I'm hoping for goats.
I always wonder how biblical literalists interpret article like discoveries of Frozen Woolly Mammoths or unearthed skeletons of such.
We might asked how are Woolly Mammoths and elephants related? When did they last share a common ancestor? Are elephants descended from Woolly mammoths or a sister species? When did Woolly Mammoths walk the earth? What did they eat? Did humans hunt them? Did Neanderthals? etc.
And we have tools for figuring out these answers. But YEC's don't. They just have to try to fit the facts into their ancient ark story and make up how the ancestors of these animals got from Mount Ararat to all the places they appear to be native to today.
Clearly a creationist must be able to see that goat and sheep are more related than goats and dogs. And the DNA proves this as does the fact that they can create offspring with sheep but not dogs.
How does a biblical literalist explain this. Did god take some sheepish goatish ancestor on board and do super fast evolution to make these two different species or did he just poof out two separate but similar-enough-to-breed species and have them board the ark in pairs? These appear to be separate "kind" to people writing the bible since they have separate names for sheep and goats. And what about Kangaroos and wallabies which they didn't even seem to know about? And how did they get to Australia from Mount Ararat? Why are there no fossils of marsupials in the middle east?
I doubt that bible literalists agree on the answers to these questions.
I suspect you have to kill your curiosity to be a YEC (or be satisfied with farfetched explanations that aren't supported by any evidence.)