Some creationists would disagree with you. "Strict" "young-earth" creationist generally also insist on the historicity and global extent of Noah's flood. In order to lend some measure of credibility (however inadequately in the view of skeptics) to the story of Noah's Ark, they must reduce the number of creatures to be loaded and cared for. They therefore suggest that only "kinds" were preserved by Noah, and that some of these "kinds" subsequently diversified (God forbid we should say "evolved") into extant species.
The Family of Equids, including horses, asses and zebras, is often used as an example of a possible "created kind," and the fact that hybridization is often possible between different species of equids is sometimes cited as evidence of this.
IOW even creationists recognize hybridization as suggestive of common descent.
I understand your point. Common descent <> macro evolution, however.