Posts Tagged ‘Animals in WWII’

Errant bats from the experimental Bat Bomb set the Army Air Base in Carlsbad, New Mexico on fire, 1942. United States Army Air Forces image.
Headlines for May 15, 1943, could have read, “Bat Bomb Destroys New Airfield,” but the plan to use small incendiary bombs attached to bats as a method to firebomb Japan was just as top secret as the Manhattan Project.
The idea to use bats as a way to deliver small fire-starting bombs was proposed by Dr. Lytle S. Adams of Pennsylvania. Dr. Adams was a dentist by trade, but dabbled in inventions as well as aviation. On December 7, 1941, Adams was vacationing in the southwestern United States. On this trip, he saw millions of bats emerging from the Carlsbad Caverns in New Mexico. He stated in a 1948 interview, “[I] had been tremendously impressed by the bat flight…Couldn’t those millions of bats be fitted with incendiary bombs and dropped from planes? What could be more devastating than such a firebomb attack?” Dr. Adams sent proposals for his project, and after some top level scientific review, President Roosevelt approved a plan to investigate the possible use of bat bombs on January 12, 1942.
The Adam’s Plan, as the proposal came to be known, called for millions of bats to be fitted with tiny incendiary bombs. The bats would then be dropped from a high altitude above Japanese industrial cities. Adams felt that a bat’s natural cold weather hibernation would be a beneficial element of the plan. Low temperatures at high altitudes would simulate winter hibernation, and as the bats fell they would gradually warm up and awaken. Once back to ground level, the bats would roost in places they felt most comfortable, such as eaves, attics, and other out of the way places. The tiny incendiary bombs would have a time delay start, and ignite as the bats were roosting. The small fires created would be hard to see, so they would be well established before anyone noticed them. This would make it harder for the fires to be put out once they were noticed, but would also give people a chance to flee unharmed. Adams felt that such a plan would cripple the manufacturing capabilities of Japan without causing extreme loss of life.
Once approval came from the White House, Dr. Adams set to work figuring out just how the bat bomb could work. The idea had two main components that had to work together, but were developed separately. Adams, along other naturalists, would work on the bat side of the equation. They would work closely with Thomas R. Taylor of the civilian group National Defense Research Committee (NDRC), who was appointed by President Roosevelt to oversee the scientific aspects of the project. Primarily, Taylor worked to design the bombshell which would carry the bats. Also part of NDRC was Dr. Louis Fieser, the inventor of napalm, who worked on the small incendiary bombs required to be carried by the bats.
Thomas Taylor at NDRC and Col. W.C. Kabrich of CWS began efforts to boost support for the program as well as develop an incendiary that would work for the bat bomb. By June 13, 1942, they had secured the support of the US Army Air Forces. In an official letter, Commanding General of the Army Air Forces Hap Arnold stated, “The Army Air Forces will cooperate with the Chemical Warfare Service when experiments reach the stage requiring tests from airplanes.” This support allowed both the bat and incendiary bomb teams to continue pursuing their various goals in developing a bat bomb. However, it seems that many upper level military leaders did not like the Adams Plan and were very doubtful of its practicality. Despite their reservations, work on the bat bomb continued, though both teams would be under immense pressure to produce positive results.

An early-model bat bombshell with mechanical opening device. Time Life Pictures/Getty Images
Once both the bat and the bomb teams had acquired the necessary information and tested their subjects separately, it was then time to test them together. The first tests were conducted in Muroc, California at the Army Air Force Base. Bats were gathered from Carlsbad and flown to Muroc. Bat unit member Jack Couffer constantly readjusted ice in the bat cages to ensure the bats did not overheat in the May heat of the Mojave Desert. These tests did not go well for the bat unit or those developing the incendiaries. The fire starting capabilities of the incendiary were not yet dependable, and the bomber pilot would not allow the bombs on board in case the igniters malfunctioned. This eventually led to Fieser’s development of safety pins attached to bottom of the trays. Also, the bat unit had to make due with a cardboard version of the bombshell they hoped to fabricate out of metal. However, the cardboard was too flimsy to hold up in the slipstream of the plane. Both teams went back to work with research and agreed to meet a month later. Lucky for those working on the Adams Plan, no high-ranking military officials attended the Muroc tests.
The next tests took place in Carlsbad, New Mexico about six weeks after the Muroc tests. Unlike Muroc, these tests were attended by an Army Air Forces captain and a CWS colonel. USMC General Louis DeHaven also attended the testing, having been notified of them by US Navy Admiral Ernest King. The location was great for the bat team, as it was close to a bat colony. It was also the location of the Carlsbad Air Force Base. Due to the top secret nature of the Adams Plan, the team was allowed to use a newly constructed, but not yet occupied, auxiliary air field on the base. The new air field was complete with barracks, offices, hangars, a control tower, and several other buildings.
In the six weeks since the Muroc tests, Dr. Fieser did not have time to make all of the needed adjustments. The new mechanical time delay igniter was not ready, nor was the safety pin mechanism. The team was forced to use a chemical delay igniter and bombs with no safety mechanism. These bombs were fine for testing fire starting abilities on the ground, but they were not stable enough to load on the airplane. Doing so could endanger the plane, the crew and the surrounding area. However, they overcame this obstacle by informing the brass that sending armed bats out over the airfield and the area was not a good idea. Since armed bats could potentially set homes and other structures on fire. Therefore, bats released from the plane needed to have dummy bombs attached to them anyway.
The first trails at Carlsbad tested the effectiveness of the bombshell. The shell was dropped loaded with bats strapped with dummy bombs. The chute deployed as intended, and the bat trays came out of the shell accordion style. Soon, the tiny bats began to launch off the trays in all directions. This part of the test was a success. The team spent hours combing the area to try to find all the places the bats had flown to. They found them roosting in eaves and barns miles from the drop zone, another success for the bat team. A second bomb was loaded and deployed with similar results.
Unfortunately, though the team suffered a serious setback at these tests. Fieser, in an effort to make a training film, wanted to put live bombs on the bats to demonstrate the incendiaries igniting. The idea was that the bats would be cooled down to a semitorpid state, and the bombs would be attached and activated with the chemical delay igniter before the bats awoke. Thus, the incendiaries would ignite while the bats were on the table. This way the film crew could photograph every aspect of the Adam’s Plan right in front of them. Unfortunately for the team, the heat of the day warmed more quickly than expected and only kept them “hibernating” for about ten minutes. Fieser had set the timers for fifteen minutes. As the armed bats awoke, they took flight. Before the bats could be caught, they followed the Adams Plan perfectly, roosting in the eaves of the airfield’s buildings. Everything worked as it was supposed to, the bats and incendiaries worked perfectly. The setback however was that the newly built, unoccupied airfield burned to the ground. Due to the top secret nature of the Adams Plan fire crews were not even allowed in to try and salvage some of the buildings in order to prevent them from seeing how the fires had started. It took only six bats to burn the Carlsbad auxiliary air field.
The bat bomb would continue to be tested for almost another year. Ultimately though, in February 1944, despite continued progress by Fieser and the bat unit, Project X-Ray was discontinued. Several factors were cited for the project’s cancelation. First, some felt that the fundamental idea of the plan was flawed, and that reliable data could not be obtained. Second, there were still many uncertainties regarding the bat’s behavior. Furthermore, the team knew all along that the bats’ natural rhythm meant that they could only launch this type of attack seasonally. The bats lived in Mexico in the winter months, and were not strong enough in the spring months to carry the seventeen-gram incendiary. Despite the project’s pace, it would not have been ready until mid-1945, a full year from when the plan was terminated. Finally, the US military had already spent close to two million dollars on the project, and was not pleased with the time frame still needed to complete the project and thus a continued financial investment would be necessary. Additional, even though the atomic bomb is not cited anywhere as a cause for discontinuing the bat bomb project, many involved with the Adams Plan believe another top secret bomb being developed under the codename the Manhattan Project was thought to have more potential.
This post by Toni Kiser, Assistant Director of Collections & Exhibits/Registrar and co-author of Loyal Forces: The American Animals of WWII.
Join us as we celebrate the launch of Loyal Forces: The American Animals of WWII, written and compiled by the The National WWII Museum’s very own Assistant Director of Collections, Toni M. Kiser and Senior Archivist, Lindsey F. Barnes.
Meet the Authors
Thursday, March 7, 2013
5:00 pm Reception | 6:00 pm Presentation
US Freedom Pavilion: The Boeing Center
Tomorrow the Museum will host a book launch event where you can meet authors Kiser and Barnes. Underneath the span of our B-17 “My Gal Sal” in the brand new US Freedom Pavilion: The Boeing Center, you’ll enjoy a reception, presentation with audience Q&A and book signing. This event is free and open to the public. Reservations are recommended.
Dinner with a Curator
Tuesday, March 19, 2013
6:30 pm – 8:30 pm
Stage Door Canteen
For an even more intimate evening, join us on Tuesday, March 19 for Dinner with a Curator. Chef John Besh’s American Sector restaurant has put together a specially selected three-course menu for you to enjoy while you discuss the use of animals during the war years with the authors. From the training of Marine Devil dogs, to the companion pets kept aboard ships, the conversation will stretch from the Home Front to the Pacific Islands and include animal-related artifacts. Space is limited for the event and reservations are required so purchase your tickets now.

Meet the Authors — Loyal Forces: The American Animals of World War II
Thursday, March 7, 2013
5:00 pm Reception | 6:00 pm Presentation
US Freedom Pavilion: The Boeing Center
Join The National WWII Museum to celebrate the launch of Loyal Forces: The American Animals of WWII, written and compiled by the Museum’s very own Assistant Director of Collections, Toni M. Kiser and Senior Archivist, Lindsey F. Barnes.
At a time when every American was called upon to contribute to the war effort — whether by enlisting, buying bonds, or collecting scrap metal — the use of American animals during World War II further demonstrates the resourcefulness of the US Army and the many sacrifices that led to the Allies’ victory. Through 157 photographs from The National WWII Museum collection, Loyal Forces captures the heroism, hard work, and innate skills of innumerable animals that aided the military as they fought to protect, transport, communicate, and sustain morale. From the last mounted cavalry charge of the US Army to the 36,000 homing pigeons deployed overseas, service animals made a significant impact on military operations during World War II.
This event, held in the brand new US Freedom Pavilion: The Boeing Center, is free and open to the public.

The Last Cavalry Charge
In 1941, as the Japanese continued to wage war on China, their need for oil, rubber, and other natural resources became desperate. Both the United States and Great Britain had placed embargoes on these items and frozen Japanese assets, making it increasingly harder for them to acquire the raw materials they needed to continue their war efforts in China. The Japanese took bold steps to ensure their gains in China would not be lost by invading the island nations in the Pacific. They hoped to secure oil from Borneo, Java, and Sumatra, along with rubber from Burma and Malaya. To secure shipping lanes for these raw materials, Japan invaded the American-controlled Philippine Islands.
Gen. Jonathan M. Wainwright was commander of the Philippine Division, assigned to the post in 1940. Nicknamed “Skinny,” Wainwright was a 1906 graduate of West Point and a World War I veteran. His assignment as commander represented a significant achievement for Wainwright, with about 7,500 soldiers under his command. These soldiers were mostly Philippine Scouts, or native Filipinos who fought under the American flag. Also assigned to Wainwright was the 26th Cavalry Regiment, one of the last horse-mounted cavalries in the U.S. Army. Wainwright was a traditionalist when it came to the cavalry. His sentiments were that horse-mounted cavalry were some of the finest, most select, and most well-trained soldiers in the military. In his memoir, General Wainwright’s Story, he says of this unit that they were “to fight as few cavalry units ever fought.”
One officer of the 26th Cavalry Regiment was Lt. Edwin Price Ramsey. Like Wainwright, Ramsey believed the horse-mounted cavalry to be a superior unit of the military. His passion to remain in a mounted unit motivated him to volunteer to go to the Philippines in April 1941. He was assigned to lead Troop G, 2nd Squadron, of the 26th Cavalry Regiment. His troop consisted of twenty-seven men, all Filipinos, whom Ramsey was to train in mounted and dismounted drill. The men were disciplined, some having served close to thirteen years in the 26th, and Ramsey enjoyed working with them. It was with this troop that Ramsey was assigned his horse Bryn Awryn, a chestnut gelding fifteen and a half hands tall and with a small white blaze on his forehead. Bryn Awryn was powerful and well schooled, clever and aggressive, with the ability to turn on a dime.
(more…)
In honor of National Dog Day, August 26th, the story of Duchess and her rescue seems fitting. National Dog day began as a way both to honor dogs and to help in their rescue from homeless and abusive situations. Duchess and her rescuer, Technical Sergeant Howard R. Synder, are a great example of a war time rescue.
The US military trained over 10,000 dogs for the war effort and sent some 2,000 overseas to serve in combat. They also made extensive use of mules, horses, and even pigeons for various types of war-related jobs. It is the companionship of animals, however, which should not be overlooked. Although many animals were used for work, they were also friends and a comfort to the men who worked alongside them. Many units, ships, and individuals picked up pets or mascots during their travels to serve as companions and friends. Mascots and other companion animals gave some light-hearted fun to the drudgery and fear that was often a part of life at sea or life in a combat zone. Dogs and cats were popular mascots, but servicemen adopted other, more exotic, pets like monkeys, donkeys, and birds.
T/Sgt. Howard R. Snyder was a truck driver for the Headquarters and Service Company of the 817th Engineer Aviation Battalion. He participated in many battles with the unit from Tunisia to the Rhineland. While on the island of Corsica, he found a small dog in an anti-aircraft gun emplacement and rescued her from the combat taking place around the emplacement. He dubbed her the “Duchess of Corsica” or just “Duchess” for short. The two became quick and steadfast companions. Duchess always rode next to Snyder in the truck, slept with him in his tent, and took cover with him under the truck when there was shelling or gunfire.
Duchess remained with Snyder for the remainder of the war and returned to the US with him aboard a Liberty ship. There were several soldiers bringing home their European-adopted companions on the ship, and the captain was not very happy about the dogs being on board. He made it clear that if any dogs made a mess on the deck, all the dogs would be thrown overboard. Snyder took his warning to heart and cleaned many messes on the deck that were not Duchess’s.
Upon their return to the US, Snyder made Duchess her own “uniform” using an Army blanket and some of his own insignia. She proudly marched in her uniform with Snyder at the very first Memorial Day parade held in Westbury, Long Island, after the war. Snyder’s son Howard M. Snyder remembers that his father was devoted to Duchess for her whole life. She lived to be eighteen years old. Like many veterans returning from war, Snyder often struggled with the events he had witnessed, but he took great comfort in Duchess’s company and in knowing that he had made a wonderful home for her in the US.
-
- Snyder with his truck. He and Duchess would often take cover under the truck when there was shelling or incoming fire. Italy 1944 Gift of Howard M. Snyder, 2012.259
-
- Snyder with his truck, Africa 1944 Gift of Howard M. Snyder, 2012.259
-
- Snyder ‘s wife, Rose, holds Duchess in her arms, New York 1948 Gift of Howard M. Snyder, 2012.259
-
- Duchess’s uniform, made by Snyder from an Army blanket and some of his insignia. Gift of Howard M. Snyder, 2012.259
-
- Duchess’s uniform, made by Snyder from an Army blanket and some of his insignia. Gift of Howard M. Snyder, 2012.259
Widely used during World War I, the homing pigeon, or carrier pigeon when relaying a message, returned to service in the European theatre during WWII. Despite the development of the radio to transmit voice messages, the carrier pigeon was a desirable alternative for communication while maintaining radio silence and obscuring the position of the sender. Additionally, homing pigeons carrying cameras provided discrete surveillance of German activities.
Get more information about the role of carrier pigeons during WWII.
Homing behavior is the unique ability of animals to return to an original location such as a nest or territory. A variety of vertebrate and invertebrate species utilize homing abilities, including honeybees, sea turtles, salmon, newts, limpets, and many species of birds. Pigeons use internal compass mechanisms paired with a highly developed hippocampus, the region of the brain controlling spatial reasoning.
Learn more about pigeon homing behavior.
-
- The celebrated war pigeon, G.I. Joe, receiving the Dickin Medal for gallantry during WWII. His swift delivery of a message to Allied bombing forces saved over 1000 lives of British troops and civilians in the Italian village of Calvi Vecchia.
-
- This pigeon vest was used by paratroopers and Signal Corps men to transport one pigeon. The message capsule was attached to a pigeon’s leg for safekeeping during flight. The National WWII Museum, Inc. 2006.121
Sign up for our monthly Calling All Teachers eNewsletter
Post by Annie Tête, STEM Education Coordinator at The National WWII Museum.

Dogs have been used in times of war even before the invention of gunpowder. Romans used them to charge into battle and attack the enemy. Native Americans used them as both pack and draft animals as well as sentry animals. Even in the Middle Ages, dogs were sent into battle equipped with their own armor. Modern European societies had long established traditions of using dogs in war. Many dogs were used throughout World War II by the French, the Belgians and by the Germans as messengers, medics, and pack animals. The US, however, never had a war dog program of this type. The only working dogs in the US military at the start of World War II were sled dogs used in Alaska when the snowy and icy terrain was impassable by vehicle. It was through the forward thinking of some in the US military and the enthusiastic support of dog fanciers that the US military began to undertake a war dog training program. Dog fanciers and these military men envisioned the various ways that dogs could be useful in both combat and non-combat roles.
Advocates for the use of dogs were quick to point out the many characteristics that made dogs useful in war. First of these is a dog’s respect of humans. Good dogs are always eager to please their masters. This means that with the right intelligence level, they can become highly trained. Dogs are also docile and watchful by nature. Although a dog’s eyesight is not particularly acute, their ability to perceive movement is exceptional. They have acute senses of hearing and smell and can act with great speed, making them exceptional companions in times of war. This watchfulness and docility, combined with acute senses, grants them an extraordinary ability to observe, find, and notice many things a human cannot.
(more…)