Historical Perspective

The use of dogs is a recent innovation to protect against chemical and biological attacks. In the past decade, terrorist activity involving chemical and biological warfare agents has become a very real threat. In March 1995, Japan’s Aum Shinrikyo cult released sarin (a nerve agent) on trains in the Tokyo subway system, killing 12 and injuring 5,498 others.1 This same cult also dispersed aerosols of anthrax and botulism in places throughout Tokyo on at least eight occasions.2 (For reasons that remain unclear, these attacks failed to produce illnesses.) Closer to home, letters containing anthrax were mailed to Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, Senator Patrick Leahy, and several media outlets in 2001, causing at least five deaths and several serious illnesses.3 In January 2005, a Florida man was arrested for possession of a biological weapon after authorities found the biotoxin ricin in his home.4

Adding to the high costs of injuries and deaths is the financial burden of response to phony chemical and biological attacks. For example, in July 2004 an employee at a post office in Long Beach, California, saw a puff of “white powder” come from an envelope. The post office was shut down and the building was decontaminated at a cost of more than $40,000. Powder from the letter, which was addressed to Boeing, was tested by authorities and determined to be baking powder.5

Chemical and biological agents may have much greater effects than explosives. The results of an explosive are devastating but, for the most part, are confined to the immediate vicinity of the blast. Chemical agents, however, can be carried considerable distances downwind until they are diluted or are broken down by environmental conditions. For biological agents, the threat may not be manifested for several days—the incubation period. In addition, the biological threats can be carried far from the original contamination site, secretly spreading the area of contamination. Both chemical and biological agents can contaminate anything they contact and do not require the use of explosives for dissemination. Given the characteristics of chem/bio agents, the results can be far more catastrophic than that of a single explosive detonation, prompting growing concern over their attractiveness as a weapon to would-be terrorists.

Detection Technologies

With the advent of new weapons technology and trends in terrorist activity, the homeland security community must adapt with better detection systems. The ability to detect potential threats, minimize casualties, and root out false alarms is paramount. There have been some improvements in recent years in the handheld equipment used for detecting chemical and biological agents. Chemical detectors can analyze a sample in seconds if there is enough chemical present to test. However, even with these advancements, continuously searching large areas is difficult. One novel approach to this challenge is the use of canine scent detection of chemical and biological warfare agents.

Canines have long proven their worth as scent detectors, filling the technology gap in areas involving cadavers, narcotics, explosives, accelerants, and search and rescue. Their ability to work in varying environments, their portability, and their acute sense of smell have made canines invaluable assets. With the real possibility that destructive chemical and biological agents will become a weapon of choice for terrorists, a new potential use for proven canine scent detection technology has emerged.

The process of training canines to detect chem/bio agents is the same used to train dogs to detect explosives. However, proximity to these agents would be a real health concern for the canines and their handlers if actual agents were used. Two questions that must be addressed are “What materials can be used in the scent training that will not harm the canine or its handler?” and “How may canines be used in the field to find deadly agents without producing a ‘canary in the mine’ effect?”

Companies such as Signature Science, based in Austin, Texas, have led the field in canine training programs for chemical and biological agent detection. Canine teams are trained to detect scents related to chemical and biological agents that may include precursors, degradation products, and production-associated materials. In addition, the canine handlers are trained in threat agent identification and response.

Due to the hazardous nature of the agents, the primary function of the canine is to detect agents before release (in mail, luggage, shipping boxes, clothes, and on a body). The canines are not intended to be used in cases when it has already been determined that an agent is present.

The handler is the vital other half of the detection team and is the first responder at a scene. Since dogs trained to detect multiple scents do not indicate which agent they have found, a handler’s knowledge of the threats is important for initial observation. After the dog has recognized that a target scent is present and the handler has assessed the possible nature of the agent, a handheld detector could be used to show exactly what substance has been found.

At Signature Science we have personnel who could be the hazmat response team, but normally we would use whichever local resources would respond to such an incident—police, firefighters, emergency medical services, state police, or a Civil Support Team.

A handheld detector helps the team get as much information as possible for a response protocol to be initiated. The handler team could use it after withdrawing the dog and donning proper personal protective equipment. However, we suggest that the responding hazmat unit carry the instrumentation. In this regard, the incident would be handled like a bomb incident. After the dog discovers a threat, the dog and handler team leave and the explosive ordnance disposal unit comes in with the proper safety equipment to identify and disarm the weapon.

Conclusions

The chem/bio terrorist attacks and false alarms observed in the past decade have demonstrated the potential for high financial and human tolls. Routine screening by chem/bio canines could detect the agents before their release, preventing deaths and minimizing, if not preventing, contamination and eliminating the costs associated with response to the events. Startup and maintenance costs of a dog team are minimal compared to recovering the cost of even one incident, and the deterrence a canine team creates by maintaining the appearance of a hardened target is immeasurable.

References

Click on an end note number to return to the article.

1. Cpl. John Bureaux, Explosives Disposal and Technology Section, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, “Criminal / Terrorist Use of Chemical / Biological Agents.”

2. William Broad, Sheryl Wudunn, and Judith Miller, “How Japan Germ Terror Alerted World,” New York Times, 26 May 1998.

3. CNN, “Leahy Says Anthrax Letter Could Have Killed 100,000,” 26 Nov. 2001.

4. CNN, “Florida Man Faces Bioweapon Charge,” 14 Jan. 2005.

5. Debra W. Yang, U.S. Attorney, Central District of California, “Woman Who Threatened to Bomb Boeing Facility and Mailed Fake Anthrax Arrested on Federal Charges,” U.S. Justice Dept. press release, 2 Sep. 2004.