Riding Halls & Other Horse Related Buildings

[Kelton Oliver]

{i]Originally posted by Pat Holscher[/i]

He did reply accusing me of being a lawyer...


Pat

Is that a punishable offense in your state? [:o)]

[Pat Holscher]

Originally posted by John FitzgeraldI-70 passes through the center of our county, right through the Eagle River Valley. Everything along that corridor and up all the creeks is becoming totally suburbanized. The yuppies are building on every available patch of ground there. The rest of the county is agricultural.

We have 3 commissioners. The up valley yuppie, the down valley hick and a guy in the middle who will go either way, depending on his mood. There is a constant struggle between us hicks and the yuppies. They want scoccer fields, ball fields, and bike paths. We want riding arenas, event centers, and non-motorized trails.

I'm really surprised (and thankful) we got the new indoor arena.

John

"A good horse rides best for a good horseman"

We had a simliar controversy to the one noted above over an agricultural facility at the local community college. In that case the college had to seek a variance in order to build a structure were they would keep livestock for part of the year for their students.

It created an uproar. People who lived upwind were complaining that it would smell, in spite of the serious abatement program the college would have. And this in a town where people use to smell the refinery on still mornings and state it was "the smell of money."

Odd thing was, the college already had a facility nearby where they show livestock and teach horseshoeing and packing, and nobody even seems to take the slightest note of it.

The variance was granted.

Pat

[Pat Holscher]

Originally posted by Kelton Oliver

Originally posted by Pat Holscher

He did reply accusing me of being a lawyer...

Pat

Is that a punishable offense in your state? [:o)]

Offensive, apparently, but not punishable.

Pat

[Pat Holscher]

The neat item posted by Couvi on the Chicago NG Armory reminded me of this thread, so I'm bumping it up.

Here's the thread:

viewtopic.php?t=8495

[selewis]

http://www.salemweb.com/history/armory/story.shtml

[Trooper]

http://www.brickmania.com/gallery/EC.html

[john]

The Riding Hall at Ft. Meade,S.D. about 1939.
It still looks substantially as it appears here,though it is now used as a gymnasium.

[Pat Holscher]

The Riding Hall at Ft. Meade,S.D. about 1939.
It still looks substantially as it appears here,though it is now used as a gymnasium.

It looks like a gymnasium. I'd have guessed that what it was originally.

[Pat Holscher]

The current issue of Military Collector and Historian, the Journal of the Company of Military Historians, Vol. 60, No. 1, Spring 2008 has an article by Nancy L. Todd entitled "Historic Army National Guard Armories in New York State". This discusses New York's interesting armories, with illustrations included..

The text reveals that New York may be responsible for the use of the name "National Guard", as four companies of the New York militia came together under that name in 1806, taking the name from the Frency Garde Nationale de Paris.

[dimarcol]

Just an observation which I think I've mentioned before.

Here at Fort Leavenworth our old riding hall was converted into a Gymnasium in the 1950s. I think that was a pretty common practice on many of the old army posts.

What is interesting is that in the 1980s when they built a brand new second gymnasium on the post, they designed it to look like a riding hall from the outside! This included designing in the bricked over large doors inset with small man-size doors. So now we have two gyms that look like former riding halls, but only one that actually was.

[Pat Holscher]

What is interesting is that in the 1980s when they built a brand new second gymnasium on the post, they designed it to look like a riding hall from the outside! This included designing in the bricked over large doors inset with small man-size doors. So now we have two gyms that look like former riding halls, but only one that actually was.

That's just bizarre!

[Pat Holscher]

I don't think this old armory is related to cavalry in any fashion, but it's an interesting example of the fortress type armory that was once characteristic of National Guard armories. This is the National Guard Armory in Yale, Oklahoma.





This building is probably also symbolic of the decline of small towns in the US. Yale is a small town, quite near other small towns in the region, and about 50 miles from Tulsa. It's a shadow of its former self, by observation, and at one time was busy enough that it had a National Guard unit.

[Couvi]

Marlow, OK, suffers the same problem and the armory is being converted to a library.

[Pat Holscher]

Marlow, OK, suffers the same problem and the armory is being converted to a library.

When I tried to find some data on this armory, I got hits for the one in Stillwell which is on the National Registry of Historic Sites, and which was built in 1937, also as a WPA project. Stillwell is about 15 miles from Yale.

I wonder what sized unit these armories houses? They are built like fortresses, but they're really not very big. Company sized?

[Mike Miller]

Having read a little about the NG, armories in small midwest and western communities during the interwar period often had less than a company since the local population could not often support a full company. They met one night a week and 2 weeks annual training during the summer, not the one weekend a month we now see. This was better for rural farmers and ranchers. People didn't travelr due to poor roads back then. National Guard units served as a great social center in many towns and were a source of supplemental income. In the 70's my first company sized NG unit in South Dakota was still divided between two communities half a state away from each other, and most units were also divided similarly. Didn't provide much unit cohesion or combined training except summer camp. Very similar to the 20's and 30's. The units located in more urban areas obviously had more men to draw from and could support company sized and larger units and transportation over poor rural roads wasn't a hinderance.

[Mike Miller]

Just did a quick scan about armories and found that there is a movement to close down many smaller ones throughout the U.S. The Feds are wanting to lower costs and forcing consolidation of armories and reserve centers. Many are old and need replacing and/or were cohabited with other local organizations. I am understanding of the financial picture but then the need for facilities spread out for support of disaster relief and other untold security issues makes me concerned. Having a local armory was always comforting but is there still a need? The San Francisco area had several active military sites when the last earthquake hit and now almost none (one airbase). The active and reserve units (mine was one) and facilities were able to provide quick support but the next time I doubt there will be enough. Any opinions?

[Pat Holscher]

Just did a quick scan about armories and found that there is a movement to close down many smaller ones throughout the U.S. The Feds are wanting to lower costs and forcing consolidation of armories and reserve centers. Many are old and need replacing and/or were cohabited with other local organizations. I am understanding of the financial picture but then the need for facilities spread out for support of disaster relief and other untold security issues makes me concerned. Having a local armory was always comforting but is there still a need? The San Francisco area had several active military sites when the last earthquake hit and now almost none (one airbase). The active and reserve units (mine was one) and facilities were able to provide quick support but the next time I doubt there will be enough. Any opinions?

Not only is there a movement, it's been happening. Here, over the past 25 years, the armories in the smaller towns have been shutting down. When that occurs here, moreover, it can mean that the Guard has no presence at all in an entire region of the state.

For example, way back when Rawlins Wyoming, which is not particularly close to anything else, had an armory and a Guard presence in which the troops who drilled there were the communications section of the HHB, 3d 49th. The HHB drilled in Casper, about 120 miles away. Commo just drilled by itself usually. That was somewhat odd, if you think about it, in that it made a section of the HHB unusually tight knit, when it was party of a larger battery, but it also gave Rawlins a Guard unit with vehicles, etc., if the need was there. That armory was closed however, some two or so decades ago, and now there is no Guard presence at all in that region of the State. The armory in Lander, the nearest one, was also closed. The Guard has recently announced the armory in Cody will be closed. I believe the armory in Thermopolis has already closed.

Effectively that means, here, that only a few significant cities are going to have a Guard presence. That means the Guard is very far from many areas of the state. As a practical matter, it also means that many who would have joined it, from smaller towns, will not. The end result will be a state National Guard which is effectively the NG of a few towns and cities.

[Mike Miller]

Maybe trend is a better term. I found that South Dakota was closing (6) or terminating agreements with some dual use armories. Many other states in the Midwest and West have been consolidating and as you pointed out maybe too much. The belief from DC is that guardsmen will travel great distances of over 100 miles to get to a drill. Costs how much in gas and then lodging for a weekend? Can't believe that Adj. Gens. have not been more vocal about this but they tend to follow the political line and not point out what is contrary to policy even if it is not well thought out. Maybe the return of more robust State Militias, not under Federal whims, will come about to fill in the some of the gaps. Just to keep the armories and store supplies in case they are needed.

[Pat Holscher]

In researching the 115th Cavalry some year ago I ran across an item about a section drilling in Glenrock Wyoming, which is about halfway between Casper and Douglas, and which has always been a very small town. Smaller than Yale now is.

That seemed odd to me at the time, but in considering the recent elements of this thread, it now seems to fit a pattern. Transportation was much poorer prior to WWII, and apparently the Guard even had some sections in tiny towns.

It really makes me wonder what the mustered unit was like, in the instances of Federalization for war. You'd have a certain section, such as the MG section, all from one small town. Tight units, I'm sure, but in some ways, that's bad.

[Mike Miller]

Had some experience with dispersed units in Germany where many of our companies were split up across Bavaria. My own company had two platoons in Augsburg, each with a squad in Garmisch and Bad Tolz. One platoon in Munich had a squad in Berchtegarten and a two man detail at Lke Chiemsee. Worked out fine with easier transportation and weekly visits by leadership. When we went to the field unit cohesion came about quickly since the outlying personnel knew their leaders.

I would suppose that the NG units had good familiarity with their chain of command which probabky didn't change very much as people stayed in the units longer and at the same ranks. This familiarity between officers, NCO and troops was a problem during mobilization and was addressed by the Army. National Guard unit personnel were shuffled when possible. Many of the senior officers and NCOs were found to be over age and released from active duty or reassigned to noncombat duties in the states.The release of officers was of course seen as political to put more regular army officers into command slots. When sent to specialist schools many soldiers and leaders were not returned to the same unit but other units still in the same NG division. The first NG units that were activated did not get some of these benefits of shuffling. As you pointed out, towns from where the units came from could lose a significant number of their male population if the unit was in combat and did suffer high casualties. This is what the war department wanted to avoid.

Still love the pictures of the old armories. I have visited the site of Ft. Meade, SD several times and find it still a nice piece of nostalgia. Another great site is Ft. A. Lincoln by Bismarck, ND which has some restoration of Custer's house and a barracks and stable. Two other sites there include an older infantry fort and another infantry fort by the airport with buildings from the same time period as Ft. Meade.