Question

Compare and contrast how buffalo were hunted on horseback and on foot.

Answer 1

The difference between horseback and on foot is on horseback it was much safer the on foot, also when you're on horseback, when you get closer to the target, it easier to kill. On horseback you can either use bow and arrow or a gun.when on horseback the hunter off it's back.this can cause injuries or death.Even if the rider had plenty of experience, reloading the gun in full gallop is difficult.On foot,a hunter would avoid being notice by a buffalo, the hunter would crawl or duck among the trees and branches. Also on foot, the hunter would be exact with the shot because they couldn't afford to waste the shot,if they missed they could scare the herd. They both would use shotgun, both are dangerous, both would have to approach the target.

Step-by-step explanation:

got it right on edge

Answer 2

Answer: The Hunt

Step-by-step explanation:

In “The Hunt” from the selection “Buffalo Hunt” it clearly states how the Indians or Native Americans hunt for buffalos.

Comparisons between Foot and Horse

1. Both method of hunting made use of bows and arrows

2. Both made use of spares

Contrast between Foot and Horse

1. One made use of horses for mobility during hunt.

2. One made use of bare foot during hunting.

This method of hunting was usually achieved by getting close to the herd of buffalos and attacking them either on foot ( creeping), or the use of horses with the aid of spears, bows and arrows one thing common amongst them was they shared same weapons during hunt.