I am ranch raised, have guided, ranched and been in the hunting business for years and I am still an avid team roper...
Mules are good and carry about 20% of their body weight, a horse can carry about 10%...This is dead weight, not a cowboy in a saddle, so the mule is stonger, the burro is even stronger than a mule, but burros are a pain to handle, they are just too stubborn to suit me at all...
I actually prefer horses as they are easier to be around as a rule, most mules have a flaw and you'll find it sooner or later. the other thing is I hate to get around Mule men, they are generally not well versed and not cowboys and loaded with BS about thier beloved animals....Both animals have good and bad traits, and its probably an individual thing more than a breed thing, but on the whole I will take a horse every time for packing or riding, they are simply smarter and more responsive and more capable of activity.
As to sure footedness the mule men always use this but its fallicy, sure footedness comes from where and how the animal was raised, if both are raised in the rough country then both do well. If they have never been shod then they have equally hard feet, but if you load them your better off to just keep them shod IMO. Once you shoe either then you have to continue to do so in most cases. Also since we pen our livestock these days and they are not constantly in the rocks for months at a time or they are in small grass pastures then the feet become soft and you need shoes.
The length of legs on horses and mules has to do with anything. The height and size of the animal determines the length of thier legs, and neither will charge uphill unless you failed to break them properly, and the same applies to downhill thats utter nonsence.
I like them both and use them both, and I don't waste my time in comparing them as a rule. I judge each animal on his own abilities and so it should be.
