is inhumane

Fact: This claim is false.  The BLM’s helicopter assisted gathers are conducted humanely…Helicopters start the horses moving in the right direction, and then back off sometimes a quarter to a half mile from the animals to let them travel at their own pace.

Another lie exposed.  This helicopter is practically bumping this herd in the ass.

Myth 8: If left alone, wild horses will limit their own population.

Fact: There is absolutely no scientific evidence to support the idea that wild hoses will automatically limit their own population.

The BLM is wrong again.  A recent study found that cougars kill enough horses to control their population.  In some areas of Nevada wild horses make up a greater proportion of cougar diet than any other animal including mule deer.

Myth 5: The BLM removes wild horses to make room for more cattle grazing on public rangeland.

Fact: This claim is totally false.  The removal of wild horses and burros from public rangeland is carried out to ensure rangeland health.

I don’t have a photo for this one, but the logic behind the BLM’s defense defies logic.  The BLM allows an average of 8.3 million cattle on public lands every month.  Compare this with 10,000-38,000 horses.  Which is overgrazing the rangeland–millions of cattle or thousands of horses?

Myth 11: Wild horses are native to the U.S.

Fact: This claim is false.  The disappearance of the horse from the Western hemisphere for 10,000 years shows that today America’s wild horses should not be considered native.

The fossil evidence proves wild horses are native to North America.  Man is the reason they were driven to extinction once.  It seems a travesty for man to drive this beautiful animal into extinction in the wild again.

A child could explain why the BLM is a wicked agency.  They allow stripmining and they mistreat animals.  It’s as simple as that.  And a child could explain why the politicians who fund the BLM are evil.  Yet, adults vote for them.  This makes the American people the villain in my opinion.

A strip mine on land owned by U.S. taxpayers.  The company that destroyed this mountaintop and stream in Arizona leased the land for $5 an acre.

President Obama could end the North American horse holocaust with an executive order.  But he is a bastard who doesn’t give a shit about the environment.  The only thing he has cared about since the day he got elected was getting re-elected.

Here’s the Horse-killer in Chief. I hate this bastard.  His environmental policies have been worse than George W. Bush’s.  I didn’t think this would be possible when I voted for him in 2008.  Environmentalists have no reason to vote in the upcoming election.  A choice between the democrats and the republicans is like a choice between shit and vomit.  It’s the pigs vs. the pussies.


Tags: , , , ,

11 Responses to “The North American Horse Holocaust Act II”

  1. Mark L. Says:

    Yep, you may have a point. Hell, BP took over which company which can be traced to mineral extraction? Same morals transferred to BP.
    Also, look at pictures of meetings where ranchers out west support the extermination of just about any large wild animal (horses, wolves, cougars,coyotes, etc.), and you will see lots of middle aged to older white people in hysterics over possible threats by the animals…unless it makes money for them like elk or mule deer, then it’s a different story.
    Deliberate extermination might be a north European ethic brought over by our ancestors, and kept alive through fairy tales (Red Riding Hood, etc.). Heck, look at the ancestry of most of the ranchers out west that shoot stuff…mostly from the same area.
    Obama is an ‘urban’ guy, he could care less because he has no attachment to land. I’m not sure what Romney would do but he hangs with some of the same ‘elitist’ hunters that want to close off hunting on public lands to everyone but themselves. Repugnican or Dumocrat doesn’t really matter anymore.

    • markgelbart Says:

      Dare I say Obama is a city slicker? Well, I called him a bastard. I guess he’s a bastard city slicker. Republicans openly say they want to get rid of the EPA. More on this on my next blog entry.

  2. James Robert Smith Says:

    I used to think that wild horses should be removed since they were an invasive species. Of course I had forgotten my natural history lessons and that they had been here until the Native Americans had hunted them to extinction. We need them back. Leave them alone and let them return to some of the places where they once lived.

    I’ve hiked alongside wild horses here in the South. There are wild horses at Cumberland Island National Seashore where I spent several days camping and hiking. It was nice to see them. There are wild ponies in the Grayson Highlands of Virginia. I always get a kick out of seeing them in the vast highland grassy balds there.

    Let them have the few places they have recolonized, and allow them to return to North America where they should be.

    • markgelbart Says:

      There was a nature documentary on one of the many cable/satellite channels not long ago where they placed trail cams on the Appalachian trail. I think it was in Virginia where they were surprised tthe cam took photos of wild horses.

  3. Mark L Says:

    We have wild goats on a mountain near me…they’ve been there over a hundred and fifty years, so I guess they are acclimating. I’d like to find somebody interested in studying feral goats if anyone knows much about it. I’ve heard about a trail cam near Blowing Rock, NC that got a wild horse or ass (all jokes aside).

    • James Robert Smith Says:

      There were feral goats at a place called Cedar Cliffs in Gilmer County where I went to high school. We rock climbed to the caves where they took shelter and the floor of the caves were deep in dried goat poop. Not sure if they’re still there, but I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that they still thrive along Talking Rock Creek. Those cliffs are impressive and offer safety for the goats.

  4. thewildhorseconspiracy Says:

    Indeed, what has and continues to happen to America’s wild horses and burros is an utter disgrace. I am a wildlife ecologist and have studied into this issue in great depth plus have extensive experience visiting and observing the herds and countering the lies and plots against them. I spent four years writing a book: The Wild Horse Conspiracy which goes into all aspects of these magnificent animals and tells what must happen to restore the herds as naturally self stabilizing populations in their legal areas throughout the West. This is called Reserve Design and it is what the government should have been doing all along. You can get the book from me for a signed copy or through amazon as a print book at or as an eBook with may color photos of the wh/b’s from all over the West at I also have a project for Reserve Design and mean to investigate just how and where it will work and to present this to all concerned including the American people.

  5. WestDeltaGirl Says:

    “..when Europeans reintroduced horses in the 15th century, they thrived everywhere including Florida and Georgia. We can’t fault the Indians for their extinction.”

    They never went extinct in the America’s! Read this please:

    • markgelbart Says:

      I’ll comment on your link in a little while when I have a chance to read it, but there is no fossil evidence of horses in North America from about 7500 BP to 1500 AD.

  6. WestDeltaGirl Says:

    in case the link doesn’t work, here’s the text from it:

    The Aboriginal North American Horse
    IN SUPPORT OF SENATE BILL 2278 (North Dakota)
    236 Rve Lavergne Quebec, Quebec, G1K-2k2 Canada
    (February 1, 1991)

    Traditional Dakota/Lakota people firmly believe that the aboriginal North American horse did not become extinct after the last Ice Age, and that it was part of their pre-contact culture.
    Scientists know from fossil remains that the horse originated and evolved in North America, and that these small 12 to 13 hand horses or ponys (sic) migrated to Asia across the Bering Strait, then spread throughout Asia and finally reached Europe. The drawings in the French Laseaux caves, dating about 10,000 B.C., are a testimony to their long westward migration. Scientists contend, however, that the aboriginal horse became extinct in North America during what is (known) as the “Pleistocene kill,” in other words, that they disappeared at the same time as the mammoth, the ground sloth, and other Ice Age mammals. This has led anthropologists to assume that Plains Indians only acquired horses after Spaniards accidentally lost some horses in Mexico, in the beginning of the XVIth (16th) century, that these few head multiplied and eventually reached the prairies.
    Dakota/Lakota Elders as well as many other Indian nations contest this theory, and content that according to their oral history, the North American horse survived the Ice Age, and that they had developed a horse culture long before the arrival of Europeans, and, furthermore, that these same distinct ponys (sic) continued to thrive on the prairies until the latter part of the XIXth (19th) century, when the U.S. government ordered them rounded up and destroyed to prevent Indians from leaving the newly-created reservations. Although there is extensive evidence of this massive slaughter, no definitive evidence has yet been found to substantiate the Elders’ other claim, but there are a number of arguments in favour of the Indian position.
    Post-glacial remains
    Some biologists have pointed out that Elders could indeed be correct, for while the mammoth and other Pleistocene mammals died out during the last Ice Age in both continents, if the horse survived in Eurasia, there is no reason for it to have become extinct in North America, especially given similar environment and climate on the steppes and prairies.
    In Eurasia, scientists have been able to trace the domestication of the horse through extensive archaeological work, fossil remains, burials, middens (garbage heaps) and artifacts. Such finds have, for instance, enabled them to determine that peoples there ate horses, buried them with notables, and helped them establish that men started riding about 3,500 B.C.
    By comparison, very little archaeological work has been done on the prairies due in large part to budget constraints. There are also other problems. Whereas the Seythians, for instance, left magnificent gold jewelry which can be dated to 400 B.C., Indian petroglyphs are usually impossible to date accurately. Digs have also concentrated mainly on villages sites, but if prehistoric prairie Indians had the same aversions to eating horsemeat as Dakota/Lakota people have today, then middens (garbage heaps) would not contain the necessary evidence either. It is well known that Dakota/Lakota people have traditionally eaten dogs, and indeed they still do at certain times, but conversely they would no more eat horses than Europeans would eat dogs. So that if both these cultural traits, in regards to horses and dogs, are ancestral, it would be useless to seek horse remains in garbage heaps.
    Dakota/Lakota burial customs are well documented: Bodies were placed on scaffolds on the prairies, and the bones were collected, cleaned and buried about one year later. As there is no tradition of ceremonial horse burials, with or without humans, one can assume that horses were simply left to die on the prairies where wolves and other scavengers would have efficiently dealt with their carcasses, thereby leaving scientists, once again, with few, if any, remains to discover.
    So whereas the Eurasian cultural practices insured the survival of physical evidence of the presence and domestication of the horse thousands of years ago, it might well be that pre-contact Indian cultural practices and environmental factors are responsible for the absence of the same evidence on this continent.
    The Indian pony and its characteristics
    Dakota/Lakota people have an extensive “horse vocabulary,” and they distinguish between their “own” horses, which among other names they call “sunkdudan,” the small-legged horse, and the European imported horse which they call the long-legged horse, or the American Horse.
    Between 1984 and 1987, this writer conducted extensive research on the prairies to retrace the itinerary of Louis-Joseph LaVerendrie who left a village site near Bismark, North Dakota, on 23 July, 1642, in an attempt to find the “People of the Horse.” He hoped they would take him to the “Western (China) Sea,” which Europeans had long sought in North America. He traveled 20 days, guided by two Mandans, and on 11 August (1642), he reached the “Mountain of the People of the Horse” where he waited 5 weeks for their arrival. In trying to locate this campsite, this writer used LaVerendrie’ s maps and diaries, as well as other documentation and interviewed numerous Elders and old ranchers. Eventually the site was located in Wyoming, and all of the people he met and traveled with were found to be Lakotas. But these interviews also lead to a wealth of information about the Indian pony.
    According to Elders, the aboriginal pony had the following characteristics: It was small, about 13 hands, it had a “strait” back necessitating a different saddle from that used on European horses, wider nostrils, larger lungs so that its endurance was proverbial. One breed had a long mane, and shaggy (curly) hair, while another had a “singed mane.” This writer contacted a specialist in mammals and was told the Elders were describing the Tarpan and the Polish Przewalski horses, and that early, independent eyewitness accounts ought to be investigated to confirm the Dakota statements. This lead to further research for creditable European reports.
    Frederick Wilhelm, Prince of Wurtemberg, a widely respected naturalist, traveled along the Mississippi and up the Missouri in 1823. Prince Wilhelm had studied zoology, botany and related sciences under Dr. Lebret, himself a student of Jussieux, Cavier and Gay-Lussac. An English translation of his diary, titled First Journey to North America in the years 1822 to 1823, was published in 1938 by the South Dakota Historical Society. His memoirs show that he was a keen observer of the fauna and flora wherever he traveled, and it was interesting to note his remarks on the Indian pony’s characteristics:
    “I interrupt my discourse, to say a few words concerning the horses of the Indians…At a cursory glance one might mistake them for horses from the steppes of eastern Europe. The long manes, long necks, strong bodies and strait back make them appear like the horses of Poland…On the whole the horses of the Indians are very enduring…” (So. Dak. Hist. Soc., XIX:378).
    He explained this curious phenomena (sic) by postulating that the Indian pony had descended from the Spanish horses, but that it has “degenerated, ” so that “They now resemble the parent (Spanish) stock very little.”
    If Elders are correct, and if the aboriginal pony did survive, it might well also explain why the ponies so closely resembled the Tarpan or the Polish horses, and perhaps systematic extermination of these ponies by the U.S. government has deprived science of very valuable information.
    Early French manuscripts: Evidence of a Dakota horse culture prior to 1650
    Other evidence exists which also militates in favor of the Indian position, that the aboriginal horse had already been tamed and ridden at the time of (white) contact.
    The first mention of horses in French manuscripts dates from 1657, and led to an amusing misunderstanding. In August 1657, Pierre Esprit Radisson traveled from Quebec to Onondaga (Syracuse, N.Y.) and during this canoe trip, a 50y/o Iroquois told the explorer of a three-year trip he had taken as a young man to the “great river that divides itself in two” — the Mississippi. (Scull, Gideon G., Voyages, 1943:105). During that trip, he assured Radisson he had seen “a beast like a Dutch horse, that had a long & straight horne in the forehead,” and this horne was some 5 feet long. Following this story Radisson (Scull:107) comments:
    “Now whether it was a unicorne, or a fibbe made by that wild man, yet (that) I cannot tell, but several others tould me the same, who have seene severall times the same beast, so that I firmly believe it.”
    Similar stories had also reached the Atlantic Dutch colonies. O’Callaghan’ s Documentary History of New York (Vol. IV:77, 1851), has an engraving of this animal, with the title “Wild Animals of New Netherlands” which has been taken from a Dutch work published in Amsterdam in 1671. The description of this strange bea(st):
    “On the borders of Canada animals are now and again seen somewhat resembling a horse; they have cloven hoofs, shaggy manes, a horn right out of the forehead, a tail like that of a wild hog, black eyes, a stag’s neck, and love the gloomiest wilderness, are shy of each other, so that the male never feeds with the female except when they associate for the purpose of increase, then they lay aside their ferocity. As soon as the rutting season is past, they again not only become wild but even attack their own.” (Soull, 1943:107, footnote 42.)
    The clue to the identity of this fabulous beast — whose habits so resembled that of the horse — was finally discovered in the account of the western journey of the explorer Jean Cavelier de la Salle. He reached the Illinois River, in January 1680, and began to construct Fort Crevecoeur, at Piorea, Illinois. On 17 February (1680), two western chiefs visited him, one of whom had a tobacco pouch made of “the foot of a horse with part of the skin of the leg.” Upon being questioned, the chief answered that 5 days west of where he lived “the inhabitants fought on horseback with lances…”
    From this description, it became evident that the “unicorns” seen by the Iroquois, in his younger days, were simply horses whose riders, perhaps hunting buffalo at a gallop, held their long spears in front of them, between the horse’s ears. As for the “cloven hoofs,” these could well have been the seams of the hide horseshoes Indians sometimes used.
    Concerning the identity of these expert riders, La Salle thought they were Spaniards:
    “(These riders) had long hair. This circumstance made us believe that he was speaking of Spaniards from New Mexico because Indians here do not let their hair grow long.”
    La Salle was at the time with Illinois Indians and had not yet reached the Mississippi, so he had no way of knowing the hairstyle of other Indian nations, but Radisson had gone to “the great river that divides itself in two,” in 1655 and again in 1659, and had met Dakotas. Radisson (Scull, 1943:151) stated:
    “Those people have their haires long. They reape twice a yeare; they were called Tatanka, that is to say buff (buffalo).” Tatanka is of course the Dakota/Lakota name of the buffalo, and as Radisson states, it was — and still is — the sacred name of the entire “Sioux” nation: Tatanka Oyate, or Pte Oyate, The Buffalo Nation. This passage is interesting because it contains the very first Dakota word ever written by a European, and at the same time gives the true name of the nation, mistakenly called “Sioux” by later Europeans.
    Were these expert prairie horsemen indeed Dakota/Lakota people as Radisson’s quote states? A manuscript map dated 1673, but probably earlier still, and its lengthy accompanying text indicate that they undoubtedly were. The text states, and the map shows the entire plains area, from Mississippi to the Rocky Mountains as “Manitounie, ” a French transcription of the old Dakota term for prairie, “Manitu,” and “oni,” to live. Hence Prairies Dwellers, a name which the Ojibwa translated into their own language as “Mascoutens Puane,” from “Mascoutens, ” prairie, and “Puane/Boine, ” the still current term for all “Sioux” people. Both names were also translated into French as “Sioux des Prairies,” Prairie Sioux. This same map, part of the Cedex Canadensis, at the Gilchrist Museum in Oklahoma, also shows that near the confluence of the Mississippi and the Missouri, where the Iroquois had seen his “unicorn,” there were indeed “Nations who have horses.”
    Hence, French manuscripts indicate that the entire prairies, from the Mississippi to the Rockies, were occupied by the Dakota/Lakota people when the first French explorers went there, and that they were skilled horsemen. Prince Frederick of Wurtemberg, who witnessed the Indian technique for hunting buffalo, was dully impressed:
    “The Indians are extremely bold and daring riders. This is shown especially in their hunting of the buffalo. In this dangerous work it is often hard to say which has the greater skill, the rider or the horse. Since the Indian who manipulates the bow and arrow can not make use of the reins, he must leave the horse entirely to its own discretion. The animal must be carefully trained to approach the bison within a few paces. It must run close to the powerful and often angry bull, and must be ready at all times to evade with the greatest swiftness the charges of the terrible oppoinent.” (S. Dak. Hist. Soc., XIX:379).
    The interesting point here is that several years prior to 1657, these Prairie Indians were already expert horsemen, having developed remarquable riding and hunting skills. That such expertise was developed by 1650 is remarquable in many ways: It implies that the original 11 head had so multiplied that within a few short years after the horses appeared, these Prairies Dakotas had devised methods for catching them, had learned to tame them, had become expert riders, had devised the most efficient buffalo hunting techniques on horseback, and had also devised techniques for training their horses in these skills. These accomplishments, in so short a time, seem all the more extraordinary when examining the development of similar skills in other areas of the world.

    Eurasia: A comparison
    By comparison, in Eurasia the thought of catching and taming horses took thousands of years. An easily accessible Time-Life book, titled First Horseman, by Frank Trippet, describes the reasons why it took thousands of years for people first confronted with horses, to even think of riding them:
    “The horse’s nature obviously had a lot to do with its initial failure to attract riders. Few men would have been tempted to mount so unpredictable a beast — and fewer still would have been able to stay aboard. (It) had evolved into the most temperamental of all domestic animals, able to elude predators by its sheer speed — the only possible defence on terrain (the Steppe) that offered no place to hide. In body and mind the horse is perfectly designed for flight, not fight. The horse relies on its uncommonly keen eyesight and marvelously acute sense of smell to send it galloping off at any hint of danger. Yet, once trapped, it kicks, bucks, slashes out with its forefeet and bites — often lethally. Also stallions protecting mares and foals will attack.”
    “Perhaps most important, the untamed horse is naturally likely to go all but beserk when anything lands on its back, simply because it has learned through the millennia that anything is likely to be a predator. Thus, if man had dreamed of riding the horse much earlier than he did, he could hardly have expected a hospitable reception from the animal that one day would become his partner.” (Trippet, 1974:47).
    Thus Trippet explains why inhabitants of the steppes only began riding about 3,500 B.C., thousands of years after they first appeared on that continent. The same reasons, however, would seem to preclude Prairie Dakotas from being so bold and so skillful, so quickly, not to mention adopting an entirely new horse culture in an exceedingly short time. Yet, another point is even more interesting.
    It has been argued that Indians had seen Spanish riders, and thus had developed their astonishing equestrian skills, but an example from the Middle East, where a similar situation occurred, shows the time required from the arrival of this “strange beast” into culture, to when its people rode awkwardly for several generations after it first appeared among them, even when experts were there to teach them.
    “More than a century passed before the Assyrians, learning from more skilled horsemen, like the Scythians, began to feel at home on horseback…For example, Assyrain cavalrymen of the Ninth Century B.C. required aides to ride beside them and manage their mounts so that they would be free to use their weapons.” (Trippet, 1974:51)
    These examples from other cultures make it difficult to believe that the aboriginal horse had indeed disappeared during the last Ice Age.
    First, the initial 11 head herd, released in the early XVIth (16th) century, would have had to multiply rapidly in a few years, and to such an extent that horses in sufficient numbers reached the prairies. Then, between that time and at the latest 1650, Dakota/Lakota people would have had to overcome their “mercurial disposition. ” Prince Frederick mentions repeatedly how wild these ponys (sic) were. Then, they would have had to learn to catch horses, tame them, learn to ride, become expert horsemen, devise the best techniques for training their horses in these skills. Compared to the time required by the Assyrians — with expert teachers — and indeed all other Eurasian horse cultures, to develop such accomplishments, the Indian feat seems unbelievable.
    Trippet (1974:47-48) concluded that: “In light of the horse’s mercurial disposition, its eventual conquest by man seems in many ways a fantastic achievement. ” Even more fantastic, then, is the incredible speed with which a horse culture was developed by the Dakota people. It might, however, be explained if the aboriginal North America horse had survived the Pleistocene, and thus had been part of a long-standing horse culture before the arrival of Europeans, as Dakota/Lakota Elders contend. And, therefore, that they had acquired these skills over the millennia, like their Eurasian counterparts, rather than in the space of one or two generations.
    Although there as yet (is) no conclusive physical evidence that the aboriginal horse survived the Pleistocene, and was part of the pre-contact civilization on the prairies, there is sufficient evidence — and indeed much more than is presented in this short paper — for experts to seriously reconsider that long-held theory that Prairies Dakotas had to wait for the arrival of the white man to give them horses.
    According to the Dakota/Lakota oral tradition, the aboriginal horse never became extinct and was part of their pre-contact culture.

    The horse is aboriginal to North America, and biologists can offer no scientific reasons for its extinction here and not in Eurasia.

    The absence of post-glacial remains could well be explained by Indian/Dakota cultural traits and environmental factors.

    The astounding horsemanship of Prairie Dakotas within a few years of the appearance of the “Spanish horse,” argues for this having been a traditional skill.

    The government pony-extermination policy may well have deprived scientists of unique specimens.
    Many theories have taken root because of preconceptions and bias. In this instance, no one can deny a long-standing prejudice against Indians, and the efforts which were made to minimize their accomplishments in many areas, and to discount oral history. In light of the above, one might well wonder if the long-held theory regarding the Indian pony is not a survival of these XIXth (19th) century prejudices.
    Definite proof of the survival of the aboriginal North American horse, and of a pre-contact Indian horse culture, might yet be discovered. Whatever happens, the few remaining Indian ponies should be treasured as part of North Dakota’s unique heritage.
    Horses definitely originated here, and whether the few remaining ponys (sic) are throwbacks, or are they actual descendants, they are a living testimony of the state’s contribution to the advancement of many civilizations throughout the world.
    ———— ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— —
    PRESENTED BY Claire Henderson, Laval University, Quebec, Canada. 2-1-91.

  7. markgelbart Says:

    Thanks for posting this interesting link.

    I’m not convinced from reading it though that horses never became extinct in North America.

    There is a scientific reason for their extinction here…overhunting by man.

    There is simply no physical evidence of horses in North America after 7500 BP until they were reintroduced by the Spanish. There’s no skeletel evidence after 11,000 BP, but there is sedaDNA in Alaska permafrost dating to 7500 BP.

    I’m not buying the claim that it would have taken Indians hundreds of years to become a horse culture. Some Plains Indians were still afraid of horses as late as the 19th century.

    They need actual physical evidence to convince me.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: