CHAPTER VI
Supply and Equipment
The Army Veterinary Servicewas not a supply service in the sense that it purchased, stored, distributed, orotherwise handled professional veterinary equipment and supplies for the Army;it was a consumer. Nor was the Army Veterinary Servicematerially involved (that is, as final approving authority) in the planning forits own supply; however, some developmental studies were undertaken. Thesematters originated with the supply activities of the Medical Department as awhole. Individual Veterinary Corps officers and units requisitioned for theirsupplies in the same manner that the Medical Corps and Dental Corps obtainedtheir supplies; their needs, such as for certain drugs, surgical dressings, andinstruments, were often furnished from the same stocks of Medical Departmentsupplies. In fact, the Army Veterinary Service had only little more to do withMedical Department supply than it had to do with the trucks, communicationsequipment, or weapons that were obtained and were used daily by each veterinaryunit and detachment.
Medical Department supplyactivities, at the level of the Surgeon General's Office, were administered bythe Finance and Supply Division-the latter being reorganized in 1942 into theSupply Service. This administrative office organization was assigned functionsand had the same degree of responsibility with regard to medical supply thatwere comparable to those of the Veterinary Division, Surgeon General's Office,regarding its supervision of professional veterinary services of the Army. Onmatters pertaining to veterinary supply, the Veterinary Division acted asadviser-in a capacity that was comparable to the advisory responsibilities, realor assumed, it had to the Personnel Division, Surgeon General's Office, withregard to veterinary personnel. Requirements planning, the professional opinionson the efficacy of supply items which were to be procured, and therecommendations on the distribution of medical equipment and supplies toveterinary detachments and units comprised the major advisory duties. Inaddition, the Veterinary Division, Surgeon General's Office, cooperated withthe Operations Service in developing equipment tables for field units and with avariety of agencies and service branches which were particularly concerned withequipment and supplies, research, and development. For example, there wasveterinary officer membership on The Surgeon General's Medical DepartmentTechnical Committee; the Army Committee for Insect and Rodent Control; theSubcommitteeon Biologicals, Drug Resources Advisory Committee of the Army?Navy MunitionsBoard; the Army Service Forces (later, War Department) Inspection AdvisoryCouncil; and the Provisions and the Feeds and Forage Technical Committees of theFederal Specifications Board, Bureau of Supply,
120
U.S. Treasury Department. All of these were concernedin some manner or other with supply to the Army. The Veterinary Division,Surgeon General's Office, also cooperated in the research and development ofcertain Quartermaster Corps and Chemical Warfare Service equipment andsupplies. It must be mentioned, however, that no Veterinary Corps officer wasdetailed to full-time duty with the Supply Service, Surgeon General's Office,although at least one such assignment was made in World War I, and after thattime mobilization planning prior to World War II had projected such assignments.In 1940-41, however, two veterinary officers were trained, presumably for suchan assignment, at the Army Industrial College, Washington, D.C.; one waseventually assigned to the St. Louis Medical Depot, St. Louis, Mo.,(1) where nearly all Medical Department itemspeculiar to the Army Veterinary Service were stored and from which Army-widedistribution was made.
The costs of MedicalDepartment materiel initially supplied to equip veterinary units which sawservice in the oversea theaters varied: For a veterinary food inspectiondetachment, $109; for the veterinary evacuation hospital, $2,078; and for theveterinary general hospital, $9,013 (2). Station veterinary hospitals for the Zone of Interior could be equippedat costs in Medical Department materiel ranging between $1,770 for one of10-animal patient capacity and $7,263 for a hospital of 150-animal patientcapacity. Of course, if the total costs to initially equip these hospitals wereto be considered, then one must add also the equipment and supplies which werefurnished by the Chemical Warfare Service, Corps of Engineers, OrdnanceDepartment, Quartermaster Corps, and Signal Corps.
MEDICAL DEPARTMENTPROCUREMENT AND DISTRIBUTION
At the onset of World WarII, the actual procurement of Medical Department equipment and supplies wasdivided between the New York General Depot, N.Y., which had a Medical Section,and the St. Louis Medical Depot. A few items were purchasedalso by the medical depot sections of general depots which were located inSan Francisco, Calif., and San Antonio, Tex. Of these, St. Louis, was, and continued to be, throughout the war,the central location for handling materiel solely classified for veterinary use(that is, class 8).
Undeniably, shortages inMedical Department materiel were encountered by the Army Veterinary Services inthe Zone of Interior, particularly during 1940-42, but, temporary as they mayhave been, there was no report that professional veterinary foodinspection and animal services were seriously affected. Overseas, in certaintheaters, shortages in Medical Department materiel existed which did affectthe Army Veterinary Service.
Throughout the MedicalDepartment supply system-from procurement districts through the depots to thecamp medical supply officers-routinely, there was no real veterinary activity.The veterinary detachments and units
121
made their needs known, byrequisitions, to the local medical supply officers and were only responsible,pursuant to the regulations of the Army, for submitting the requisitions,properly caring for the property which they received, and for practicing supplyeconomy. At various times, their requisition demands were processed through theMedical Department supply system to the Veterinary Division, Surgeon General'sOffice, for review before procurement and distribution were effected. Thelatter situation occurred whenever the requisitions called for new (ornonstandard) items or for seemingly unusual quantities of items which werealready being handled by the Medical Department supply system. These demandsarose when veterinary detachments and units were expanded into new areas ofactivities; for example, the care and treatment of Army dogs and signal pigeons.Actually, only a few requisitions concerning the professional care and treatmentof these animals were favorably reviewed within the Veterinary Division, SurgeonGeneral's Office, because there were so few items specifically required forwhich standard items could not be substituted.
MEDICAL DEPARTMENT SUPPLYITEMS
Nearly all of the equipmentand supplies professionally used by the Army Veterinary Service were provided bythe Medical Department in the same manner that professional supplies came intothe hands of Medical Corps and Dental Corps officers. In fact, after 1921 whenthe separate veterinary supply tables were discontinued, many items in commonuse by these three professional corps were grouped together for procurement,storage, and distribution.
One class of MedicalDepartment equipment and supply items (class 8) was procured, handled, andissued for the use of the Army Veterinary Service only. Its 164 items (as of theJanuary 1941 edition of the supply catalog) were those that had no otherMedical Department use. The cataloging ofthe veterinary class of equipment and supplies was not greatly changed during World War II; a few items were deleted and some others were transferred asthe responsibility of the Quartermaster Corps to supply, but, on the whole,nothing new of major importance was added. This revealed that the supplyplanning in peacetime generally was such that actual veterinary supply was notadversely affected or delayed, as had occurred in World War I, when studies onrequirements and on an up-to-date compilation of a veterinary supply table werenot begun until after war mobilization had started.
Small Unit Assemblies
In order to facilitate theirhandling and issue, a great many of the individual items were assembled intokits and chests. Some of these small
122
unit assemblies wereintended for supply to veterinary personnel and facilities operating in the Zoneof Interior and to units deployed in the communications zone of a wartheater. A number of other small unit assemblies were developed for veterinaryfield service. The weight, size, and cost data of these are shown in table 15.
TABLE 15.-Weight, size, and price data of veterinary small unit assemblies
Item number |
| Weight | Size | Price |
Pounds | Cubic feet | |||
8 019 000 | Case, hypodermic tablets, veterinary | 0.50 | 0.01 | $4.00 |
8 020 000 | Case, mallein test | 4.25 | .33 | 48.00 |
8 021 000 | Case, meat and dairy hygiene inspection | 10.00 | .55 | 30.85 |
8 023 000 | Case, pocket, veterinary | 1.50 | .02 | 18.80 |
8 024 000 | Case, post mortem, veterinary | 10.50 | .25 | 21.35 |
8 029 000 | Chest, clipping | 51.50 | 2.84 | 45.00 |
7 794 000 | Dispensing set, veterinary | 150.00 | 13.00 | 29.30 |
9 713 000 | Kit, veterinary officer's | 8.75 | .63 | 31.00 |
9 712 500 | Kit, veterinary noncommissioned officer's | 9.40 | .48 | 11.50 |
9 805 000 | Case, instrument, veterinary noncommissioned officer's | 1.25 | .02 | 7.50 |
9 713 500 | Kit, veterinary private's | 7.67 | .37 | 9.15 |
9 805 700 | Case, instrument, veterinary private's | .25 | .01 | 3.00 |
9 802 000 | Case, dental, veterinary | 35.00 | .70 | 110.00 |
9 803 000 | Case, foot, veterinary | 8.00 | .25 | 33.50 |
9 804 000 | Case, forceps, hemostatic, veterinary | 1.25 | .04 | 25.00 |
9 805 000 | Case, general operating, veterinary | 13.00 | .49 | 113.30 |
9 806 000 | Case, stomach and rectal, veterinary | 12.00 | .60 | 6.75 |
9 807 000 | Chest, MD No. 80 | 155.00 | 5.00 | 141.00 |
9 808 000 | Chest, MD No. 81 | 160.00 | 5.00 | 50.00 |
9 812 200 | Chest, veterinary pack A | 59.00 | 1.80 | 37.00 |
9 812 500 | Chest, veterinary pack B | 60.00 | 1.80 | 34.75 |
9 814 000 | Chest, restraint, veterinary | 84.00 | 4.25 | 94.45 |
9 815 000 | Chest, restraint, veterinary, supplemental | 94.00 | 4.22 | 66.25 |
9 816 000 | Surgical dressing set, veterinary | 80.00 | 4.00 | 38.25 |
9 815 400 | Gas casualty set, veterinary | 165.00 | 5.00 | 143.75 |
Sources: (1) Army Service Forces Catalog,MED 3, 1 Mar. 1944. (2) War Department Supply Bulletin, SB 8-1, 9 Nov. 1944.
In parallel with thedevelopment of a medical kit for testing the Army's water supplies for possiblecontamination by chemical warfare agents, the Medical Research Laboratory, ChemicalWarfareCenter, Edgewood Arsenal, Md., in December 1944 initiated a project on a fieldkit which could be used for similarly testing the Army's food supplies. ByFebruary 1945, the kit assembly was approved (or standardized) by Headquarters,Army Service Forces; during May 1945, it was included as an item of regularMedical Department supply and was made available to a large number of militaryunits, including those of the Army Veterinary Service. It consisted of the
123
FIGURE 6.-Food testing kitfor detecting chemical warfare agent contamination of foods.
kind of reagents that wereuseful in conducting simple tests for the detection of mustard gas, nitrogenmustards, cyanogenic agents, and the arsenical smokes and blister gascontamination in foods (fig. 6).
Biologicals
The procurement anddistribution of biologicals by the Medical Department supply system wereclosely supervised by the Veterinary Division, Surgeon General's Office,probably to a more exacting degree than any other group of Medical Departmentmateriel used by the Army Veterinary Service. During 1942, the VeterinaryDivision, Surgeon General's Office, entered into regular meetings of theSubcommittee on Biologicals of the Drug Resources Advisory Committee, Army-NavyMunitions Board. At these meetings, that part of the Nation'sindustry which produced biologicals was surveyed as to its capacity to satisfymilitary requirements for biologicals; later, this planning was conducted incooperation with the Army Veterinary School, Army Medical Center, Washington,D.C., on request of the Requirements Division, Army Service Forces. The actualprocurement of biologicals involved both the output from Medical Departmentlaboratories of certain items and the purchase of others from commercialsources. At the onset of World War II,
124
the biological productsitemized in the Medical Department Supply Catalog included:
From commercial sourcesthrough depots:
Antianthrax serum
Anthrax spore vaccine (intradermic)
Tetanus antitoxin
From Army Veterinary School, Army Medical Center:
Antigens: bovine infectiousabortion, glanders, and equine infectious abortion (for complement-fixationtests)
Mallein (intradermic )
Tuberculin (intradermic)
Vaccine, equine strangles
Vaccine, equine infectiousabortion
From corps area medical laboratories:
Vaccine, autogenous, veterinary
At this time, however,little use was being made of equine strangles vaccine, and it was soon removedfrom Medical Department supply; the same was true for the laboratory testantigen for bovine infectious abortion. There were several additionalbiologicals, some in common use in the Army, but they were not itemized untillater. These included equine encephalomyelitis vaccine-improved, produced, anddistributed by the ArmyVeterinarySchool after the late 1930's-and tetanus toxoid ofcommercial manufacture. The former, appearing first in the supply catalog in1942, was used in the highly successful program to protect military horses andmules from equine encephalomyelitis which was occurring in enzootic form eachyear in the United States (fig. 7). The tetanus toxoid appeared in regularsupply channels at the same time, but actually it was used earlier in 1939, ina new program to confer a permanent type of immunity against tetanus in a fewselected Army animals. The toxoid, however, did not entirely replace tetanusantitoxin which was used whenever a serious wound injury was treated. During1943, the diagnostic antigens for conducting the tube and the plateagglutination tests for bovine contagious abortion were added to the supplycatalog.
The manufacture of a fewveterinary biologicals by the Medical Department was continued or revitalizedin World War II or whenever commercial or other sources could not fully satisfyArmy requirements. Economy in production and distribution was a factor in theseactivities, but far more important than this was the training it offeredveterinary laboratory officers. Certain production procedures which were coveredby patent held by a manufacturer of equine encephalomyelitis vaccine wererecognized by the Army VeterinarySchool in its production and improvement of thatvaccinal biological for military use; the manufacturer granted license to theArmy to use the patented techniques. Aside from the few mentioned, veterinarybiologicals generally were procured from commercial sources.
Actually, there were manymore kinds of biologicals needed and used by the Army Veterinary Service thanwere itemized as available through regular Medical Department supply channels.The itemized ones conceivably were
125
FIGURE 7.-Biologicalproduction, Army Veterinary School, Army Medical Center, Washington, D.C.
sufficient for theveterinary services with Army horses and mules, but many others were neededand were obtained for the professional care and treatment of Army dogs, signalpigeons, animal pets belonging to military organizations and personnel,military farm livestock, and the civilian animals which temporarily came underdirect military jurisdiction. In regard to the civilian animals, it should beunderstood that the establishment of civil affairs and military governmentorganization and of civilian aid supply was usually delayed and that theplanning for these animals was conducted at levels of military administration(and with a degree of secretiveness) far removed from the veterinary services inthe task forces where the civilian animal populations in liberated, captured,and occupied areas during World War II, particularly in the Pacific theaters,were first encountered. Therefore, the biologicals needed for these groups ofanimals were procured usually through local purchases made by depots and medicalsupply officers; sometimes they were actually obtained in foreign countries, ifavailable and if the local situation was one of emergency. Among the biologicalsmost commonly needed were rabies vaccine, anti-canine-distemper serum andvirus, pigeonpox vaccine, anti-hog-cholera serum and virus, and variousbiologicals for the diagnosis or control of the other serious diseases oflivestock (not excluding brucellosis, erysipelas, blackleg, leptospirosis,and salmonellosis). In
126
1943, camp medical supplyofficers in the Zone of Interior were authorized to procure biologicals for theprotection of Army dogs against rabies and canine distemper.
Difficulties in theveterinary supply of biologicals were encountered with the short life of viablevaccinal agents; also, there were delays in receiving requisitioned supplies,but these delays more frequently arose when the supply depots or supplyofficers were not fully advised of the specific biological needed, the quantity(dose or vials), and the exact reasons for needing them. There is no doubt thatveterinary requisitions were at times as badly written as the scribbledprescriptions handed into corner drugstores in civilian life. In their advisoryrelationship to Medical Department supply officers overseas, veterinaryofficers advised against the introduction of specific viable biologicals intoareas which were free of the particular disease or which regulated against theimportation or use of such agents.
Professional Books andJournals
Until 1943, there was littlesupply by the Medical Department of veterinary professional books andperiodicals (or journals). A book allowance was established during 1942 forhospital libraries in the Zone of Interior, but the books were too few in numberand generally were not of the subject matter more urgently needed by veterinaryofficers. Then, in July 1943, the Surgeon General's Office announced a procedurefor the supply of 46 kinds of books to the offices of service commandveterinarians, station veterinary detachments, veterinary laboratories andtraining schools, and to the Army Veterinary Service inside of depots, marketcenters, remount area headquarters, dog training centers, and ports; eachfacility was furnished the books that were most needed according to itsactivities.
Unit Equipment Assemblages
To facilitate the deliveryof functional equipment to new veterinary organizations and units, particularlyin their preparations for oversea deployment, their Medical Department andother technical service items of equipment and supplies were grouped togetherinto unit assemblages. Earlier assemblages of Medical Department technicalequipment and supplies were compiled from War Department approved tables ofallowances and from tables of equipment for the specific units that werepromulgated later. As of January 1941, the Medical Department Supply Catalogitemized six veterinary unit assemblages: Veterinary Dispensary Equipment(Zone of Interior), Veterinary Pack Equipment (Cavalry), VeterinaryConvalescent Hospital (1,000-animal), Veterinary Evacuation Hospital(250-animal), Veterinary General Hospital (500-animal), and Veterinary StationHospital (150-animal). In January 1942, on the basis of mobilization planning,the Veterinary Division, Surgeon General's Office, recommended that the 13assemblages for
127
veterinary evacuation,general, and station hospitals be packed and placed into storage at variousplaces throughout theUnited Statesso that they would be available whenever and ifthese type units would be activated. During 1942, there were added to the sixoriginal ones, the unit assemblages for the separate veterinary company, theveterinary troop of a medical squadron (in a cavalry division), and theveterinary company of a medical battalion (in a mountain division); however,planning for these was transient, and the assemblages disappeared from regularMedical Department supply channels before 1943.
Eventually, the unitassemblages that were retained were described as to their component technicalitems in Medical Department equipment lists. Similar lists were developed forthe Medical Department materiel-assemblages for veterinary infirmaries andstation veterinary hospital organizations which were being established andoperated at the Army camps in the Zone of Interior. During 1944, these severalequipment lists were integrated into a new section of the Medical DepartmentSupply Catalog and were regarded as a supplemental annex to War Departmentapproved tables of equipment for veterinary units; that is, the MedicalDepartment items of materiel, because of their great numbers, were enumeratedfor the units in these equipment lists rather than in the relevant approvedtables of equipment which were already lengthy with their entries on othernon-Medical Department equipment. Table 16 refers only to the Medical Departmentmateriel authorized for a given unit by citation of the item number of theunit assemblage which was described in the lists.
NON-MEDICAL DEPARTMENTSUPPLY AND EQUIPMENT
The Medical Departmentsupply of technical or professional materiel comprised only a part of theequipment and supplies which were used by the Army Veterinary Service. Thelatter also obtained items from the Chemical Warfare Service, Corps ofEngineers, Ordnance Department, Quartermaster Corps, and Signal Corps. Thesemilitary services procured, stored, and distributed certain supplies in aboutthe same manner that the Medical Department procured, handled, and distributedmedical supplies. Quantitatively for each veterinary unit, their supply greatlyoutweighed the Medical Department materiel and included gas masks, motortransport vehicles, as well as horses and mules, and armaments.
Protective Equipment AgainstChemical Warfare
The supply of protectiveequipment which would safeguard military animals against chemical warfare agentswas the responsibility of the Chemical Warfare Service. However, thisequipment, which came into Army supply during World War II, was the resultlargely of the research and development studies that were undertaken byVeterinary Corps officers in cooperation
128
with the Chemical WarfareService. The onset of World War II found the Army without tested or provedequipment that might be used to protect horses, mules, dogs, and pigeons fromsuch chemical warfare agents as were thought to have been developed in Europe during the last decade. There were certain horsegas masks available or left over from World War I, but little was accomplishedduring the succeeding peacetime years to improve them or to make themprotective against the newer chemical warfare agents. In fact, throughout the1930's (or until mid-1940, at least), the use of Army horses and mules toactually test the protective efficiency of chemical warfare equipment wasprohibited.
TABLE 16.-Weight, size, andprice data of Medical Department unit assemblages for veterinary units
|
|
|
|
|
Pounds | Cubic feet | Dollars | ||
9 735 200 | Veterinary infirmary, ZI | 1,101 | 132 | 619 |
9 734 000 | Veterinary dispensary equipment, CZ | 576 | 23 | 1,054 |
9 735 500 | Veterinary pack equipment | 92 | 4 | 74 |
9 733 500 | Veterinary convalescent hospital, CZ, 500-patient | 17,920 | 929 | 7,745 |
9 734 500 | Veterinary evacuation hospital, 150-patient | 3,303 | 172 | 2,078 |
9 736 000 | Veterinary station hospital, ZI, 150-patient | 19,879 | 1,111 | 7,263 |
9 736 200 | Veterinary station hospital, ZI, 100-patient | 16,242 | 902 | 6,213 |
9 736 300 | Veterinary station hospital, ZI, 50-patient | 11,775 | 733 | 4,949 |
9 736 400 | Veterinary station hospital, ZI, 25-patient | 5,830 | 347 | 2,202 |
9 736 500 | Veterinary station hospital, ZI, 10-patient | 4,098 | 281 | 1,770 |
9 736 100 | Veterinary station hospital, CZ, 150-patient | 10,785 | 498 | 5,011 |
9 735 500 | Veterinary general hospital, CZ, 500-patient | 26,990 | 1,612 | 9,013 |
9 733 700 | Veterinary detachment, food inspection equipment, medical | 100 | 5 | 109 |
Sources: (1) Army ServiceForces Catalog, MED 3, 1 Mar. 1944. (2) War Department Supply Bulletin, SB 8-1,9 Nov. 1944.
During August 1940, studieswere begun at the ChemicalWarfareCenter on a canister-type mask which would providegreater protection to animals and would be effective against the newer chemicalwarfare agents. The mask that was developed satisfied the requirements of fieldtrials which were conducted by the Cavalry Board, FortRiley, Kans., the First Cavalry Division Board atFort Bliss, Tex., and the Field Artillery Board, Fort Bragg, N.C.Subsequently, on 20 February 1941, the War Department described the Horse Gas Masks M4 and M5 as standard equipment. About a year later, an
129
expenditure order was issuedby the Chemical Warfare Service on the procurement of 39,145 of these masksand, within a short period of time, a technical manual and motion picturefilms were prepared for training personnel in their use, care, handling,packing, transporting, and inspection. Issues of these masks were authorized foreach horse and mule in a theater of operations, with additional numbers forveterinary units and hospitals having animal patients.
There were no major changesin protective equipment for Army horses and mules during the remainder of thewar period; in fact, during April 1943, the Army Ground Forces-with itsrequirements apparently met-indicated that there was no need to continuedevelopmental studies on the masks or on any other kind of equipment (includingcapes and leggings).
Studies, comparable to theresearch and development of horse gas masks, were conducted on protectiveequipment for Army dogs. In the fall of 1942, the Quartermaster Corps inquiredinto the availability of masks or other protective equipment for dogs whichwere then being used. This inquiry marked the beginning of studies on theeffects of chemical agents on dogs, but it was not until 1944 that field trialswith experimental models of dog masks were brought to a final stage.Eventually, the Dog Gas Mask M6-12-8 was approved and made available bythe Chemical Warfare Service as an item of issue in the oversea theaters, on thebasis of one for each Army dog.
Transportation Equipment
Vehicles and animals were apart of the unit equipment of most veterinary detachments and units which weredeployed in the oversea theaters; these were used in the transportation ofpersonnel and equipment, the collection of daily supplies (including rations),and the evacuation of sick and wounded animals. Until August 1942, all vehiclesas well as animals were provided by the Quartermaster Corps but, after thattime, the supply of motor transport was the responsibility of the OrdnanceDepartment, while the Quartermaster Corps continued to supply the animals whichwere used with the veterinary leading apparatus and wagons or were used in packanimal transport and to provide the few wagons that were authorized in thelarger veterinary hospitals.
There is little need todescribe the veterinary leading apparatus because it was not used to any greatextent, if at all, in the evacuation of animals during World War II. It was aQuartermaster Corps item of supply and was listed as costing more than $200each, exclusive of the animals which were used to operate it (fig. 8). Actually,the lead line was impressed into uses other than that of evacuating animals; itwas used also to move animals if they were not to be led or driven as a herd. Thus,at a port of embarkation in the Zone of Interior during World War II, aso-called floating picket line was improvised by stretching a sort of leadingapparatus between two trucks.
During World War II, the identity of theveterinary ambulance as a
130
FIGURE 8.-Operation of theveterinary lead line.
specific kind ofanimal-drawn or motor-drawn vehicle and trailer was generally lost in the useof a variety of motor vehicles and semitrailers to transport sick and woundedanimals. What was referred to as the Quartermaster Corps horse ambulance in 1940soon became the two-wheel, two-horse trailer van (fig. 9), and the trucksspecially fitted with stock-rack bodies were often replaced overseas with trucksthat had no special sides to prevent animals from falling off or jumping overthe sides of the truck body. In fact, almost any type of 2?-ton or a 4- to5-ton truck could be, and was, used to transport animals to veterinaryhospitals. In the Mediterranean theater during operations in mountainous areas,6-ton semitrailers drawn by tractor truck were found to be particularlyhazardous in the successful evacuation of the sick and wounded animals frompack trains of the Fifth U.S. Army, and these semitrailers were replaced byregular motor vehicles.
OVERSEA SUPPLY
Overseas, the ArmyVeterinary Service obtained its equipment and supplies in much the same mannerthat it obtained them in the Zone of Interior; namely, by requisition demandon depots. Of course, there were occasions when the required supplies wereprocured by local purchase or when captured materiel was used. The depotsystem of supply by the Medical Department overseas was based upon theestablishment and opera-
131
FIGURE 9.-QuartermasterCorps horse ambulance, 1940. A. Sideview. B. Rearview.
132
tion of field medical branchdepots and medical sections of general depots which were located in the combator army areas and in the communications zone under the control of the theater'sservices of supply organization. Each depot included a Veterinary Corps officer(in the grade of major) who acted as a special staff assistant to the unitcommander. At least 12 such depot units, each with its own veterinary officer,came into existence during the first few years of the war. During 1943, thedepot unit just mentioned was removed from the list of approved tables oforganization and was replaced by two new kinds of field or theater units.Neither of the new units was specially authorized a Veterinary Corps officer,but some few veterinary officers who had become experienced with their earlierassignments in the original units were retained or became unit commanders.
Medical Department Supply inthe Oversea Theaters
By the end of World War II,the utilization of veterinary personnel on full-time duty in field medical depotorganizations and operations was negligible. Matters relating to the equipmentand supply of veterinary personnel and units in the oversea theaters werechiefly limited to liaison and to the advisory assistance given by theaterveterinarians to the medical supply officers who were located in thevarious theater surgeons' offices. The needs for a particular item or kind ofitem more often comprised the urgency for veterinary advisory assistance to thetheater medical supply officers. Except in two theaters and possibly in a third,the supply needs of the Army Veterinary Service were, in terms of quantity,quality, and time, satisfactorily met. At one time or another, shortages insupply were experienced, but these frequently were transient and were overcomealmost as soon as they occurred. A factor contributing to such incidents was thedeployment of Army dogs and signal pigeons into oversea areas where the ArmyVeterinary Service may have been totally unprepared and unequipped to renderany kind of professional animal services. In other situations, captured animalswere assembled, and local livestock industries were temporarily brought undermilitary control so that there were demands for supplies that were not foreseenduring the planning for a given military operation. This actually occurred inthe European theater where considerable emphasis was placed on a policy in whichthe Army veterinary animal service was to be confined at the level of emergencyfirst aid treatment in medical dispensaries and which favored the utilization oflocal civilian veterinary facilities and personnel. Actually, the policy hadno value in any theater except in Europe and, even there, certain problemsarose; for example, captured animals untested for glanders were used indepots, and sick or wounded guard dogs were evacuated to a British Armyveterinary hospital.
The truly real shortages ofveterinary equipment and supplies were experienced in the China-Burma-India andthe Mediterranean theaters. In the latter, the unexpected and sudden use oflarge numbers of animals by
133
U.S. troops-first in theSicilian campaign and then in the campaigns northward up the Italian peninsula-and thesubsequent deployment of Italian Army pack trains andveterinary hospitals created demands for supplies which were not readilysatisfied. Even at the end of 1944, the Army Veterinary Service with theremount organization that was supporting the Fifth U.S. Army regarded itsmedical supply situation as acute.
In the China-Burma-Indiatheater, later divided into the separate India?Burma and the China theaters,the Army Veterinary Service experienced great difficulties in obtaining MedicalDepartment equipment and supplies for its use, but this situation was nodifferent from that for all of the U.S. forces in the theater. Actually, thedifficulties were probably caused by the shipping distance and time from theZone of Interior and by the relative low standing in priority of the theater toreceive supplies until the war in Europe was won. One result of this shortage insupply was the hampering effect on the early instructional programs whichwere conducted for the Chinese military forces by Army veterinary personnel intraining schools or centers and by those who were assigned liaison duty with the Chinese field armies and combat divisions;however, local improvisation of training aids by the Army Veterinary Serviceprevented any serious delay of training. Significantly, self-supply was only apart of the Medical Department supply difficulties in the China-Burma-Indiatheater; there were also the problems in the U.S. supply of veterinary materielto the United States?sponsored Chinese Army in China and to other Chinesemilitary organizations and in the British supply of veterinary materiel to theAllied-sponsored Chinese Army in India, which was reorganized and trainedby the U.S. forces.
These supplies wereseparately identified as to their sources and recipients in the theater, untilthe fall of 1944, when the confusion and complexity of the supply procedureswhich were seen at ports and depots handling, storing, and distributing thesedifferent kinds of supplies were brought to an end; at this time, a unilateral U.S. supply for both the U.S. forces and Chinesearmies was established. Before this time, in connection with the supply to theChinese Army in India, British officials were primarily responsible, but theArmy Veterinary Service was actually responsible for determining requirementsand distributing the British supplies to the Chinese combat divisions.Unfortunately, the British sources did not deliver the kind and amount ofmateriel which was requisitioned nor were the deliveries effected without some delay.In the supply to the Chinese Army in China, difficulties wereexperienced with so-called Chinese defense supplies which were beingprovided by the United States on a lend-lease basis and were distributed bythe Chinese National Health Administration. Eventually, this was modified sothat greater amounts of the right kind of medical equipment and supplies wouldbe obtained in China and more would be diverted to the military effort. Inaddition to these two Chinese forces, there was another
134
one which was not Alliedsponsored but was maintained by the Chinese government through its Ministryof War. It was supplied by a Chinese Services of Supply organization, comparableto the China theater's U.S. Services of Supply organization, and was alsoresponsible for any local procurement of military supplies in China. The Chineseorganization was provided Veterinary Corps personnel who were only partiallysuccessful in their attempts to develop a veterinary supply system in theChinese forces that would have paralleled the Medical Department system ofsupply in the U.S. Army. Originally, their veterinary supply wasadministered as a separateactivity of the Chinese Horse Administration, which maintained four veterinarysupply depots.
Civilian Supply in Liberatedand Occupied Areas
The brief references madepreviously to Chinese defense supplies comprised the only known instance inwhich the Army Veterinary Service was directly involved in the MedicalDepartment's participation in the lend-lease supply of American medical materielto foreign countries. This supply was undertaken by the United States in 1941 toprovide aid to those foreign countries and their armies whose defense wasconsidered as essential to its own defense (3, 4). There was also another programfor supplying civilians, but this was limited to newly liberated and occupiedareas. While the latter supply was conceived as being outside the sphere ofmilitary operations and more properly the concern of nonmilitary agencies ofthe U.S. Government, there was reason to believe that temporary relief should beafforded to civilian populations in liberated and occupied areas if for no otherreason than that disease and civilian unrest, as might hamper militaryoperations, should be kept to a minimum. It was to be a short-term program,operated by the Army only during the period of military operations, and was tobe "phased-out" as postwar rehabilitation programs would come intoexistence. Planning for direct civilian supply by the Army during the periodof liberation and initial occupation was undertaken in 1943, or afterexperiences in North Africa had shown that civilian agencies (including theForeign Economic Administration and the Office of Foreign Relief andRehabilitation Operations, U.S. Department of State) were powerless to act untilthe areas were militarily secured. Veterinary materiel was included in thiscivilian supply specifically to protect civilians and U.S. troops fromindigenous animal diseases and to conserve the food and transport animalpopulations in these areas.
Planning for the civiliansupply of Medical Department materiel was undertaken in the Surgeon General'sOffice by a specially created board of officers, in mid-1943. Theirrecommendations were channeled through Headquarters, Army Service Forces, andthence to the Combined (United States?British) Chiefs of Staff, located inWashington, D.C., which had established a Supply Subcommittee within itsCombined Civil Affairs Committee.
135
Actually, the originalplanning in the Surgeon General's Office overlooked veterinary materielrequirements of liberated and occupied countries, but this situation wascorrected after December 1943 when the Subcommittee asked if there were studiedrequirements for veterinary materiel in this civilian supply. If not, the Armywas requested to support the recommendations which had been made by U.S. StateDepartment agencies who were to follow the Army supply with their ownlong-range, postwar programs for veterinary civilian supply in liberated andoccupied countries. A veterinary officer was named at once on the SurgeonGeneral's Civil Affairs Division Board and then to a newly formed WorkingParty on Veterinary Supplies for Liberated Areas, which operated within thejurisdiction of the Combined Chiefs of Staff, in Washington, D.C. (5).
The Working Party onVeterinary Supplies for Liberated Areas was made up of a United States componentand a British component-the latter obtaining itsviews from London, England. TheUnited States component, including Veterinary Corps representation from theSurgeon General's Office, formulated and, on 15 March 1944, reported a planfor civilian supply (6), and the British component's plan became available duringApril 1944. The British component's plan seemingly was one which was developedby United States and the British Army veterinary officers in England (7, 8, 9).1 Obviously, the two plans were not alike, but their differences were readilyreconciled in a moderate revision of the U.S. plan which soon found acceptancewith the Supply Committee, Combined Civil Affairs Committee of the CombinedChiefs of Staff. The Army's veterinary civilian supply was based on theprocurement and distribution of four small unit assemblies of Medical Departmentmateriel as follows:
| Number of items | |
CAD Basic Veterinary Unit: For the care and treatment of 20 percent of 25,000 animals for 3 months, in occupied areas during the period of military occupation | 43 |
CAD Veterinary Surgical Unit: For the care and treatment of each 10 percent of 100,000 animals for 6 months | 40 |
CAD Veterinary Laboratory Unit: For the establishment, or the rehabilitation, of simple food analytical and animal disease-diagnostic laboratories | 88 |
CAD Biologic Reserve: For controlling enzootics, using on 20 percent of 25,000 animals: | |
Central Reserve | 6 |
On need-be basis (for 6-month period) | 12 |
1In England, a specialAllied Post War Requirements Bureau was set up during the fall of 1944 toinclude representatives from various countries and one Veterinary Corps officer.Certain recommendations regarding veterinary supply were subsequently reviewedjointly by the British Royal Army Veterinary Corps and the U.S. Army VeterinaryService of the European theater. The latter's review eventually came into thehands of the Working Committee on Veterinary Supplies for Liberated Areas.
136
As of 9 June 1944, supplyplanning within the Combined Chiefs of Staff projected requirements for 3,496basic, 224 surgical, and 77 laboratory units for distribution among 17 Europeancountries during the initial 6 months of their liberation or militaryoccupation; these quantities were increased later. Responsibility for theirprocurement was divided between the United States and the United Kingdom-thelatter only had one-third of the total but was responsible for the supply ofmost of the biologicals. At this time, however, the fighting on the EuropeanContinent had begun so that the Allied (United States and British) forcesresorted to the plan which had been developed in England until the basic,surgical, and laboratory units that were approved could be assembled and madeavailable. Actually, the Allied forces found their civilian supplies being usedat an earlier date and at a much more rapid rate than anticipated so thatrequisitioning by spot demand early became a commonplace procedure to bringveterinary civilian supplies into European countries. However, while spot demandrequisitioning seemed to have initially brought the more urgently neededsupplies into France, the civilian supplies became more readily available whenthe Allied armies liberated the other countries in Northwest Europe.
A civilian supply programfor the Mediterranean theater, particularly Italy, likewise was developed by theWorking Party on Veterinary Supplies for Liberated Areas. However, what wasbeing accomplished was not fully known to that theater because, in June 1944,the latter submitted to the Combined Civil Affairs Committee in Washington,D.C., a list of veterinary materiel which it thought, supported by its study ofthe needs of Italian veterinarians during the previous 6 months, should besupplied to foreign countries having an agricultural economy comparable to thatof Italy (10, 11). Obviously, the newly submitted list for veterinary civiliansupply was critically at variance with the several small unit assemblies whichhad been developed in Washington, D.C., because the latter presumably were basedon probable needs where American methods of disease control and treatment wereemployed. The Surgeon General's Office advised the Combined Chiefs of Staff'sCivil Affairs Committee that their four small unit assemblies should not bechanged (12), and this recommendation was eventually agreed to by the PublicHealth Subcommission, Allied Control Commission, in Italy. Then, as thesesupplies became available, the Public Health Subcommission, Allied ControlCommission, transferred them to the Chief of the Italian Veterinary Serviceunder the Ministry of Interior, who distributed them through the variousprovincial governments. Where these imported civilian supplies together withthose available from the local Italian resources were inadequate, the moreurgent requirements were partially met by requisitioning on the Army medicalsupply system within the theater or by requisitioning special items direct fromthe United States.
Greece and Austria also were provided with veterinarymateriel in this
137
Army Medical Department'scivilian supply program. However, their requisitions, particularly those fromGreece, were necessarily reduced because some of the equipment and supplies sodemanded were destined for use in long?term rehabilitation programs in thesecountries and thus were outside of the limitations which governed the Army'scivilian supply program. In the Pacific and Far East areas, the United Stateswas alone in the military supplying of civilians during the period of militaryliberation and initial occupation. These areas specifically included thePhilippine Islands, Formosa, parts of China, the Netherlands East Indies,Japan, and Korea. However, the program was not fully developed for anyparticular area pursuant to original plans when Japan unexpectedlysurrendered. Then, as happened in Europe, the Army responsibility in liberatedareas was relinquished as soon as possible to the liberated governments whocontinued to obtain their needed supplies through civilian internationalagencies. Of course, in military occupied areas, the Army continued its civiliansupply program long after the end of active hostilities.
References
1. Kelser, R. A.: VeterinaryService in the Preparedness Program. Vet. Med. 36: 12-18, January 1941.
2. Army Service Forces Medical Supply Catalog, MED 3, 1 Mar. 1944.
3. Public Law 11, 77th Congress,approved 11 March 1941.
4. Yates, Richard E.: TheProcurement and Distribution of Medical Supplies in the Zone of Interior DuringWorld War II (31 May 1946). [Official record.]5. Memorandum, Combined Secretariat to SupplySubcommittee, Combined Civil Affairs Committee, 9 June 1944, subject: VeterinarySupplies for Liberated Areas: Report by the Working Party.
6. Memorandum, U.S. Membersto Supply Committee, Combined Civil Affairs Committee, 15 Mar. 1944, subject:Veterinary Supplies for Liberated Areas.
7. Memorandum, Civil SupplyBranch, International Division, Army Service Forces, for Special PlanningDivision, Surgeon General's Office, 19 Apr. 1944, subject: VeterinaryRequirements in Occupied Countries.
8. Perkins, C. B., andHuebner, R. A.: World War II History of the Army Veterinary Service, EuropeanTheater. [Official record.]
9. Todd, Frank A.: Historyof the U.S. Army Veterinary Service With Civil Affairs/Military Government inthe European Theater, July 1947. [Official record.]
10. Letter, Economics andSupply Division, G-5 Section, Allied Force Headquarters, 8 June 1944, toCombined Civil Affairs Committee, Combined Chiefs of Staff, 8 June 1944,subject: Veterinary Component Additions to CAD List.
11. Letter, Col. R. W.Rushmore, VC, to Public Health Subcommission, Allied Control Commission, Italy,18 July 1944, subject: Summary of Veterinary Activities for Period 1 November1943 to 1 July 1944.
12. Memorandum, CivilianSupply Branch, International Division, Army Service Forces, for The SurgeonGeneral, 16 June 1944, subject: AFHQ Veterinary List. Memorandum in reply,Operations Service, Surgeon General's Office, 3 July 1944.
