# Talk:Florida Cracker Horse

This review is transcluded from Talk:Florida Cracker Horse/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Sasata (talk) 14:14, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I'll have comments up soon. Sasata (talk) 14:14, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

"and continued to be used by Florida cowboys, known as "crackers" until the 1930s." They were known as something else after the 1930s?
Tweaked the punctuation on this a bit. Dana boomer (talk) 20:48, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
"The base genetics of the breed" How is base genetics different from regular genetics?
Changed to "foundation genetics", hope that helped.  Montanabw(talk) 03:37, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
seems to me the info about height is repeated unnecessarily in the History section
Removed. Dana boomer (talk) 20:48, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
"During the American Civil War (1861–1865), both sides purchased large amounts of beef" both sides of what? (I know the answer, but don't think we should assume all readers will)
Changed to "both belligerents". Does this work better? Dana boomer (talk) 20:48, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Sure. Sasata (talk) 21:32, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
link to purebred?
Done.  Montanabw(talk) 03:37, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
according to this source, the FC contained the blood of the North African Barb.
comment:  The Barb is the same as "North African Barb"  -- and was part of the foundation stock of the Colonial Spanish horse, (most sources say Andalusian, Barb and Arabian) so it's implied.  The source also is wrong in that the Jennet was never a "war horse" (see Horses in the Middle Ages. The Jennet was actually the gaited horse breed used for travel, not combat.  Overall, the excerpts you provide suggest to me that this book is a poor source; the author didn't do her history homework. (It's also a bit annoying and imprecise that she refers to the lter English settlers as "white" -- as if Spanish people were not European.  Sloppy, sloppy...) Montanabw(talk) 03:30, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
Why no mention of the alternative names in the article text? Also, the previous source says it's "Chickasaw", not "Chicksaw"; it also mentions the name "Marsh Tackie"
Note below, the Marsh Tacky is a different breed, though of related ancestry. Fixed spelling of Chickasaw.  The rest is Dana's call, not mine.  Montanabw(talk) 03:30, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
The Carolina Marsh Tacky is a different breed, as Montana says - the sources that say they're the same breed are using outdated information, as we now have DNA studies proving they're related but different. I thought it would be redundant to mention the names in both the infobox and the text, but if you disagree I can easily add them in to the text. Dana boomer (talk) 20:48, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
I always thought that there shouldn't be anything in the infobox that's not mentioned in the article... perhaps I am wrong about this? Sasata (talk) 21:32, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
no mention of  the single-footed gait known in the South as a "coon rack"? Come on, this is vital information! :) (also mentioned here) and here)
All of these "singlefooting" gaits are simply lateral ambling gaits, they come up with a lot of fancy names to try and prove that one breed is VERY different from the other, but other than the fox trot (a diagonal four beat ambling gait) they all are 4-beat, lateral and either synchronous (1-2-3-4) or asynchronous (1-2, 3-4); and that's everything that varies other than speed (the rack and its variants -- the largo, the tolt, etc. -- are fast, the others are slow)  and the style of leg action.  Hence, the term "coon rack" is absolutely meaningless absent some description that goes beyond that of a lateral ambling gait.  (Sorry to rant, I get in trouble in all the gaited breed articles for pointing out that the gaits are actually remarkably similar...(hee hee!)   Montanabw(talk) 03:30, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
this source says they are used today for "Team penning, team roping, trail riding, endurance riding, and as mounts for historical reenactments."
See note below, existing text says something similar...  Montanabw(talk) 03:30, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
this source (which also uses "Marsh Tackies") says they are characterized by "their extremely smooth gait"
Every single gaited breed likes to point out that their breed has an "extremely smooth gait."  Ambling gaits are supposed to be smooth, that's why people like them.  They ALL are smooth.  (lateral ambling gaits being slightly smoother than diagonal ambling gaits, but other than that, the rest is breed propaganda).  Montanabw(talk) 03:39, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
is it worthy of inclusion that one FC horse lived to be 46?
While uncommon, horses living into their 40s are not unheard of in many breeds. The oldest known horse lived to be 62, so this horse isn't even approaching the record. If you really want me to, I can include it, but I don't really think it's all that noteworthy. Dana boomer (talk) 20:48, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Sasata, this is Dana's article, so I'll let her answer most of your questions.  However the Cracker Horse is somewhat different from the Marsh Tacky, which was the horse developed in the Carolinas.  They have similar ancestry (the Colonial Spanish horse, but developed for slightly different needs.  I'll fix a couple minor things.  I don't know what Dana's sources say, but IMHO to imagine any gaited horse being used for team roping has got to be "our breed can do everything including leaping tall buildings in a single bound" PR stuff!  (Team roping horses, particularly headers, need to be well over 1000 pounds to even think about holding a steer!)  They also might be used for endurance riding, but they sure as heck aren't winning; none of the gaited horse breeds do, not over 100 mile courses, anyway. I'm all for versatility, but no breed can do it all -- I mean the draft horse crowd likes to claim their critters do barrel racing, and have the photos to prove it, but they also look ridiculous doing so and can't beat the breeds bred for it.  Sorry if I'm ranting, I just have a raw nerve on that issue.  Form to function, form to function...sigh.  Montanabw(talk) 03:02, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
No problem, I'm just spewing out stuff I find in Google Books, I'll let you guys decide if it's crap or not :) Sasata (talk) 03:24, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
LOL!  Okey dokey!  Montanabw(talk) 03:39, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
I think Montana and I have fixed or replied to all of your queries. I agree about the gait stuff - all of the single-foot ambles are basically the same (although you'll never get breed registries to admit that), and every registry likes to claim that they have the smoothest breed known to man. Montana is also correct on their uses - gaited horses are often used in endurance riding by people just out to enjoy the ride, but they don't win. You want an Arabian for that, although Anglo-Arabs, Mustangs and a few Thoroughbreds also hit the top ranks. Their uses are already mentioned in the Characteristics section, although I've tweaked it to make it more obvious that they're not used extensively for western events - you generally don't see gaited horses in these events, and heavier horses are better for the roping events, although the light, cat-footed horses are more often seen in cutting events. This is probably way more than you want to know, but... Let us know if any of our answers don't satisfy or if there are more issues. Dana boomer (talk) 20:48, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
While I don't disagree with what you're saying about the gait (and indeed, would not be in a position to anyways) the fact is that several sources refer to the "coon rack" (even Dr. Molly), and I think it should be at least mentioned in the article; some people may come to this article specifically for this information. If you have a reliable source that reiterates your gait analysis, that could come right after it :)
Allright, I've added a sentence on the coon rack and repeated the information from the infobox in the body of the article. Dana boomer (talk) 02:15, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
Ok, almost done: just fix the seven dabs, and can you check out the licensing of the cow picture File:Florida Cracker cow and calf.JPG ? I can't see on the website where permission is explicitly given to use the picture in the manner that the uploader indicated, and it would probably be better if there was a link directly to the page the image is from (rather than just the main website). Sasata (talk) 02:56, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

I've fixed the dab links and replaced the image with one that has a proper license. I couldn't even find the existing one on the source website - they must have mixed things around since that image was uploaded. Dana boomer (talk) 13:23, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
We're good to go, passing the article now. Sasata (talk) 15:27, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Wondering if the sources calling the FL Cracker a "Chickasaw" are wrong.  Found an article on the Chickasaw horse, sounds like a totally different breed. http://www.chickasaw.net/history_culture/index_681.htm   I'd not change this article absent some source comparing the two, but maybe if the Chickasaw article ever gets created the ref in this one might want to be tweaked.  Just for down the road. No biggie now. Montanabw(talk) 01:52, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

I think there might be a little truth in both sides. According to Dutson, the original Chickasaw horses went extinct after assisting in the creation of both the Florida Cracker and the Quarter Horse. Today's Chickasaw is a recreation and approximation of the old breed, as the old lines are gone. Other sources confirm this, and say that although the new breed resembles the old one, it doesn't actually descend from it. Add this to the fact that I can't even find a mention of the "Chickasaw Horse Association" still existing, and I don't think that a separate article is really warranted. Note that the article you linked above is from 1977. Perhaps a mention in this article - something along the lines of:
"The original Chickasaw horse, bred by the Chickasaw Indians using horses captured from De Soto's expedition, went extinct after being used to create the Florida Cracker Horse.[ref] Some sources still use the Chickasaw name to describe the Florida Cracker Horses of today.[ref][ref][ref] In the 1970s there was a surge of interest in recreating the Chickasaw using horses bearing strong resemblances to the original breed,[ref] but this has since died out and the breed association that was created appears to no longer exist."
Or similar? Dana boomer (talk) 21:07, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
That could work and I'd support that.  Maybe we could create Chickasaw as a redirect and put it into the List of Horse breeds as "see Florida Cracker Horse"  Then, should someone disagree with your analysis, they can just find the source material. The other possibility would be to do the article as an extinct breed, like the Narragansett Pacer and etc. It would be short, but could cross link from Quarter Horse and Florida Cracker.   Montanabw(talk) 20:54, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
Finally got around to adding this in. I did it as a new subsection of the history section, kind of like with the "strains and subtypes" sections we have in the Andalusian and Lusitano articles. This will allow it to be expanded or easily split off if new sources are found, and the article is not so large (only 13 kb right now, I think!) that it can't take the extra weight. Dana boomer (talk) 13:40, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
:Should we put in a redirect, and would it make any sense to add "Chickasaw horse -- See Florida Cracker Horse" in the list of horse breeds?  (Thinking of this due to the new creation of the Choctaw horse article by a newbie)... Montanabw(talk) 16:53, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:American Paint horse which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 17:30, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

In the article it is stated that the origin of the word "Cracker" is due to cowboys cracking their whips.  This is contrary to the Wikipedia article on Florida Crackers that clearly states that the origin of the word comes from an older English anachronistic usage of this word indicating someone who was loud and boastful and that the word "Cracker" was applied to early remote settlers of the lower English colonies.  The word is used in this context by Shakespeare and others much earlier.  This misconception of the relationship of this word to whipping is completely erroneous and needs to be purged from Wikipedia and other sources.   If no one corrects this I will within the next few weeks.  But before I do I would like to see a consensus on the history of it's usage which while I am certain of what I said is true, there are still some who claim there a third, alternate etymology.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.144.213.97 (talk) 14:41, 24 May 2015 (UTC) 

On page 34 of Cracker : The Cracker Culture in Florida History by Dana Ste. Claire, [978-0-8130-3028-9], published by University Press of Florida, it states, "Early on in America, the term came to represent a host of undesirable characteristics---dishonest, shiftless, and insipid to name a few. Whatever 'cracker' may have originally implied, the term was well worn by the time [Florida] cowhunters began to herd their cattle through the Florida wilds in the early 1800s."
Previous pages of that chapter, beginning on page 27, offer numerous, alternative origins for the term cracker, reaching back to 1509. Under a section titled Whip Cracker, the author writes, "Florida Crackers nowadays spend a great deal of time trying to persuade themselves and others that the term cracker originated from the sound of whips cracking over cattle..." That section ends with "Cowhunter historian Joyce Peters offers an interesting insight on the luxury of owning whips.... 'Those poor people (Crackers) had no leather for shoes, much less cow whips, which promoters are using to explain the term cracker." Thomas R. Fasulo (talk) 15:13, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Excellent point. A rewording (at the least) is in order. Your source looks solid. With the other uses of "cracker" included in Florida cracker, I'm trying to decide how to best approach it. Detailed discussion probably is best kept in the Florida cracker and Georgia cracker articles since this is the article about the horse breed. A less absolute statement is appropriate. I'll float, "The origin of the term cracker is unclear. One proposed origin is that it derived from whip cracker in reference to the cracking of whips used to drive cattle, but the term was in use before cattle drives started in the 1800s." I'm not happy with this wording. I don't feel it flows on its own within the paragraph (too much "crack" among other problems), but I hope you can see where I'm trying to go. BiologicalMe (talk) 16:08, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Florida Cracker Horse. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101214030002/http://chickasaw.net/history_culture/index_681.htm to http://www.chickasaw.net/history_culture/index_681.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:41, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

"Country of Origin" in the article's infobox ought to be simply "United States".  Unlike the United Kingdom, whose large constituent regions (England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland) retain the status of "countries", US States are simply "states" (although some American states are larger than the entire United Kingdom in area).   
Since Florida isn't a country (West Florida was a republic for 74 days in 1810) it can't be a "country of origin".  This is common enough knowledge, it doesn't need a supporting citation and I'll fix it now under WP:BOLD.  Hat tip to my wife, the horsey girl, for the catch. loupgarous (talk) 03:46, 23 December 2019 (UTC)