Thanks, Felix! That was quite the Ha'DIbaHQeD lesson! Another major difference between sarks and horses, from what you've mentioned, is that a sark is omnivorous. And what with their variety of coat colors, much like in the old Wizard of Oz movie, one could have a "Sargh of a different color"!

Klingon for the Galactic Traveler describes a {Sargh} ("sark") as

"an animal somewhat resembling a Terran horse, both in appearance and in that Klingons >(generally individually) often ride on the animal's back"

In the TNG episode "Pen Pals", Picard had the following exchange with the holodeck >computer:

PICARD: Computer, programme the holodeck for a woodland setting, with a bridle path and an >appropriate mount. COMPUTER: Type of mount? Andorian Zabathu, Klingon Sark, ... PICARD: Horse. Earth horse.

According to The Starfleet Survival Guide, these beasts of burden are "omnivorous quadruped >equine" lifeforms that "are similar in size and behavior to Terran horses and Talnerian >riding lizards". They stand "roughly 2.5 to 2.9 meters tall at the shoulder, and mature adults weigh in >excess of 340 kilograms". They have "coarse, shaggy coats of fur" in a variety of colors.

They can accelerate from a standstill to speeds greater than 80 km/h in less than 12 >seconds.

An important difference between sarks and horses is that sarks have two straight, sharp >horns that can extend more than a meter in front of their heads.

They also have spiked, flail-like tails.

Males are known to be fiercely territorial, and approaching a female may enrage them. They >have been known to disembowel people in a single pass.

In other words, I'm sure you could describe a horse as a {tera' Sargh}, and I believe many >in the community do. That being said, I wouldn't be surprised if a Klingon would describe >it as a {Sarghqoq} when they see it.

//loghaD