[QUOTE=KIloBright;7944409]
What about this source?
http://sheldonhorses.wordpress.com/americas-war-horse/
I am not questioning the official breeding policy , concerning re-mount horses, but I find so many sources that document mustangs as being used as a resource to fill the growing demand for horses on the front during World War 1, that I find it hard to dismiss them all as urban legend.[/QUOTE]
Well, this link you furnished is an advocacy site, which is neither here nor there on the subject of military horses, but I often find more fiction than fact on various mustang advocacy sites. I’ve looked at a few other pages on this site and sorry to say, I’m not impressed, it is pretty much the Disney version of the history of feral horses. The author doesn’t list any references, and when you google on the name Harry Winton, you only get this same story on the site you’ve linked and one other mustang site.
When you explore the history of the Sheldon National Wildlife Refuge, at least only briefly as I’ve done, you get this from the Refuge’s web site:
“Prior to these lands becoming a national wildlife refuge, ranchers raised European horse breeds as working stock and as remounts for the U.S. Cavalry. When the need for saddle horses diminished at the turn of the 20th Century, these horse herds were released on lands that are now the Sheldon refuge and other public lands where they became free-roaming animals. Active interbreeding of feral horses with ranch horses continued well into the 20th century. A more thorough coverage of the history can be found in the EA.”
In contrast, you have this statement from the site you linked:
“During World War I, and into World War II, military cavalry contractor Harry Winton (sometimes referenced as ‘Wilson’) would roundup horses from the area now known as Sheldon National Wildlife Refuge. The horses would then be loaded onto railroad cars and shipped to the East Cost. From there the horses would make a trip across the Atlantic ocean by ship. Horses that survived the journey had a bit placed in their mouths and began to pull artillery or serve as a cavalry mount.”
If the implication is that this individual furnished horses to the U.S. Army, well, note the Society of the Military Horse quote above which pretty firmly states that feral horses were simply not used in the 20th century. Additionally, the remount procedures for procurement of horses at their remount depots have pretty detailed procedures on the acquisition and training of horses. It is not plausible to consider that they would have shipped unevaluated horses and slapped a bit in their mouth and had them pulling artillery. I don’t think I’d be crazy enough to slap a bit on an unbroken horse and try competing in some arena event, and it’s even less likely I’d want to try that sort of thing in a war zone, my life would already be on the line with people shooting at me, let alone trying to train a wild horse on the spot.
Now, maybe this individual shipped horses to someone, either a government or horse dealer in Europe. I could get to a feasible profit motive if someone ‘over there’ was willing to pay for a boatload of horses of unknown ability, who could simply sell what wasn’t useful for meat. Or, maybe this individual just bragged of selling horses in enough bars around the west that the legend stuck in folklore and some believe it’s true. Just don’t have enough info for this to be at all compelling.
Purely anecdotal tidbit, I know that my Belgian grandfather, at the end of WWI and into the 20s, had an assigned horse that was European, not from the U.S., and this of course after all of the carnage. I don’t have time to go back to that 1928 reference but it did give numbers of horses sent to and returned from the war if I remember correctly. The U.S. government did furnish horses to Europe prior to U.S. entry into the war, but these were horses procured by the U.S. Army following the same requirements as if they were to be used by the U.S. Army.
