U.S. Army Medical Department, Office of Medical History
Skip Navigation, go to content

HISTORY OF THE OFFICE OF MEDICAL HISTORY

AMEDD BIOGRAPHIES

AMEDD CORPS HISTORY

BOOKS AND DOCUMENTS

HISTORICAL ART WORK & IMAGES

MEDICAL MEMOIRS

AMEDD MEDAL OF HONOR RECIPIENTS External Link, Opens in New Window

ORGANIZATIONAL HISTORIES

THE SURGEONS GENERAL

ANNUAL REPORTS OF THE SURGEON GENERAL

AMEDD UNIT PATCHES AND LINEAGE

THE AMEDD HISTORIAN NEWSLETTER

Chapter VII

Contents

CHAPTER VII

Functional Organization in the Zone of Interior

WAR DEPARTMENT ORGANIZATION

Chapters III to VI have dealt with the Army Veterinary Service in general terms as to its central administration, its personnel, and its training and supply. Probably, a more interesting subject is the functional organization of the Army Veterinary Service in the Zone of Interior or the discussion of the deployment and utilization of veterinary personnel and their activities in the United States during World War II. Unfortunately, functional organization per se is difficult to understand and proves even more difficult to describe, particularly since veterinary functional organization was one of integration into the combat arms and technical services. Essentially, it followed the command structure of the Army as a whole and, as the latter changed, so did veterinary functional organization change. Sometimes, the military command structure created hardships on the orderly operations of a military veterinary service, but this could be expected, and though, seemingly or theoretically, threatening a complete breakdown for adequate and proper professional activities, these hardships were minimized by willful cooperation and recourse to technical channels of communication between the veterinary personnel who came under control of the various commands. The latter always had as their objective the gaining of command support in the conduct of meat and dairy hygiene and veterinary animal services. These two activities, together with veterinary laboratory service, characterized the organizational functions of the Army Veterinary Service in World War II.

Before discussing the veterinary organization, one must be moderately acquainted with the organization of the War Department which, physically located in the United States, was superimposed over the Army both in the Zone of Interior and overseas. At the onset of World War II, the War Department, as contrasted with the Army, included the civilian Secretary of War and the military Chief of Staff, who controlled the War Department General Staff and the War Department Special Staff. The latter comprised the chiefs of combat arms, certain administrative bureaus such as were headed by The Adjutant General, Judge Advocate General, Inspector General, and Chief of Finance, and the chiefs of supply and technical services. The service chiefs were the Chief of Chemical Warfare Service, Chief of Engineers, The Surgeon General, Chief of Ordnance, The Quartermaster General, and Chief Signal Officer. There was no Chief of Transportation until mid-1942. The Army organization comprised the four field armies which commanded most of the ground tactical forces in the United States, and the nine corps area commands administered the military camps and


140

stations and supported the ground force units. There were certain other field installations, however, such as general depots and ports, which came under the direct control of the War Department. Finally, there were two major commands which had come into existence during the pre-Pearl Harbor emergency periods: The Army Air Forces and the General Headquarters for the field forces. The latter, created in July 1940, was responsible for the tactical training of ground troops and the planning for the defense of the United States by four territorial defense commands. By this time, the Army Air Forces was started on its way toward a degree of autonomy.

There were few components of the overall military organization in the Zone of Interior below the level of the General Staff that did not have assigned veterinary personnel. The larger share of this personnel was, at the beginning of the war period, located at various camps and stations under the jurisdiction of corps area commands, in the depots, hospitals, schools, and laboratories controlled by The Quartermaster General and The Surgeon General, and at the general depots, ports, or other exempted stations which reported directly to the War Department. Gradually, as the Nation's first peacetime draft law came into operation and military Reserve forces were ordered into active duty, more Veterinary Corps personnel were assigned to the ground combat units and to the Army Air Forces fields and bases.

Effective on 9 March 1942, about 3 months after the start of active hostilities, the War Department was reorganized, and the operational controls over military activities in the Zone of Interior were redevided among three, newly created, separate commands: The Army Air Forces, the Army Ground Forces, and the Services of Supply-the last being renamed Army Service Forces in May 1943 (1). The veterinary organization of these three commands is described later, but it is of immediate importance to observe that the commanding general of each of these commands reported to the Chief of Staff of the Army. The Surgeon General, in turn, was subordinated to the Commanding General, Army Service Forces.

Of the three newly created War Department commands in the Zone of Interior, Army Service Forces predominates in the discussion of the Army Veterinary Service, because the Army Service Forces command included The Surgeon General of the Army and the Medical Department of which the Army Veterinary Service was a component element. Also, it included the Quartermaster Corps which supplied the Army and other Armed Forces with foods and animals, the Transportation Corps which transported the Army and moved its supplies, and the service commands (once called corps areas) which controlled or administered nearly all of the Army camps and stations in the Zone of Interior. In contrast to the alignment of the larger share of the Army Veterinary Service with Army Service Forces, a proportionally smaller number of veterinary personnel on duty at airfields and bases were transferred to Army Air Forces, and Army Ground Forces came into control


141

over those personnel who were assigned to Infantry, Cavalry, Field Artillery, and other ground combat service organizations and units.

RELATIONSHIP WITHIN THE ARMY SERVICE FORCES

The Army Services Forces command included its headquarters organization, certain operational elements which were the technical or the administrative and supply services, and the service commands (formerly corps areas) which were the major elements of its field organization. At its head was the Commanding General, Army Service Forces. The several functional staff divisions of Headquarters, Army Service Forces, were not unlike the policy-making General Staff divisions of the War Department and also comprised the groups of certain War Department administrative bureaus including the offices of The Adjutant General, the Judge Advocate General, the Chief of Finance, the Provost Marshal General, and the Chief of Chaplains. No veterinary personnel were assigned to Headquarters, Army Service Forces. The technical services and supply departments of the Army were in the next echelon of the command. One such agency was the Medical Department which was headed by The Surgeon General; the latter's office included the Veterinary Division whose divisional chief-a Veterinary Corps officer-was the chief of the Army Veterinary Service. The technical services included also the Chemical Warfare Service, Corps of Engineers, Ordnance Department, Quartermaster Corps, Signal Corps, and Transportation Corps. Each of these, as did the Medical Department, controlled a number of field installations in the Zone of Interior, also referred to as class IV installations, where veterinary personnel were on duty. These personnel comprised the remount depot veterinarians, remount purchasing board and area headquarters veterinarians, Army dog center veterinarians, depot veterinarians, market center veterinarians, port veterinarians, veterinary instructional staffs in schools and training centers, and those engaged in research and development activities. The Army Service Forces field organization or its service commands, from a veterinary standpoint, comprised the service command veterinarians, medical laboratory veterinarians, and the many camp, station, and area veterinarians. Installations under the control of service commands were designated as class I installations, and the veterinary services thereat, as class I activities.

Thus, within Army Service Forces, veterinary personnel in the Zone of Interior were divided among two command groups-those belonging to the several technical services and the others under jurisdiction of the service commands. This division or scattering of veterinary personnel came with the Army Service Forces emphasis on decentralizing command authority over supply matters (that is, procurement, transportation, storage, and distribution) among the technical and supply services and that of "housekeeping" to the service commands. Professional and specialist activities were accorded secondary roles in the Army Service Forces so that training, labora-


142

tory services, hospitalization functions and other medical activities, including the veterinary services, were grossly and arbitrarily divided between the Army's technical services and its "housekeepers." This division complicated and made difficult an overall technical supervision of veterinary activities by The Surgeon General, such as in a service command, in a Quartermaster Corps depot, or in a Transportation Corps port. However, by means of informal arrangements and personal communications on professional matters, necessarily made outside of command channels, the various groups of veterinary personnel were coordinated in their activities to become equally important in accomplishing the major missions of the Army Veterinary Service in the Zone of Interior.

ROLE OF PERSONNEL ASSIGNED TO THE TECHNICAL SERVICES

The Army Veterinary Service with the supply and technical departments, bureaus, or corps of the Army Service Forces necessitated the distribution of veterinary personnel and their utilization at various field (or class IV) installations which were controlled by the respective chiefs of services. At one time, in 1943, there were approximately 600 such installations in the Zone of Interior, but no more than one-fourth of this number were provided with organically assigned veterinary personnel, including some that were provided part-time or attending veterinary services by personnel under service command jurisdiction. Essentially, these personnel assignments were regulated by The Surgeon General in the same general manner that all Medical Department officer and enlisted personnel assignments were controlled, and were made in cooperation with the chiefs of technical services who required Army Veterinary Service personnel. There was no instance on record that The Surgeon General was, or could be, criticized one way or the other in his actions on withholding or making available veterinary personnel to the various technical services; in fact, the Quartermaster Corps which required relatively large numbers of them, on one specific occasion, augmented the arguments of The Surgeon General in order to obtain veterinarians for military service in numbers greater than the number that Headquarters, Army Service Forces, was willing to grant. Following their assignments, the veterinary personnel came under the immediate control of the respective installation commander and the latter's chief of the technical service concerned; for example, under the depot commander and The Quartermaster General or under the port commander and Chief of Transportation. However, a varying degree of professional or advisory assistance on technical matters for conducting the veterinary service in the class IV installations was provided by The Surgeon General to these assigned personnel. With one exception, the personnel so assigned to the various technical service installations retained their identity with the Veterinary Corps, Medical Department-the exception being a few officers who were assigned to duty with the Chemical Warfare Service. At these class IV installations, the


143

commander and his chief of technical service directed the performance of specialized veterinary services within the defined overall mission and functions of the concerned technical service organization. Of course, this direction was self-limiting to the degree that the veterinary services rendered were within the scope of Medical Department activities and were coordinated and uniform in nature and that the veterinary personnel were properly and economically assigned and utilized; all were matters of immediate and continuing importance to The Surgeon General.

Chemical Warfare Service

The Chemical Warfare Service (later Chemical Corps) was one of the Army Service Forces technical services having assigned veterinary personnel. Its veterinary service was a major Medical Department activity at Edgewood Arsenal, Md., and other field installations which were controlled by the Chemical Warfare Service. The veterinary activities there were diversified, ranging from the operation of laboratory animal colonies to scientific research into the effects of chemical warfare gases on animals and the development of procedures and protective equipment regarding animals and troop food supplies which may be exposed to any chemical warfare attack by an enemy. Also, pertinent training publications were promulgated for use throughout the Army, and instructional services were rendered. Altogether, these veterinary activities were completely defensive in nature as regards the mission and functions which were defined for the Chemical Warfare Service; of course, activities pertaining to the actual care and handling of animal casualties and contaminated subsistence were the responsibility of the Medical Department.

These activities had an inauspicious start when, just before World War II, one Veterinary Corps officer was assigned to the Medical Research Division at Edgewood Arsenal; as of September 1945, the number of veterinary officers there was eight. This medical facility was reorganized several times during the war period, so that for some time the veterinary personnel were assigned to the Medical Department Research Laboratory. In 1943, however, the laboratory was brought under jurisdiction of the Chemical Warfare Center, Edgewood Arsenal, and thus was controlled by the Chief of Chemical Warfare Service. In September 1945, the Medical Research Laboratory was discontinued, but its activities at Edgewood Arsenal were continued as the new field organization, or Research Branch of the Medical Division which was established in the office of the Chief of Chemical Warfare Service. Within this reorganization, veterinary officers comprised the field Veterinary and Animal Section and others were assigned to the Flame Attack and the Food Chemistry Sections. At various times, these personnel were detailed to duty in the Chemical Warfare Service mobile or field testing unit at Bushnell, Fla., and to the San José Island project, Panama Canal Department. Another two officers were permanently assigned to the Medical Research


144

Laboratory, Dugway Proving Ground, Tooele, Utah. Matters relating to the veterinary medical aspects of chemical warfare and progress reports on research and development were communicated directly, or through the office of the Chief of Chemical Warfare Service, to the Veterinary Division, Surgeon General's Office.

At Edgewood Arsenal, one of several specific activities of Veterinary Corps officers was their utilization as part-time instructors in the training courses, including the Medical Department Officers' Course, that were held in the Chemical Warfare School. Another activity and one that was conducted in other installations was the procurement of experimental animals and the management of laboratory animal colonies which were needed in chemical warfare research; the veterinary officers often evaluated the toxicological and biological reactions occurring in tested animals. In addition, these personnel entered into research and development projects on the effects, hazards, protection, and treatment or decontamination of military animals and food supplies exposed to chemical warfare agents. Fundamental principles of veterinary medical or defensive aspects of chemical warfare were promulgated in Army training manuals (2, 3, 4), and protective equipment was developed for military animals; namely, the Horse Gas Masks, M4 and M5; the Dog Gas Masks, MG-12-8; and the Protective Pigeon Bag. The masks became items of standard issue by the Chemical Warfare Service. Recommendations also were made with regard to the treatment of animal casualties which led to the development at the Medical Department Equipment Laboratory, Carlisle Barracks, Pa., of the new Veterinary Gas Casualty Chest Set. In regard to the Army's food supplies, studies were made on the protective efficacy of outside packing and packaging materials, particularly those which were used on field rations. Actually, this development concerned the Chemical Warfare and Army Veterinary Services as much as it did the Quartermaster Corps-the latter being primarily responsible for the Armed Forces food packing and packaging. Later, a kit was developed for Medical Department issue to military units that could be utilized to detect the gross contamination of foods by common chemical warfare agents; this was officially referred to as the Food Testing Kit (fig. 6). In 1945, the Army Veterinary Service with the Chemical Warfare Service initiated a new project for studying chemical agents which might be used beneficially as insect control or insecticidal agents.

Completely separate from the preceding utilization of Veterinary Corps personnel, the Chemical Warfare Service had approximately 20 others in its Special Projects Division who were concerned with the veterinary medical aspects of biological warfare. Details regarding their activities are generally unavailable except perhaps the notation that the Chemical Warfare Service sometimes had no responsibility other than that of administering the money. Thus, in this way, the Chemical Warfare Service became involved in the joint United States-Canadian research project that was con-


145

ducted on the viral agent of rinderpest disease of cattle, leading to the development of a new avianized vaccine that could be used to effectively protect the country's cattle population from a panzootic of that disease. This project was conducted at the War Disease Control Station, Grosse Isle, Canada, and was staffed by six Veterinary Corps officers and several research scientists from the Army Medical Corps, the Navy, and the Canadian Army. Other Veterinary Corps officers were engaged in antibiological warfare research at an installation in Maryland.

Medical Department

The Medical Department must also be described as one of the Army Service Forces technical services having assigned veterinary personnel, exclusive to those comprising the Veterinary Division in the Surgeon General's Office. Just as Edgewood Arsenal came under control of the Chief of Chemical Warfare Service, there were a number of Medical Department installations and activities commanded by The Surgeon General. The more obvious of such were the Army Medical Museum (later Army Institute of Pathology), the Army Medical Center-both in Washington, D.C.-and the Medical Field Service School, Carlisle Barracks, Pa. Other class IV installations under The Surgeon General were the medical depots and medical sections of general depots, medical research facilities including the Veterinary Research Laboratory at Front Royal, Va., and the instructional staffs of replacement training centers such as at Camp Grant, Ill., and Fort Lewis, Wash., and the enlisted technicians school at William Beaumont General Hospital, El Paso, Tex. The named general hospitals, including William Beaumont General Hospital, were not commanded by The Surgeon General after August 1942 when Headquarters, Army Service Forces, transferred them to service command control; only training activities within them were regulated by The Surgeon General. Also, the regional and convalescent hospitals or hospital centers (except that of Walter Reed), which came into existence later, were not controlled by The Surgeon General. These were controlled by the commanding general of the service command in which they were located, but, in the spring of 1946, they were transferred to Medical Department control. The same situation pertained to the replacement training centers for veterinary enlisted personnel; that is, the centers' instructional staffs and training doctrines were regulated as class IV activities by The Surgeon General, but all other veterinary services at Camp Grant and Fort Lewis were regulated by the concerned service command as at any other of its class I installations.

The installations just mentioned, or any others that were commanded by a chief of technical service, were commonly referred to as class IV installations. The same classification procedure designated activities and facilities coming under service command control as class I installations; those of the Army Ground Forces were class II installations, and the


146

Army Air Forces controlled its own (class III) installations. Actually, there was a continual interchange of the class designations of installations so that, for example, Carlisle Barracks which housed the Medical Field Service School was, for a short period of time (August 1942 to May 1943), controlled not by The Surgeon General but by the Third Service Command. The situation pertaining to replacement training centers and the school training staffs in named hospitals was even more confusing because the installations housing them were designated as class I or under the control of the service commands; but, as previously mentioned, The Surgeon General prescribed the training doctrine and assigned the instructional staffs in these installations.

Army Medical Center.-The functional organization of the Army Veterinary Service at the Army Medical Center, Washington, D.C., was largely that of the Army Veterinary School. The Army Veterinary School was a component of the Medical Department Professional Service Schools organization of the center and was headed by a Veterinary Corps officer as school director. Its mission, pursuant to Army Regulations No. 350-1000, were (1) to provide instructional service in the training of Medical Department personnel, (2) to conduct a veterinary laboratory service and research investigations on animal diseases and Army foods, and (3) to produce, develop, and distribute certain veterinary biologicals. In addition, the Army Veterinary School rendered station meat and dairy hygiene and veterinary animal services for the medical center which included the Walter Reed General Hospital. The exception to the organization of all veterinary activities at the Army Medical Center under the Army Veterinary School occurred with the establishment, in April 1941, of the Medical Department Enlisted Technicians School under the administrative control of the Professional Service Schools organization. A special veterinary instructional staff was assigned but was discontinued in March 1945 when all veterinary activities of the installation again came under control of the director of the Army Veterinary School.

The Army Veterinary School laboratory was essentially the central veterinary laboratory for the Army and, until World War II, comprised the only Medical Department laboratory facility available for routine clinicodiagnostic and food analytical needs of the Army Veterinary Service in the Zone of Interior. Then, in 1941, as new corps area (or service command) medical laboratories were established, each with a veterinary section, the laboratory of the Army Veterinary School restricted its routine services to satisfying the veterinary laboratory needs of the Third Service Command and the Military District of Washington. In its activities as the Army's central veterinary laboratory, the Army Veterinary School trained nearly all veterinary personnel who were assigned to the Medical Department laboratory system, provided advisory services to the Surgeon General's Office, evaluated and standardized test procedures and equipment, and acted as a


147

control or appeal laboratory regarding controversial matters arising between other laboratories. Its research investigations and activities included the perfection and production of equine encephalomyelitis vaccine; the application of improved biologic preparation to the production of typhus vaccine; the production of large quantities of Japanese B encephalitis vaccine used to immunize troops; the isolation and identification of the viruses of various types of equine encephalomyelitis infection in man and animals; the effects of freezing, storing, and thawing fresh milk; and the analyses and nutritional evaluation of the military ration. Many of these studies were conducted in collaboration with the laboratories of the Army Medical School.

Medical Field Service School.-The Army Veterinary Service with the Medical Field Service School, Carlisle Barracks, included the veterinary officers who were assigned to, and comprised, the school's Department of Veterinary Field Service. Prior to September 1942, the department was referred to as the Office of the Senior Veterinary Representative. Their activities were largely those of providing veterinary instructional services in the courses on medical field service that were conducted for Medical Department officers and in the officer candidate school. The Basic Course or the wartime Officers' Refresher Basic Course were attended by veterinary officers as well as by medical and dental officers. In addition to their instructional activities, the school's veterinary officers provided the station meat and dairy hygiene and veterinary animal services for Carlisle Barracks and represented the Veterinary Division, Surgeon General's Office, in the development of training doctrine and War Department manuals concerning veterinary medical field service. Also, these officers cooperated with the Medical Department Equipment Laboratory in studies on improving and developing Medical Department equipment and supplies which were used or needed by the Army Veterinary Service in the field.

Following the termination of the war, on 15 February 1946, the Medical Department school was discontinued at Carlisle Barracks and concurrently reestablished, with its Veterinary Department, at Brooke Army Medical Center, Fort Sam Houston, Tex. The equipment research activities relating to packing and chest assemblies were resumed at the Army-Navy Medical Purchasing Office, New York, N.Y., and those relating to veterinary food inspection equipment were assigned to the Meat and Dairy Hygiene School, Chicago, Ill.

Army Medical Museum.-The Army Medical Museum in Washington, D.C., redesignated in 1946 as the Army Institute of Pathology and then in 1949 as the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, first gained the assignment of a Veterinary Corps officer on 13 October 1943. Actually, this facility had need for veterinary services long before this date because of the growth in the collection of animal specimens during the opening years of the war and the need to arrange, investigate, and study such pathological material. Several months later, on 23 March 1944, The Surgeon General


148

FIGURE 10.-Maj. T. C. Jones, VC, Registrar, Registry of Veterinary Pathology, Army Institute of Pathology.

granted approval for the American Veterinary Medical Association to sponsor a veterinary subdivision or element of the American Registry of Pathology (5, 6). This subdivision, named the Registry of Veterinary Pathology (originally called the Registry of Comparative Pathology), was administered by the senior pathologist or chief of veterinary section, pathological department (fig. 10). As of the end of World War II, the Registry of Veterinary Pathology contained 3,600 accessions and was already providing clinicodiagnostic and consultation services in pathology to members of the American veterinary profession. It had also contributed to wartime research on animal disease of military importance such as equine influenza, equine periodic ophthalmia, and canine leptospirosis.

Veterinary Research Laboratory.-Another class IV installation was the Veterinary Research Laboratory, located at the Aleshire Quartermaster Remount Depot, Front Royal, Va. This laboratory originated with recommendations made on 6 August 1938, by the Chief of the Veterinary Division, Surgeon General's Office. Cooperative actions subsequently taken by the local quartermaster depot commander and depot veterinarian led to the de-


149

velopment of laboratory facilities suitable for the conduct of research investigations on diseases seriously affecting Army horses and mules. By 10 June 1939, the first Veterinary Corps officer and other personnel had arrived. There is no official date on its establishment, but, as of September 1944, the Veterinary Research Laboratory was being formally referred to as a field installation under the command control of The Surgeon General (7). At this time, concurrent with Army planning for closing the depot at an early date, the Surgeon General's Office, with the concurrence of the Remount Branch, Office of the Quartermaster General, sought and eventually gained (on 3 May 1945) approval from Headquarters, Army Service Forces, to relocate the laboratory in Nebraska at the Robinson Quartermaster Remount Depot. The Veterinary Research Laboratory was physically transferred to its new location in September 1945, where it continued in operation until it closed in July 1947. Actually, only the physical plant of the laboratory was closed because the Veterinary Research Laboratory was then transferred on paper in an inactive status to the Army Medical Center, and the existing research projects were referred to the Army Veterinary School at that center for further study.

During the tenure of its operations, the range of the activities of the Veterinary Research Laboratory paralleled that of any scientific research on diseases and injuries and consisted of investigations on the clinical and pathological changes and the improved means for diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of equine influenza, equine periodic ophthalmia, and equine infectious anemia.

Quartermaster Corps

Within the Army Service Forces organization in the Zone of Interior, the Quartermaster Corps was the leading technical and supply service with regard to the number of veterinary personnel utilized at its installations. This personnel included animal purchasing board veterinarians, headquarters veterinarians of remount purchasing and breeding areas, remount depot veterinarians, veterinarians of Army dog reception and training centers, depot veterinarians of Quartermaster depots and sections of general (or Army Service Forces) depots, and to a degree, the Quartermaster market center veterinarians. These veterinarians, or veterinary officers, and the veterinary detachments which they commanded rendered professional and technical services in as many as 7 or more purchasing boards, 7 remount areas, 4 remount depots, 6 dog centers, 18 depots and depot sections, and 34 market centers. The first three were concerned with the Quartermaster supply of horses and mules; the next group of installations was involved in the supply of dogs to the Armed Forces; and the last two groups procured, stored, issued, and otherwise handled the nonperishable and perishable subsistence supply for the Army. All were class IV installations under the control of The Quartermaster General, and their veterinarians came under the jurisdiction of the concerned installation commander. At the installa-


150

tions, the senior veterinary officers supervised the conduct of routine station­type meat and dairy hygiene and veterinary animal services-these activities being the same as in any Army camp or airbase. However, their principal duties were of a specialized nature and were characteristic of the overall missions of the particular Quartermaster installations to which the veterinary officers were assigned.

Animal purchasing boards.-For the supply of horses and mules to the Army, the Quartermaster Corps established animal purchasing boards. These were mobile procurement agencies which went to the farms, horse production areas, and livestock markets located within or in a part of a specified geographic area conforming to the boundaries of one of the several designated remount areas in the United States. Actually, these boards were constituted or active only during the time that horses and mules were being procured in their given geographic areas, and their operations were regulated by the concerned headquarters' remount purchasing and breeding areas, within whose geographic boundaries they were operating. Sometimes, two or more animal purchasing boards were operational in a remount area, but usually the rate of animal procurement during World War II was so sporadic and relatively small, in contrast to the situation in World War I, that only one board was allowed to operate at a time in a remount area. In fact, most frequently, remount area headquarters personnel were placed on additional duty to the local animal purchasing board whenever any animals were to be procured. The numbers and kinds of animals purchased were regulated by The Quartermaster General who issued procurement directives to the personnel in headquarters' remount purchasing and breeding areas, who in turn controlled the concerned animal purchasing boards.

The Army Veterinary Service had the assigned mission to physically examine all animals prior to purchase, with a view to insuring the acquisition of only healthy, sound horses and mules, and to inspect and supervise the sanitary conditions at purchasing points and along the shipping routes to Army remount depots or other destinations in order to prevent the introduction or spread of communicable animal diseases (8, 9). At the organization level of the animal purchasing board, this mission was the designated responsibility of the purchasing board veterinarian. Each purchasing board was required to have a Veterinary Corps officer in the composition of its membership, who came under the immediate jurisdiction of the officer in charge of the board. The purchasing board veterinarian determined the age (and sometimes the weight) and made a complete and systematic physical examination as to health, soundness, and physical condition of each horse or mule submitted to the board, followed by specific recommendation as to the acceptability of each animal. This recommendation was made subject to the result of the intradermic mallein test for glanders that was conducted on the animal at the purchase point, if sufficient period of time (48 hours) was available, or after the animal's arrival at destination. The animals which


151

MAP l.-Quartermaster Remount Purchasing and Breeding Areas, Army Service Forces, May 1942.

were finally accepted for purchase were then identified descriptively, and temporarily or permanently marked with a Preston brand. In addition to these activities, the purchasing board veterinarian conducted sanitary inspections of purchasing points and of the methods and facilities which were being used in handling and shipping the animals and investigated the animal disease situation among civilian populations in the locality. Animals which, on physical examinations for Army procurement, showed signs or symptoms of serious communicable disease were reported to local civilian authorities for disposition; furthermore, areas which were experiencing enzootics of such diseases or were under animal quarantine imposed by States or the Federal Government were removed as points of animal procurement.

Headquarters, remount purchasing and breeding areas.-The remount areas, more descriptively named remount purchasing and breeding areas, were geographically defined areas of the United States, including its territories. Within each such area, all matters relating to horse and mule procurement and to the Army Horse Breeding Plan were coordinated and supervised by the pertinent area headquarters organization which, in turn, was controlled by The Quartermaster General. At the beginning of the war period, there were seven such areas (map 1). Subsequently, the number of remount areas was reduced to six and then, in 1947, to four.


152

Each remount area headquarters included the headquarters veterinarian who, under the direction of the immediate officer in charge, supervised all veterinary matters relating to animal procurement and the Army Horse Breeding Plan in the respective area (10). His special duties included the assignment, training, and supervision of veterinary personnel who were assigned to animal purchasing boards which operated in the area; the sanitary inspection of facilities and procedures commonly used throughout the area for assembling, handling, and transporting animals; and the veterinary survey, in cooperation with local, State, or Federal agencies, of the nature and extent of prevailing animal diseases and other conditions bearing on the potential military usefulness of animals in the remount area. Arrangements also were made for the care and treatment of those newly purchased animals which might become sick or injured before they were shipped from the purchase points or while en route to the remount depots. Also, the headquarters veterinarian provided professional services to the Government-owned stations which, under the Army Horse Breeding Plan, were farmed out in that area to selected civilian horse breeders, called stallion agents. These professional services included the examination of the stallions for condition, soundness, and sterility and the examinations of the civilian mares which were to be serviced by the stallions. Of course, professional advice and instruction were provided as to the proper care of the stallions, the mares, and their foals in order to further the object of the Army Horse Breeding Plan, which was to improve the quality of horses suitable for military use. Some few remount area headquarters had their own stables for handling the stallions between times of issue to the civilian agents; infrequently, these animals were so handled as to require their withdrawal from stallion agents.

Remount depots.-The third agency or installation organic to the Army horse and mule supply comprised the Quartermaster remount depots. These received the newly purchased animals (also called remounts or green animals) from the purchasing boards in the remount areas, conditioned or otherwise processed them, and then issued the animals to mounted organizations and installations. These depots also maintained small brood mare bands, assisted in the operation of the Army Horse Breeding Plan, and became the location of two Army dog reception and training centers. At the beginning of World War II, the number of remount depots operating in the Zone of Interior was three: Aleshire, at Front Royal, Va.; Keno, at Fort Reno, Okla.; and Robinson, at Fort Robinson, Nebr. Their capacities were expanded in the fall of 1940 to handle as many as 35,000 horses and mules at one time. In October 1943, the Kellogg Arabian Nursery, Pomona, Calif., was acquired by donation and was established as the fourth remount depot in the Zone of Interior; however, its activities were less expansive than those of the other three. Between July 1940 and June 1945, the depots processed over 100,000 animals (including 57,000 newly purchased remounts and 47,000 horses and mules which were returned by organizations and installations) and had issued more


153

than 65,000 animals, some being issued more than one time. As of December 1945, animals in the four depots totaled little more than 12,000.

Each remount depot was internally organized to include a veterinary section headed by the depot veterinarian who commanded the veterinary detachment and the station veterinary hospital. Typical of the functional organization of veterinary services in nearly all Quartermaster installations, the depot veterinarian also occupied the position of staff officer to the commanding officer of the depot. The veterinary section itself was divided into several subsections: Administration; medical supply; station meat and dairy hygiene and forage inspection; receipt, quarantine, and issue; breeding and nursery; and, of course, the veterinary hospital. The depot veterinarians also supervised veterinary officer replacement pools and veterinary activities of Army dog centers when they were operated at the remount depots. With regard to the remounts which were received or the animals returned from organizations, the depot veterinary activities included identification and branding, supervision of quarantine, diagnostic testing and immunization against serious animal diseases, dipping and internal medication against parasitic infestations, and the care and treatment of sick and injured animals. Special inspections were made at the time the animals were prepared for issue and shipped from the depot so that only those in good health and physical condition would arrive at destination. As required, depot veterinary personnel were detailed as attendants to the animals while en route.

The veterinary service with the depot brood mare bands was highly specialized in character because it involved, not only routine veterinary care and treatment activities, but also supervision over brood mares and stallions which were particularly subject to so-called breeding diseases and sterility problems, and the proper management of foals. New techniques and scientific improvement of horse production and control of animal diseases were under continuous study by the remount depot veterinarians.

Army dog reception and training centers.-Another type of Quartermaster installation concerned with the processing of animals was the Army dog (or the officially named war dog) reception and training center. This was an innovation of World War II when dogs were, for the first time in American military history, included in the definition of military animals and thus were provided with the same degree of veterinary care and treatment as Army horses and males. Beginning in March 1942, the Army began to accept donations of trained war dogs, but, a few months later, the Army undertook the training of dogs with arrangements being made with a newly organized civilian agency to recruit dogs (lent by civilian owners) and to send them to Army dog reception and training centers. Later, in March 1945, the Army also began purchasing its own war dogs. The newly acquired dogs were received, conditioned or otherwise processed, and issued to military organizations by Army dog reception and training centers; what was accomplished there paralleled the mission and activities of remount depots with


154

newly purchased horses and mules. Five dog centers were established in late 1942, in the remount depots at Fort Robinson and Front Royal, at Camp Rimini, Mont., at Cat Island (near Gulfport), Miss., and at San Carlos, Calif. Only the installation at Fort Robinson was continued in operation after November 1944; the others were closed a few months earlier. In 1943, a sixth Army dog center was established and operated at the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Agricultural Research Center, Beltsville, Md., but its activities were limited largely to a joint research project on Army dog rations. The Camp Rimini installation was designated primarily as the center for processing sled and pack dogs. Approximately 18,000 dogs were received at the centers from the civilian agency, and another 1,380 were purchased by the Army between March and August 1945; of this number, more than 10,000 dogs were issued, including those shipped overseas.

Each dog center had its own veterinary detachment, whose commanding officer was responsible for the veterinary care and treatment of the dogs which were received, processed, and issued by that installation. The veterinary activities in the Army dog centers included physically examining the dogs at time of arrival; identifying and branding them; supervising their quarantine, feeding, kenneling, and handling; diagnostic testing for and immunizing against communicable diseases; controlling parasitic infestations; treating and hospitalizing sick and wounded dogs; and inspecting the dogs for health and physical condition at the time of issue or shipment from the center. The major difference between these activities and the veterinary service with horses and mules in remount depots was that the dogs received from the civilian procurement agency were frequently not examined for health and physical condition until after their arrival at the dog centers. Thus, many animals were necessarily hospitalized at the centers or were destroyed, with owners' consent, if the initial examinations showed them to be seriously sick, injured, or infected with a communicable disease; unfortunately, a relatively large percentage of these animals were disqualified by other factors, such as temperament, but even so, they could not be returned to their owners while sick or known to be infected with serious disease. This situation was strikingly exemplified in 1942 when one recruit dog developed signs of rabies infection after its arrival at the Fort Robinson center. Of course, when the dogs were procured by purchase, a Veterinary Corps officer usually made a complete physical examination of the dogs before acceptance and prior to their shipment to an Army dog center. During 1942-43, a contractor in the First Service Command who was supplying trained sled dogs was provided attending veterinary services after suffering serious losses on account of insanitary conditions and after an epizootic of canine distemper in his kennels threatened to curtail the Army supply.

Quartermaster depots and sections of Army Service Forces depots.-Although the Army Veterinary Service at the several types of Quartermaster Corps installations was concerned with animal care and treatment, there were


155

two other types of installations which utilized an even greater number of personnel as veterinary food inspectors; namely, the Quartermaster depots and sections of general (or Army Service Forces) depots and the Quartermaster market centers. These other installations procured, received, stored, and distributed meat and dairy products for the Army in the Zone of Interior and for shipment overseas; the depots handled nonperishable subsistence, and the market centers handled the perishable subsistence.

At the beginning of the war, Veterinary Corps personnel were on duty at the five active subsistence storage and distribution depots in the United States: Chicago and Seattle Quartermaster Depots, San Antonio General Depot, and the depots with the ports of embarkation at New York and San Francisco. During the prewar emergency period, these depots were expanded, and new general and Quartermaster depots were constructed so that the Quartermaster depot system of Army food supply in the Zone of Interior eventually totaled 18 installations, each having its own veterinary detachment. These included the Atlanta Army Service Forces Depot in Georgia, Boston Quartermaster Depot in Massachusetts, California Quartermaster Depot (at Oakland), Charlotte Quartermaster Depot in North Carolina, Chicago Quartermaster Depot in Illinois, Columbus Army Service Forces Depot in Ohio, Jersey City Quartermaster Depot in New Jersey, Kansas City Quartermaster Depot in Missouri, Memphis Army Service Forces Depot in Tennessee, Mira Loma Quartermaster Depot in California, New Cumberland Army Service Forces Depot in Pennsylvania, Richmond Army Service Forces Depot in Virginia, San Antonio Army Service Forces Depot in Texas (at Fort Sam Houston), Savannah Army Service Forces Depot in Georgia, Schenectady Army Service Forces Depot in New York, Seattle Army Service Forces Depot in Washington, Utah Army Service Forces Depot (at Ogden), and Fort Worth Quartermaster Depot in Texas. These Army Service Forces depots were called general supply depots before Headquarters, Army Service Forces, had changed their names, and each handled not only nonperishable subsistence but also other Quartermaster supplies and the supplies of other technical services for the Army. Of course, there were other depots, but some depots were so little concerned with the Army food supply that they did not warrant the assignment of veterinary personnel, although all were provided station-type veterinary services, usually on an attending basis. Thus, mention by name only is made of the Belle Mead Army Service Forces Depot in New Jersey, Jeffersonville Quartermaster Depot in Indiana, Philadelphia Quartermaster Depot in Pennsylvania, New Orleans General Depot in Louisiana, New York General Depot in New York, and the Washington Quartermaster Depot in the District of Columbia.

The depots just mentioned were class IV installations under the control of The Quartermaster General, except for the early period of the war when the general depots were regulated by the War Department General Staff and


156

then, for a brief period of time, by Headquarters, Army Service Forces, which had created a General Depot Service to supervise them. The latter control was discontinued in July 1942 when the responsibility for general depot administration was transferred to The Quartermaster General, who was already operating his own Quartermaster depots. At each of the 18 depots having assigned veterinary personnel, there was the designated depot veterinarian who was responsible to the immediate depot commander for the conduct of the veterinary activities at that depot. These activities were the performance of routine station-type meat and dairy hygiene and veterinary animal services and the inspection of the nonperishable meat and dairy products that were received, stored, distributed, or otherwise handled by the depot. Also, the depot veterinary detachments inspected foods, both perishable and nonperishable, during their procurement, but this activity became so complicated with the veterinary food inspection activities of service commands as to warrant its discussion in later paragraphs.

The Quartermaster depot veterinary detachments had varied beginnings. Two of them, the Chicago and San Antonio depots, actually existed before the prewar emergency periods; several others originated from the division of existing combination depot-port veterinary organizations, and then there were a few which at one time had veterinary personnel detailed to them on an attending basis by the corps area or service command in which the depots were located. Combination depot-port detachments were the predecessors of separate depot veterinary detachments which were organized at the Boston (in the spring of 1942), the California or the former San Francisco (in September 1942), and the Seattle (in May 1942) depots. The combination depot-port detachments in New Orleans and New York, however, became predominantly port organizations as the original depots in these cities were subordinated or disappeared. The Columbus (before September 1942), Savannah (between December 1941 and October 1942), and New Cumberland (between September 1941 and April 1945) depots as well as that at Boston (prior to January 1942) were originally dependent on the Fifth, Fourth, Third, and First Service Commands, respectively, for their veterinary services, but eventually these depots gained their own assigned veterinary personnel. On the other hand, until December 1940, the Chicago depot veterinarian was detailed additional duty as Sixth Corps Area veterinarian, and the veterinary detachment at Schenectady depot did not formally originate until January 1942 when the civilian veterinarian, who was employed at that installation in connection with the Civilian Conservation Corps program, was ordered into active military service as a Reserve Corps officer. Finally, there were the two subdepots or branch depots-Mira Loma and Fort Worth-where the originally assigned veterinary personnel from the parent California and San Antonio depot detachments became separate veterinary detachments, in August and May 1942, respectively, when the subdepots were reorganized as full depots. The beginning dates of veterinary detachments in other


157

CHART 1.-Functional organization of the Chicago Quartermaster Depot, Chicago, Ill., 17 August 1945

depots were as follows: Atlanta, March 1941; Charlotte, December 1941; Jersey City, July 1941; Kansas City, December 1940; Memphis, May 1942; Richmond, July 1942; and Utah, May 1942.

Within the operating organization of the various depots, the depot veterinarian frequently was placed at the level of chief of a division and as a staff officer reporting directly to the depot commander (chart 1). In less than half of the number of installations, the depot veterinarian organized his operations as a branch under the jurisdiction of the chief of the depot's administrative division. In a few other instances, the veterinary service organization was placed under the supervision of the depot's procurement division of the storage division, but this arrangement, although commonly observed in many depots during the early part of the war period, was generally unsatisfactory as obligating the inspector to the chief of a division for which the inspections were being conducted and as restricting the performance of the overall mission of the depot veterinary detachment. This organization within the depots completely separated depot veterinarians from super-


158

vision by medical supply officers in Army Service Forces depots and from the depot surgeons or medical sections except in regard to the sanitary inspections of local food supplies and station veterinary service with the few animals which were maintained there.

The internal organization of the veterinary branch or division likewise varied among the depots and was usually developed by the depot veterinarian in accordance with the local situation. Thus, the office of the depot veterinarian was recognized as the administrative section and veterinary detachment headquarters; the depot section performed the station service and inspected the depot's receipts, storage, and distributions of nonperishable foods, and sometimes there was a laboratory section and a field inspection section. The field inspection section usually had one or more suboffices in the city where the depot was located; performed inspections in the commercial food establishments, storage warehouses, and shipping points that were involved in the Army food supply program; and also provided the Veterinary Corps officer in attendance at the Quartermaster market center, if one was located in that city. Many depot veterinary field inspection sections were further subdivided, as required, into two or more subsections, each being responsible for the inspection service in a geographical area of the city or for the specialized inspection of certain products or a specific activity (such as milk supply and refrigerated storage plants).

The numbers of personnel comprising the veterinary organizations varied greatly among the depots and generally increased as the war progressed. In the beginning, only one or two veterinary officers and from one to four civilians were required at many depots, but then these were not engaged in the origin inspections of foods; enlisted personnel were not especially assigned pursuant to the Quartermaster Corps policy that depot operations should be manned by civilian employees. The latter were utilized in capacities as clerk-stenographers, in such depot laboratories as came under the jurisdiction of depot veterinarians, as laborers for opening and repackaging the sample inspection cases of food, and infrequently as inspectors. Most of the enlisted personnel were added in connection with the off-depot veterinary activities, particularly after the fall of 1943, when veterinary inspection responsibilities in metropolitan areas in which depots were located were assigned to the respective depot veterinary detachments. As of mid-1945, an estimated 160 Veterinary Corps officers were assigned to duty with the depots, together with 450 veterinary enlisted men and 90 civilian employees, but this number (aggregating 700) was somewhat below the peak strength which was reached in the depots earlier. The largest depot veterinary detachment was that at Chicago where 72 officers and 171 enlisted personnel were assigned as of October 1943.

The depot-assigned Veterinary Corps officers usually were graduates of the wartime Meat and Dairy Hygiene Course which was begun in November 1940 at the Chicago Quartermaster Depot. Throughout the war period, however, this course was conducted under the supervision of the depot veteri-


159

narian, Chicago Quartermaster Depot, but the instructional staff and training doctrine was selected and prescribed by the Surgeon General's Office. At seven depots (Boston, California, Chicago, Kansas City, San Antonio, Seattle, and Fort Worth) Veterinary Officer Replacement Pools, under control of The Surgeon General, were established for conducting on-the-job training for newly appointed officers preparatory to their permanent assignment. Depot-assigned veterinary officers also provided instructional services in formal training courses which were conducted at the depots for Quartermaster personnel.

The relationship between the depot veterinary detachments and the Army Veterinary Service of the service commands was manifestly one of cooperation. Actually, pursuant to the channels of command within the Army Service Forces organization, the depot veterinary detachment was totally outside the jurisdiction of the service command even though the latter was responsible for, and did provide, certain services, including medical activities, to the depots.

ANIMAL SERVICE

In regard to veterinary animal service, it may be mentioned that a few depots (such as at Richmond with 60-70 horses, Utah with 40 horses, Atlanta with 18, and Columbus and Schenectady each with less than 10) utilized horses to mount civil guard patrols or for drayage purposes in lieu of motor vehicles. These and a number of other depots (including Chicago, Mira Loma, New Cumberland, Savannah, and Fort Worth) also had Army dogs to augment the internal security procedures inside warehouses and storage areas. These animals usually came under the full supervision of the depot veterinary detachment. In other depots, studies were conducted on the development of animal feeds and forage. At the California depot, more than 1,200,000 pounds of grain, hay, and straw were inspected prior to purchase in the period 1940 through March 1945, but the greater part of this amount pertained to supervising or inspecting the double compressing of grain hays by contractors at the Tracy subdepot for transshipment overseas. At the Seattle depot, research studies led to the development of a canned horsemeat and herring product for feeding Army dogs in the Alaskan Department.

MEAT AND DAIRY INSPECTIONS

Since few depots had military troops, the station meat and dairy hygiene inspections were largely limited to sanitary inspections of foods which were procured locally by the officers club messes or the concessionaires who operated restaurants for the depot's civilian employees. This sanitary inspection of foods and the conducting of a rabies control program for civilian-owned pet animals and Army dogs on the depot were the only veterinary activities that were accomplished under the supervision of the depot surgeon. The latter frequently designated the depot veterinarian as the depot medical sanitary officer.


160

TABLE 17.- Inspection of meat and dairy products by the Army Veterinary Service with Quartermaster and Army Service Forces depots, 1940-45


Depot


1940


1941


1942


1943


1944


1945

 

Millions of pounds

Millions of pounds

Millions of pounds

Millions of pounds

Millions of pounds

Millions of pounds

Atlanta

----

11.2

63.7

36.9

24.8

23.3

Boston

---

---

(1)

(1)

286.

321.

California

31.1

84.1

396.0

240.6

525.6

468.9

Charlotte

---

---

30.3

17.4

67.5

42.3

Columbus

---

---

186.6

221.6

308.9

2202.2

Kansas City

---

28.5

518.8

315.3

255.6

248.8

Memphis

---

---

64.3

157.4

215.0

3192.5

Mira Loma

---

---

22.3

176.1

306.9

252.7

New Cumberland

---

---

---

---

---

(1)

San Antonio

13.4

67.6

190.0

295.2

147.8

159.9

Schenectady

---

---

160.6

(1)

478.2

(1)

Utah

---

---

(1)

225.8

264.2

341.4

Fort Worth

---

32.9

178.3

238.5

423.9

(1)


1Data not available from source material.
2To June 1945.
3To August 1945.
Source: Histories of the Army Veterinary Service With Quartermaster Depots and Sections of Army Service Forces Depots During World War II. [Official records.]
Note: In addition to those inspections shown, the Chicago Quartermaster Depot's veterinary inspections of products passed each month averaged 90 million pounds in 1942, more than 142 million pounds in 1943, and 122 million pounds in 1944, with July 1945 marking the month of greatest amount of inspections at 205 million pounds. The Jersey City Quartermaster Depot's inspections during 1944 gradually increased from 91 million pounds inspected in March to 168 million pounds in October, and reached a quantity as high as 200 million pounds in March 1945.

In contrast to the station-type meat and dairy hygiene service just mentioned there were the inspections of the nonperishable (or canned) meat and dairy products that were received, stored, distributed, or otherwise handled by the depots. Until the fall of 1943, this comprised the principal duty of the Army Veterinary Service with Quartermaster depots and sections of Army Service Forces depots; of course, many depot veterinary detachments also were inspecting the procurements of nonperishable foods. After August 1943, the principal activities of the detachments were twofold: (1) The in­depot inspections of foods handled by the depots, and (2) the off-depot meat and dairy hygiene inspections which then were officially limited to contiguous metropolitan areas but extended to all commercial food establishments, storage warehouses, or shipping points, located within the area, that were concerned with the Army supply of both nonperishable and perishable meat and dairy products. The quantities of subsistence thus inspected varied greatly among the individual depots (table 17); in fact, some few depot detachments (such as at the Atlanta, Charlotte, and Memphis installations) had little to do with the inspection of perishable meat and dairy products.

The on-depot veterinary inspections of the nonperishable meat and dairy products received, stored, or shipped by the depots were largely sanitary in


161

nature. Before the war, very small amounts of subsistence were stockpiled, only at the Chicago Quartermaster Depot and at the Seattle Quartermaster Depot to the account of the San Francisco General Depot (later, the California Quartermaster Depot). In early 1941, as wartime stockpiling programs were begun, the Chicago Quartermaster Depot, in particular, scattered its subsistence holdings to seven depots (namely, Atlanta, Charlotte, Jersey City, Kansas City, New Orleans, San Antonio, and Schenectady). This led to the formation of many additional depot veterinary detachments. In mid-1941, the new Quartermaster system of nonperishable subsistence supply in the Zone of Interior gave the designation of nine installations as regional distribution depots which would supply the needs of certain specified Army camps and airbases. Additional depots were soon named so that there were no Quartermaster depots and sections of Army Service Forces depots having veterinary detachments that were not receiving, storing, and distributing canned meat and dairy products.

On-depot inspection of nonperishable meat and dairy products was continuous throughout the period of their storage or holding at the depot. Special inspections were conducted at the time of their receipt as a phase of veterinary procurement inspection. Although originally inspected during the time of manufacture or canning in contractor's plants, these products were reinspected for sanitary condition before the Army finally accepted them on delivery. Occasionally, the extent of damage to subsistence while in transit to the depots had to be assessed so that proper claims could be made against the rail or truck carriers. Also, pursuant to those terms of contractual documents relating to the contractor's guarantee against more than specified rates of spoilage in newly delivered products, timely veterinary inspections were made which would enable Army contracting officers to obtain the contractor's replacement shipment or payment for the spoiled or deteriorated products. At regular intervals, surveillance inspections were made on the stored subsistence so that lots of a particular item, longest on hand or showing signs of beginning deterioration, would be granted priority for distribution at an early date. Actually, stock turnover was quite rapid during most of the war period so that comparatively small quantities of nonperishable subsistence in the depots became unsuitable for distribution. The leakage among cans of evaporated milk, the penetration of wooden-box nails into cans of imported corned beef, and the rusting of the exterior of cans in commercial-type packages seemed to have been the major causes for the losses that occurred. Of course, particular attention was directed to prevent unnecessary exposure of stored products to extreme climatic conditions, to minimize the damage from outside storage when enclosed warehouse space was not available, and to avoid the losses attributable to factors such as were readily regulated (such as rough handling and high stackpiling). Another veterinary inspection was conducted at the time the products were distributed or shipped from the depot to the Army camps or airbases or to a port for oversea movement; routinely,


162

however, the inspection of nonperishable subsistence immediately prior to shipment could be minimized wherever the surveillance inspections of nonperishable products in storage were systematically conducted.

FOOD SALVAGE

Veterinary surveillance inspections in seven depots were extended to food salvage activities that had become necessary as Army camps, once having relatively large numbers of troops, returned their surplus stockages to depots for redistribution. Also, large quantities of subsistence were returned from the Alaskan area after the Aleutian campaign and from other offshore base commands which had been built up in 1940-41. In these activities, depot veterinary inspection personnel, utilizing prisoner-of-war labor, segregated the sound canned products and repackaged them so that the processed stock was suitable for domestic use or even export shipment; usually 90 to 95 percent of these products was actually saved. At the Utah installation, the salvage operations were particularly extensive, covering more than 400 carloads or about 35 million pounds of returned canned meat and dairy products. In addition, the Army Veterinary Service at the Atlanta, Charlotte, Jersey City, Mira Loma, New Cumberland, Richmond, and Seattle depots, on authorization of the local commander, extended their food surveillance inspections to the canned fruits and vegetables and to the cereals which were stored or handled in the depots.

TESTING LABORATORIES

Another depot activity usually assigned to the operational control of Veterinary Corps officers was the local Quartermaster subsistence or general testing laboratory (figs. 11 and 12). Actually, the Army Veterinary Service had little need for these laboratories in connection with their meat and dairy hygiene inspections because the Medical Department system of laboratories in hospitals and for the service commands was set up and available pursuant to an authorization earlier granted by the War Department. However, regardless of this and probably with the encouragement of individual veterinary personnel, the Atlanta, California, Charlotte, Jersey City, Kansas City, Memphis, Mira Loma, and Seattle depots had their own laboratories under Veterinary Corps supervision, but the Surgeon General's Office refrained from granting them Medical Department trained personnel and equipment. Instead, the depot subsistence laboratories were manned by civilian employees, utilizing locally procured laboratory equipment and supplies. In the California installation-apparently the most elaborate laboratory-the workload, in 1944 alone, comprised 40,050 separate examinations and tests on 14,630 samples which were representative for 78 million pounds of subsistence.

Centralized procurement of nonperishable subsistence.-In regard to the off-depot inspections, the depot veterinary detachments were concerned with two Quartermaster systems of Army subsistence procurement-one, the  


163

FIGURE 11.-Veterinary Food Laboratory, California Quartermaster Depot, Oakland, Calif.

centralizing of procurement for nonperishable meat and dairy products in three depots, and, the other, the Quartermaster market center system pertaining to the procurement, storage, and distribution of perishable products. The Quartermaster market centers are described later in this chapter, but it may be noted that few depot detachments had much to do with inspecting the perishable subsistence supply, until after August 1943, as this inspection workload at the onset was left to the Army Veterinary Service under control of the service commands. In regard to nonperishable products procurement, however, both depot veterinary detachments and service command veterinary detachments were involved early.

During the prewar emergency periods, only a few canned meat, fish, and dairy products were centrally purchased for the Army. There were three so-called procuring depots, but they made little or no demand for veterinary products inspection at the point of origin or during the time of manufacture. Each such depot had its own veterinary detachment which conducted acceptance inspection on such samples as were submitted by the contractors. This was a common practice forced on the peacetime Army, though at times detachment personnel traveled to the food establishments to inspect the  


164

FIGURE 12.-Testing laboratory at the Atlanta Army Service Forces Depot, 1945.

product during its manufacture. Later, origin procurement inspection gained more recognition, and soon the procuring depots' veterinary detachments were faced with an almost insurmountable workload at many, far­distant and widely separated cities where civilian subsistence contractors were producing for the rapidly expanding Army. Also, the number of canned items designated for central procurement, by the Chicago depot in particular, was greatly increased. During January 1941, following approval of Quartermaster Corps planning by The Surgeon General, The Adjutant General authorized depots to communicate with the commanding generals of service commands (then called corps areas) in regard to the ordering of Veterinary Corps officers on origin inspections of nonperishable subsistence (11, 12, 13, 14). This became effective almost immediately in the First, Third, Fourth, and Fifth Service Commands, and the veterinary detachments of the depots which were located in these service command areas (including those of the Boston, New Cumberland, Richmond, Atlanta, Charlotte, Memphis, Savannah, and Columbus depots) and conducted little, if any, origin inspections of canned products for the procuring depots. At other depots, such as at Jersey City, Schenectady, Chicago, Kansas City, San Antonio, Fort Worth, Oakland, Mira Loma, Seattle, and Utah (which were in the geographic areas of the Second, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, and Ninth Service Commands), the depot detachments greatly expanded their


165

activities, sometimes to distant points, to inspect the nonperishable subsistence which was being procured.

Unquestionably, individual depot commanders believed that their veterinary detachments were better qualified to conduct origin inspections of nonperishable subsistence than those under the jurisdiction of service commands (15). Individual commanding generals of service commands, however, believed that their veterinary inspection services, which were already organized for inspecting most of the Quartermaster market center procurements of perishable products, were being disrupted by the off-depot inspection activities by depot veterinary detachments. In any event, areas of conflict and overlapping of inspectional jurisdiction developed between the depots and the service commands. A partial solution to these problems came in February 1943 when The Quartermaster General requested his depot commanders to limit the deployment of their veterinary detachments on origin inspections of nonperishable subsistence to points within a radius of 30 miles from the cities or towns where such depots were located (16). In August 1943, Headquarters, Army Service Forces, directed that the depot commanders (or their veterinary detachments) would have inspectional responsibility over nonperishable, as well as perishable, meat and dairy products such as were procured, stored, or otherwise handled by the Army in metropolitan areas where the depots were located; in all other geographical areas, the concerned service command's veterinary inspection organization would assume the responsibility (17). Thus, the depot veterinary detachments, such as the Boston, Richmond, and Columbus installations, which were then performing only on-depot meat and dairy hygiene services, were considerably enlarged and then undertook full veterinary inspectional responsibilities in their metropolitan areas; on the other hand, those detachments with the Jersey City, Chicago, Kansas City, San Antonio, and Fort Worth depots lost their inspectional jurisdiction over large geographical areas to the respective service commands.

Quartermaster market center system for procuring perishable subsistence.-In the system for the centralized procurement of perishable subsistence by Quartermaster market centers started in 1941, the veterinary inspection workload, for the most part, was divided between the Army Veterinary Service with the service commands and that with the Quartermaster depots and sections of Army Service Forces depots. The latter, however, had little to do with the inspection of perishable, or fresh, meat and dairy products until after August 1943. Under this system that gradually replaced the peacetime procedures in which individual Army camps and airbases procured and competed against each other in the same local markets, the responsibility for perishable subsistence procurement was transferred from the formerly independent camp and base purchasing officers to the Office of the Quartermaster General and thence to its new field agency in Chicago; namely, Headquarters, Perishable Subsistence Branch, later named Field  


166

Headquarters, Perishable Branch, Subsistence Division, Office of The Quartermaster General. A Veterinary Corps officer, assigned on 2 October 1941, as headquarters veterinarian and chief of veterinary section, was accorded the recognition of having originated a system of inspection that in great measure assured the success of the Quartermaster market center system (18).1 The headquarters organization supervised the procurement, storage, and distribution of perishable subsistence on a regional or geographic basis through a varying number of operating agencies, designated Quartermaster market centers. Eventually, these handled all types of perishable meat and dairy products in the Zone of Interior but, in the beginning, only butter, cheese, fresh eggs, and poultry were procured, stored, and distributed. Any or all procurement and storage activities with respect to the products in a given geographic area were the responsibility of a specific Quartermaster market center which was responsible also for distributing them to Army camps and airbases in their immediate vicinities; the required inspections were conducted, or arranged for, by Veterinary Corps officers on duty with the respective market centers.

At the field headquarters level of organization, the headquarters veterinarian originally planned for the inspection of all meat and dairy products which were to be procured, stored, distributed or otherwise handled by the Quartermaster market center system and initiated the proposal that soon saw the utilization of the existent Army Veterinary Service with the service commands, depots, ports, and other installations-whichever had a Veterinary Corps officer available and nearest the area-to conduct the required inspections. Then, on 17 October 1941, pursuant to this planning, The Adjutant General authorized the officers in charge of market centers to call on the commanding generals of service commands (then called corps areas) to arrange for service command veterinary personnel to conduct point of origin inspections on market center purchases of perishable meat and dairy products (19). This authorization was similar to that made earlier in 1941 with respect to the veterinary inspection of depot procurements of canned subsistence. In November 1941, The Quartermaster General authorized market center officers also to request the commanding officers of four depots (Boston, Charlotte, Chicago, and Kansas City) to provide veterinary inspectional services. However, pursuant to the original authorization, the service commands undertook the performance of the major share of the veterinary procurement inspection workload for the market centers, although, in accordance with arrangements made locally with the service command veterinarians, a few port and depot veterinary detachments expanded their operations in response to market center requests for inspection at points of origin. Naturally, there were several geographic areas in which these

1The veterinary section, as of August 1945, included 6 veterinary officers and 18 civilian clerical employees and was internally organized into 5 subsections: Administrative; meat and meat food products; butter, eggs, and fish; and the Chicago Quartermaster Market Center veterinary component.  


167

arrangements were unsuitable, with the result that in August 1943, Headquarters, Army Service Forces, directed that, with the exception of the metropolitan areas contiguous to depots where the concerned depot commanders would be responsible for providing all veterinary food inspection services, the commanding generals of service commands were responsible for providing the veterinary inspectional services-whether it be in regard to perishable or to nonperishable subsistence (17). Thus, during the winter of 1943-44, the service command veterinary service organizations assumed the inspection workload in cities and towns throughout the continental United States except in about a dozen metropolitan areas in which depot veterinary detachments conducted the inspections of meat and dairy products. Sometimes the service command's inspection workload was passed on to the veterinary detachments at airbases and fields under control of the Army Air Forces.

At the level of the market centers, which were the operational elements of the Quartermaster market center system, only those concerned with meat and dairy products were provided with organic veterinary services. These included the following market centers, designated after the city or town in which they were located: Alexandria, Va.; Baltimore, Md.; Boston, Mass.; Columbia, S.C.; Columbus, Ga.; Denver, Colo.; Dover Buying Office, Dover, Del.; El Paso, Tex.; Houston, Tex.; Jacksonville, Fla.; Kansas City, Kans.; Los Angeles, Calif.; Little Rock, Ark.; Louisville, Ky.; Memphis, Tenn.; Nashville, Tenn.; New Orleans, La.; New York, N.Y.; Norfolk, Va.; Oklahoma City, Okla.; Orlando, Fla.; Philadelphia, Pa.; Phoenix, Ariz.; Richmond, Va.; Salt Lake City, Utah; San Antonio, Tex.; San Francisco, Calif.; Seattle, Wash.; Spokane, Wash.; St. Louis, Mo.; Syracuse, N.Y.; Fort Worth, Tex.; and Edmonton, Canada. The veterinary section of field headquarters included a subsection which rendered this service to the Chicago market center. Usually, veterinary officers were detailed to the installations on an attending or part-time basis from their primary assignment with a nearby depot or service command camp. There were a few market centers, however, which gained their own assigned veterinary officers, but such assignments were regarded as tending to subordinate inspectional activities under the jurisdiction of procurement and supply officers and buyers.

The market center veterinarian functioned under the supervision of the officer in charge reviewed the purchase orders made by the buyers, and forwarded copies of such orders with requests for inspection to the Army camp, airbase, depot, or other veterinary officers located nearest the geographic area in which the purchases were being made. The field headquarters veterinarian promulgated an official guide on the format of such market center purchase orders and bid proposals which were used by the contracting officers and buyers in all market centers, and at the same time promulgated a series of letter guides on the veterinary technical aspects of inspecting market center purchases and storages of subsistence for use by the Army camp, airbase, depot, and other inspecting veterinary officers. At


168

first, the market center veterinarian's requests for inspections were forwarded to the offices of the concerned service command veterinarians who, in turn, determined which Army camp, airbase, depot, or other veterinary detachment would conduct the particular inspections; later, the market center veterinarians were authorized direct communications with the actual inspectors, and the service command veterinarian was supplied with information copies of inspection requests. This expedited the rendition and reporting of the veterinary inspection, particularly when the market center purchase instruments were changed, as they often were, or when the contractors failed to comply with the provisions of the Army purchase instruments. By the end of 1942, most service commands were routinely informing the market center veterinarians of the location and addresses of the veterinary detachments which would conduct inspections in specified areas. The service commands were responsible also for ascertaining that contractors' food establishments, storage warehouses, and commercial distribution points operated at certain sanitary standards; routinely, the establishments entering into a contract were previously inspected by a Veterinary Corps officer on request of a market center, and then reinspected at least each month during the time that such establishments maintained interest in contracting with the Army. Establishments failing to comply with certain sanitary standards were disapproved and, on recommendation of the service command veterinarian, were not used in the subsistence buying by the Quartermaster market center system. The same was applicable to sources of the nonperishable subsistence which was procured by the depots. Lists of approved establishments thus were officially promulgated by service command veterinarians, who then forwarded them to the market center veterinarians who, in turn, advised the contracting officers and buyers in regard to civilian contractors with the facilities and standards of operation needed to produce clean, wholesome products for Army supply.

In the market center system of procurement, emphasis was placed on the veterinary inspection of meat and dairy products during their manufacture or processing and for compliance with the grade and sanitary qualities as indicated in the purchase instruments; another and final veterinary inspection was conducted for sanitary condition of the products at the time of arrival at destination and actual receipt by Army property or supply officers. Until December 1945, inspections were made on the procurement of 13,411,237,884 pounds of meat and dairy products, having a value of $3,359,231,351. Some of these products were delivered to Zone of Interior destinations for immediate troop issue; however, a large portion of them were temporarily stored as reserve stockpile or were purchased during peak or seasonal production periods. Veterinary surveillance inspections were made of these products, usually stored in commercial cold storage plants, at 30-day intervals. Market center veterinarians, reviewing the periodic reports of surveillance inspections submitted by Army camp, depot, airbase, or other  


169

inspecting veterinary detachments, were generally successful in advising the market center property or supply officers in regard to which products, longest in storage or showing signs of early deteriorations, should be moved from the storage plants for early distribution. Improper packing or damage to shipping containers comprised major causes for recommending that certain lots be withdrawn from transshipment overseas. During the period from September 1944 through June 1945, the outright monetary losses in storage holdings of perishable subsistence did not exceed 0.005 percent of the value.

Transportation Corps

The Army Veterinary Service with the Transportation Corps was centered at ports of embarkation which served as the terminal points for moving materiel from the Zone of Interior to the oversea theaters. The Transportation Corps, however, did not come into existence until the spring-summer of 1942, so that the onset of World War II actually found the military transportation activity divided between the War Department General Staff (Assistant Chief of Staff, G-4) for overall supervision and the Quartermaster Corps and its Army Transport Service. At that time, there were only two Army ports of embarkation-at New York, N.Y., encompassing the Brooklyn Army Base, and at San Francisco, Calif., encompassing Fort Mason. Other ports were established during the prewar emergency periods at Boston, Mass., New Orleans, La., and Seattle, Wash. The veterinary services at these Army ports were conducted on a coordinated basis with that of the general and quartermaster depots that were located in coastal cities. Of course, when these military ports became identified as field installations of the newly created Transportation Corps, the dualistic activities of the veterinary detachments in the seaboard cities were terminated. Separate veterinary services were established.

Veterinary detachments were formed at the following eight class IV installations under jurisdiction of the Chief of Transportation, or ports of embarkation: Boston, Charleston, S.C., Hampton Roads, Va., Los Angeles, Calif., New Orleans, New York, Seattle, and San Francisco. A number of subports and three cargo ports were established under the control of these ports of embarkation which also for short periods of time, supervised shipping operations of a lesser extent at approximately 10 other coastal cities, including those in Alaska (at Excursion Inlet, Juneau, and Skagway) and in Canada. Usually, a satellite installation was provided veterinary service on a part-time basis by the area command in which it was located. Between December 1941 and the end of 1945, these Army ports embarked well over 7½ million passengers and loaded out approximately 1⅓ million ship tons (measurement tons of 40 cu. ft.) of cargo freight (20). Also, more than 11,000 mules and horses were transshipped to the U.S. and Allied armies overseas.


170

The Army Veterinary Service with each port of embarkation was regulated by the senior Veterinary Corps officer, designated as the port veterinarian, assigned to the office of the port surgeon. The latter acted as adviser to the port commander for all medical activities performed in behalf of that port; after mid-1943, technical guidance over Medical Department activities in ports by the Surgeon General's Office was more or less assumed by a medical officer then detailed to the Office of Chief of Transportation. Under the supervision of the immediate surgeon at each port, the port veterinarian commanded the port veterinary detachment; conducted the port's veterinary services, including routine station-type meat and dairy hygiene and veterinary animal service operations; provided for the inspections of the foods and the animals which were received, processed, and transshipped through the port; and performed veterinary sanitary inspections of harbor craft, freighters, refrigerated cargo ships, and animal and troop transports. The last two activities were, of course, the principal and characteristic operations of the Army Veterinary Service at Transportation Corps ports. A few post veterinary detachments also were involved in the inspection of the Quartermaster Corps supply of subsistence, but, by the fall of 1943, procurement inspection in the Zone of Interior was reallocated to service commands and depots. The New Orleans port veterinary detachment, which had been conducting large­scale procurement inspections along the Gulf Coast, for example, in September 1943, lost several personnel and this inspection responsibility to the Eighth Service Command.

The numbers of personnel in the veterinary detachments varied among the ports, aggregating a total of approximately 50 officers and probably more than double that number of enlisted personnel. Civilians were employed as clerk-stenographers in most detachment offices. As of mid-1945, the Los Angeles port had 7 veterinary officers and 16 enlisted personnel on duty; at New York, these numbers were 9 and 19, respectively. Wartime peak strengths in the San Francisco port averaged 14 veterinary officers each month during the last 6 months of 1944 and 33 enlisted personnel per month during the period from January to June 1943. Most port veterinarians conducted their own programs of on-the-job training for their veterinary detachments. In addition, port veterinarians, pursuant to Army regulations, conducted special training of veterinary personnel who accompanied the oversea shipments of Army horses and mules, dogs, and other animals and, at the New York and San Francisco installations, supervised the operation of veterinary officers replacement pools.

Station-type veterinary services.-In the conduct of their routine, station-type veterinary services, the port of veterinary detachments may be compared with the depot veterinary detachments as previously described. They provided professional care and treatment for a small number of horses and mules that were maintained in several ports for drayage purposes or to mount guard patrols and for a few Army dogs which were used as internal  


171

security guards. One port of embarkation (Boston) had as many as 19 horses and 23 dogs in a subsidiary installation, and at another (Charleston), the port veterinarian attended 40 horses and 12 dogs; however, not more than an aggregate of 150 animals came under veterinary supervision in the ports at any one time. The major station-type activity was not veterinary service with animals, but the meat and dairy hygiene services relating to the subsistence supply to port-assigned personnel, the crews on small boats or harbor craft, and the troops during their staging. Usually, the meat and dairy products used inside of the ports and their troop staging areas were received from nearby depots and market centers, and thus, having been inspected when procured, only came under veterinary surveillance inspection at the times of receipt and issue. At all ports, this meat and dairy hygiene service was extended to veterinary sanitary inspections of Army exchange restaurants, officers club messes, concessionaires, and troop messhalls; this activity at the New York port, for example, led to the rendition of more than 1,700 monthly sanitary inspection reports through the 2-year period ending June 1945.

The station-type veterinary meat and dairy hygiene services also included the veterinary sanitary inspections of the food storage facilities on small boats and harbor craft, on baggage-kitchen and kitchen cars of troop and hospital trains arriving and departing from the ports, on Army-operated ships, and sometimes on Navy, War Shipping Administration, and British Ministry of War Transport vessels in Army service. Troop trains requiring additional subsistence supply while en route ordinarily obtained the meat and dairy products from one of approximately 125 specially designated Army installations or supply points along their routes of travel. Another activity was related to the inspection of so-called ships stores or the subsistence which was used in the feeding of crews during the voyages; this supply was entirely separate from subsistence cargo for oversea supply and the subsistence which was used for on-ship feeding of Army troops while en route.

The Army and Navy routinely provided subsistence stores for their ships from regular military stockpiles, but the other agencies obtained their ships stores for crew feeding from a miscellany of domestic and foreign sources where sanitary conditions were often questionable. The problem here was that the Army Veterinary Service had no responsibility or authorization to conduct meat and dairy hygiene services regarding the ships stores on the War Shipping Administration and British vessels, but, at the same time, this subsistence-of unknown origin and of questionable quality-such as became surplus to the crews was being discharged at the oversea destinations and entered into Army subsistence supply. This occurred particularly during the early war years and often comprised the first fresh foods that were available in the oversea theaters; Army hospitals in the North African thea-


172

ter and in the South Pacific Area gained priority for receiving such surplus ships stores.

Along with their conduct of routine meat and dairy hygiene services in the port areas, the veterinary detachments became involved in a number of related food inspection activities. For example, the port veterinary detachments at the Boston and Seattle installations also inspected the fruit and vegetable supply. At the Charleston port, this extra duty was added, in July 1944, when the port commander determined that past losses among nonanimal-origin foods were too great. Another activity was the supervision of subsistence conservation measures whereby seriously damaged food containers were set aside on the piers (that is, removed from oversea shipment) for collection later and then recommended for reissue locally. Possibly, an activity that reached considerable proportions in the vicinity of ports, such as at Charleston and New Orleans, was the encouragement and the sanitary supervision of local fresh milk supplies; port commanders more or less demanded that, for maintaining morale in the troop staging areas, fresh milk would be made available in plentiful supply. In this connection, the Army Veterinary Service at the Boston and the Charleston ports inaugurated, or participated in, the original studies on the development of a suitably frozen fresh milk for issue to the Army hospital ships which were evacuating patients from the European theater. The Transportation Corps, Quartermaster Corps, and the Medical Department viewed this development as a major advancement in the feeding of hospital patients. The Army Veterinary Service with Transportation Corps ports also comprised a security guard against the introduction of animal diseases into the United States and frequently cooperated with such Federal nonmilitary agencies as were legally empowered to regulate the importation of animals, food products, or ships stores, and the disposal of garbage on ships returning from oversea theaters. For example, foot-and-mouth disease (aphthous fever) was not brought into the United States even in the immediate postwar period when millions of military personnel were returned from Europe. Particular mention may be made of the successful operations of various degrees of import quarantine conducted in the Los Angeles, New Orleans, New York, and Seattle ports. Also, importations of Army purchases of South American canned corned beef were inspected routinely at time of arrival by port or nearby depot veterinary detachments in cooperation with civilian veterinary inspectors of the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Inspection of shipboard subsistence.-The specialist activities of the Army Veterinary Service with the Zone of Interior ports concerned the transportation of animals to the theaters, the oversea movement of subsistence cargo, and the subsistence supply for on-ship feeding of troops while en route. The last-named activity posed a major and difficult problem throughout the war period because so few troop movements were made on ships under regulatory control of the Army; in fact, the Navy, War Shipping  


173

Administration, and British Ministry of War Transport transported the majority of Army troops. This problem was twofold in nature: It concerned the sanitary inspections of ships galleys and the storage of subsistence which were involved in the feeding of Army troops while in transit; and it related to the veterinary sanitary and other quality grading of the actual food products. The first part of the problem was readily answered, because Veterinary Corps officers were usually named into membership on official port inspector general teams that passed on the acceptability of ships which were being offered by the agencies for moving Army troops. At the Hampton Roads and San Francisco installations, such port veterinary inspections over the 2-year period ending June 1945 were made of 988 (including 162 Navy­controlled) ships and 466 ships, respectively. At the New York port, as many as a hundred ships were inspected during a single month.

The second part of the problem related to the veterinary inspections of the products used for shipboard feeding of Army troops is somewhat comparable to the situation of the entry of ships stores from War Shipping Administration vessels into regular Army supply channels overseas, as previously noted. This was not readily solved because the War Shipping Administration and other agencies, including the British Ministry of War Transport, and less so, the Navy, each maintained its own subsistence procurement responsibility. However, what was accomplished during the war to improve the quality of this shipboard subsistence was done in accordance with local arrangements made by individual port veterinarians and the concerned agency representatives. However, near the end of the war period, the matter of veterinary-inspected meat and dairy products became the subject of conferences between the Army and the War Shipping Administration, but no final, centralized interagency agreement was reached. Pursuant to these local arrangements, the Army Veterinary Service at the onset limited itself to the inspection of foods for sanitary and grade quality at the time of arrival at the piers or immediately prior to their loading into the ships' troop galleys. At Hampton Roads, such inspections of products at shipside were begun in October 1943 and aggregated 8,556,966 pounds of inspected meat and dairy products by the end of June 1945. Such shipside inspections were eventually set up at four ports, and at three others, the port veterinarians also requested nearby depot and service command veterinary detachments to inspect the subsistence in commercial food establishments before delivery to the piers.

In regard to troop feeding on British Ministry of War Transport ships which were loading out of the Boston, Hampton Roads, and New York ports, local arrangements were in effect before the end of 1943 for their supplies of meat and dairy products to have originated from Veterinary Corps-approved food establishments and to be inspected at shipside (or prior to loading) for sanitary condition and grade quality. At Hampton Roads, such inspections were made of 761,876 pounds of subsistence in the 4-month period,  


174

October 1943 through January 1944; at New York, an average of six British transports were inspected each month. Suitable local arrangements also were made in regard to the oversea transportation of Army personnel on Navy­controlled ships, particularly at the Hampton Roads, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Seattle ports; of course, during the war, large quantities of Navy­owned subsistence were procured through Army supply channels so that veterinary products inspections at shipside were routinely one of observing that the products themselves had not deteriorated or become spoiled since their last inspection at a procurement point or storage facility. It may be mentioned that Headquarters, Army Service Forces, on 27 March 1944, officially approved the agreement which had been reached between The Surgeon General and the Chief, Bureau of Supplies and Accounts, U.S. Navy, whereby the Army Veterinary Service would inspect all foods loaded on War Shipping Administration-controlled ships which were transporting Navy personnel out of the San Francisco port. Similar but less formal arrangements were also in effect at Seattle.

Inspection of subsistence cargo.-The inspection of subsistence cargo for oversea supply was the most important activity of the Army Veterinary Service at Zone of Interior ports.   It had for its objectives the removal from transshipment of meat and dairy products such as were deteriorated or otherwise unsuitable or would become spoiled while en route or soon after arrival at destination and the technical supervision over the facilities and procedures of ships storage as would assure the safekeeping of the products, particularly those of a perishable nature, during the voyage (fig. 13). During the early war years, since few personnel in the ports assumed the responsibility for the overall aspects of handling subsistence cargo, port veterinary detachments necessarily operated as technical advisors on packaging, storage, stevedoring, and security police. For example, at various times in the New York port, 40 percent of outside containers were noted to be damaged as a result of rough handling or improper packaging, 10 carloads of frozen products had thawed out during their stay on the pier area before they were opened for loading, and pilferage on the piers approximated 100,000 pounds per month. Of course, these difficulties were gradually overcome.

The quantities of outbound subsistence inspected varied among the individual ports, and for each port the rate of shipment changed periodically. For example, the West Coast ports shipped large volumes during the first 6 months of the war, but with Allied strategy calling for early defeat of the German Axis, larger volumes were later moved from the Atlantic ports-first to the North African and then to the European theaters. Boston became concerned with the supply to the base command garrisons in Newfoundland, Greenland, and Iceland, but its heaviest movements were made to northern Europe. New York was the principal port for serving the European theater and also moved large quantities to the Mediterranean. Hampton Roads divided its outbound cargo for these two theaters, whereas the Charleston  


175

FIGURE 13.-Shipside inspection of foods of animal origin in Zone of Interior ports was one of the many inspections conducted by the Army Veterinary Service along the food supply route to troops overseas.

port carried a light cargo loading schedule-its wartime role being that of the home port for hospital ships in Atlantic waters. New Orleans was the major shipping port for the Armed Forces in the Caribbean area, but it also shipped to the European and Asiatic-Pacific theaters. On the West Coast, the San Francisco port was the principal oversea supplier, but in this it was aided by the Los Angeles installation, which also served the Asiatic theater, and by the Seattle port, which moved supplies to Alaska and to the Central and Western Pacific area. In March 1945, the veterinary detachment at the New York Port of Embarkation alone technically supervised the loading out of 315 million pounds of meat and dairy products-a wartime peak monthly inspection workload at a port for the war period.

Refrigerated freighters, each usually requiring 5 days for loading, were moved out of many ports at the rate of 1 per month, but peak monthly rates of 3 were experienced at Hampton Roads (in November 1943), of 10 at Los Angeles (in the first half of 1943), and of 25 at the New York port. It may be mentioned that refrigerated freighters (also called reefer ships) were not especially plentiful during the early part of the war period; on the other hand, refrigerated storage and issue points were not fully developed  


176

in the theaters to receive or hold any large quantities of perishable subsistence even if it was shipped. The early demands for perishable subsistence were satisfied in part by the use of portable refrigerator boxes (of 360 cu. ft. capacity), which could be carried as deck cargo loads and then put ashore at destination; also, some few cargo ships were modified during their construction to have built-in refrigerated space in their holds. Later, refrigerated barges were constructed which could be used as floating storage and issue points on arrival at outlying bases in the Pacific theaters. As of May 1945, the Army controlled only three of the total of 148 fully or partially refrigerated ships available in the U.S. shipping pool (aggregating 15 million cu. ft. of refrigerated ship space). Infrequently, veterinary officers were detailed to duty on the refrigerated ships during voyages to observe the conditions of the subsistence on arrival overseas.

Veterinary animal service.-Nearly all ports of embarkation were involved in the movement of Army animals to the oversea commands. Altogether, under veterinary supervision, these ports shipped out more than 11,000 mules and horses, approximately 1,900 Army dogs, and several thousand pigeons and Medical Department laboratory animals. Another 2,227 mules were transshipped to India through the New York Port of Embarkation, under the provisions of lend-lease supply to Great Britain; through the fall of 1945, a few hundred horses and mules surplus to the Army in the Panama Canal Department, 153 captured horses from the European theater, and many Army dogs and signal pigeons also were brought into the Zone of Interior through the ports. In this traffic, the port veterinarians inspected the animals on arrival, rendered veterinary certificates on their health, cared for them during their stay in the port area, and supervised the loading and unloading procedures; animals which were sick or injured, or in unsatisfactory physical condition, were removed from further shipment. Facilities on outbound animal transports were inspected before the start of loading operations and before the transports departed. Also, such veterinary personnel as accompanied the transports to destination were selected, trained, and equipped to care for the animals while en route. Sometimes, port-assigned veterinary personnel comprised the animal transports' veterinary detachments, but more often the latter were veterinary animal service detachments which were en route overseas or the personnel organically assigned to the units whose animals were being transported.

With the exception of two, the ports of embarkation did not have special facilities for receiving, processing, and embarking animals. At the New York port, horses and mules generally were moved through the stockyards in Jersey City, N.J., where the required Army veterinary animal services were provided by a provisional organization under control of the Second Service Command. The Ninth Service Command veterinary detachment at the Presidio of San Francisco provided the essential veterinary animal services for the 2,929 mules and horses that were staged for movement to the Central  


177

FIGURE 14.-Aerial view of Animal Remount Station, Camp Plauche, New Orleans, La., 1914. The loading wharf is shown in the upper left corner

and Southwest Pacific theaters through the San Francisco port; at Seattle, the detachment at Fort Lawton, Wash., cared for the dogs which were moved through that port. Elsewhere, pier or warehouse facilities were used. The exceptional ports, or those having special animal embarkation depot facilities, were the New Orleans port with its Animal Remount Station, Camp Plauche, La. (fig. 14) and the Los Angeles installation with its Animal Depot, Puente, Calif. The latter's veterinary detachment became operational in February 1944 and until its discontinuance in May 1945, received 1,874 mules and horses and actually embarked 1,550 of these for the China-Burma-India theater. At the Camp Plauche facility, port veterinary services were rendered for as many as 964 horses and mules in a single month (as of June 1944); approximately one-half of the total number of mules and horses transshipped out of the Zone of Interior during the war were processed at Camp Plauche remount station under veterinary supervision, with destinations in the Asiatic-Pacific and Mediterranean theaters.

ROLE OF PERSONNEL ASSIGNED TO SERVICE COMMANDS

Activities and installations of the Army Service Forces that were not controlled by a chief of technical service were administered and organized on a regional basis by service commands. The latter contained the major  


178

operating elements of the Army Veterinary Service in the Zone of Interior. There were nine service commands whose geographic boundaries paralleled those of their predecessor corps areas (map 2), and their commanding generals each reported to the Commanding General, Army Service Forces. In the summer of 1942, a tenth service command-but with additional missions not relating to the Army Service Forces-was formed. This was the Military District of Washington, with headquarters in the District of Columbia, which came into control of several installations and a small area previously assigned to the Third Service Command (21). During September 1942, the Northwest Service Command was established, with headquarters at Whitehorse and later relocated in Edmonton, to administer specified oil pipeline, highway, and railroad projects in western Canada. This last-named command was discontinued on 30 June 1945 and incorporated, as district subcommand, into the Sixth Service Command.

Each service command had its own veterinarian who controlled the command's veterinary services under the supervision of the service command surgeon (fig. 15).2 The service command veterinarian functioned as the advisory and administrative assistant to the surgeon of the service command in directing the veterinary service thereof, as a veterinary consultant, and as attending veterinarian at the headquarters (22).

Actually, the service command surgeons and veterinarians did not always have this centralized direction and control over Medical Department activities and veterinary services throughout their respective commands or in the Army camps and installations which came under service command jurisdiction. Before November-December 1943, Headquarters, Army Service Forces, provided for little or no control of the service commands' Medical Department

2The following Veterinary Corps officers served in the capacity as service command veterinarians or, before July 1942, as corps area veterinarians:
First Service Command: Col. George H. Koon (1939 through December 1943) and Col. Jesse D. Derrick (December 1943 through 1945).  
Second Service Command: Col. Christian W. Greenlee (1939 through September 1940) and Col. Burton A. Seeley (September 1940 through 1945).
Third Service Command: Col. Horace S. Eakins (1939 through August 1942), Col. Frank H. Woodruff (August 1942 through August 1944), and Col. George L. Caldwell (September 1944 through 1945).
Fourth Service Command: Col. Burton A. Seeley (1936 through September 1940), Col. William H. Houston (September 1940 through April 1945), and Col. Edward M. Curley (April through December 1945).  
Fifth Service Command: Col. W. H. Houston (1937 through September 1940) and Col. C. W. Greenlee (September 1940 through 1945).  
Sixth Service Command: Lt. Col. Will C. Griffin (1936 through September 1940), Col. Fred C. Waters (September through December 1940), Col. James E. Noonan (December 1940 through February 1944), and Col. Louis L. Shook (February 1944 through 1945).  
Seventh Service Command: Col. Harold E. Egan (1939 through 1945).  
Eighth Service Command: Col. Jean R. Underwood (1939 through January 1941), Col. James A. McCallam (March 1941 through February 1943), and Col. A. C. Wight (March 1943 through 1945).
Ninth Service Command: Col. Robert J. Foster (1938 through September 1944), Col. Oness H. Dixon (April 1944 through August 1945), and Col. Francois H. K. Reynolds (September through December 1945).  
Military District of Washington: Lt. Col. Gerald W. Holmberg (December 1942 through 1945). 
Northwest Service Command: Maj. W. E. Bills.


179

MAP 2.-Service Commands, August 1942.

functions and activities by the respective headquarters surgeons and veterinarians because, at all echelons of Army Service Forces organization, the total subordination of medical affairs was under the direct control of immediate commanders. In fact, a commanding general of a service command was not authorized to have a surgeon, or any other Medical Department officer, on his immediate staff. This situation originated in the summer-fall of 1942 when the predecessor corps areas were redesignated as service commands and the latter, in turn, were made direct agencies of the Commanding General, Army Service Forces. However, before this time or in the days of corps area organization, there was a Medical Department control which in some respects was similar to that seen in the service command organization after November-December 1943; that is, each corps area had a corps area surgeon (and a corps area veterinarian as assistant to the surgeon) on the staff of the commanding general. The difference between them and the later service command surgeon (and veterinarian) was that the latter supervised his command's veterinary services under the regulation of the commanding general of the service command, whereas the corps area surgeon (and his veterinary officer assistant), even though he reported to the corps area commander, was commonly referred to as an agent of The Surgeon General. The corps area's medical affairs were regulated by technical channels of communication from the Surgeon General's Office, but this was abruptly discontinued with the new organization of the service commands.  


180

FIGURE 15.-Conference of service command veterinarians held at Chicago, Ill., 18 March 1944. Left to right, first row, seated: Col. Burton A. Seeley, Col. Harold E. Egan, Col. Robert J. Foster, Brig. Gen. Raymond A. Kelser, Col. Jesse D. Derrick, Col. William H. Houston, and Col. Christian W. Greenlee. Second row: Col. Forrest L. Holycross, Col. Oness H. Dixon, Jr., Lt. Col. Raymond T. Seymour, Lt. Col. John H. Rust 3d, Lt. Col. H. K. Moore, Col. Louis L. Shook, Col. Gerald W. FitzGerald, and Col. Seth C. Dildine. Third row: Col. Allen C. Wight, Lt. Col. Gardiner B. Jones, Col. Frank H. Woodruff, Lt. Col. John Ludwigs, Lt. Col. S. W. Alford, Col. Fred C. Waters, and Col. Frank M. Lee.

The inception of the service command organization in the summer of 1942 brought with it the temporary removal of the ex-corps area surgeon from his staff officer status with respect to the commanding general and his downgrading to the position of "chief of medical branch" under the directorship of the new service command headquarters supply division (23). At the same time, the service command veterinarian became a chief of section within the medical branch, although Headquarters, Army Service Forces, did not provide for a veterinary section in the internal organization of that branch. In fact, for some time, the veterinary section of one service command headquarters operated outside the jurisdiction of the medical branch and, in another section, such a separation was discussed. As a further indication of the irregularities brought on by the Headquarters, Army Service Forces, plan for the new service command organization, another headquarters tentatively placed its medical branch under the directorship of personnel rather than under the headquarters supply division. More important, however, was the fact that there was no officially recognized service command veterinarian and that it was not a Medical Department officer (service command surgeon


181

and/or veterinarian) but the headquarters director of supply who was explicitly assigned the staff functions for supervising the service command's veterinary services, including those at the camp or post level.

At first, Headquarters, Army Service Forces, provided for these service command headquarters directors of supply to supervise also the veterinary inspection services at market centers, plants, and depots in connection with procurement of meat and food supplies. This obviously was an error as it tended to completely separate certain food procurement inspection responsibility from The Quartermaster General since all other procurements by him and by the other chiefs of technical supply services were inspected under their supervision or other regulatory control and not by any service command headquarters. In any event, this was soon corrected-as were other mistakes-by Headquarters, Army Service Forces. Thus, in December 1942, a revised manual on the organization of its service commands changed the supervisory activity so that the director of supply in each headquarters was to supervise the veterinary inspection service incident to the service command procurement of meat and food supplies, and, as requested by The Quartermaster General, they were to assist also in inspections incident to other procurement of meat and food supplies. Actually, by this time, The Quartermaster General, through his developing centralized depot procurement system for nonperishable subsistence and the new Quartermaster market center system, was procuring most of the supplies needed by the Army.

Along with this delegation of staff controls over veterinary food inspection activities to the headquarters' directors of supply, the service command veterinarians also lost their staff controls both over veterinary personnel assignment in the service commands and over their training to the new service command headquarters' directors of personnel and directors of training, respectively. In other words, veterinary affairs became a complicated, trifurcated staff problem in the service command headquarters. Actually, the Army Veterinary Service was not the only service affected by the service command organization of 1942 because the same losses of staff representation and their divisions in management control were equally experienced by all technical services. It may be noted, however, that, in at least one service command headquarters, the chief of the veterinary section was subdelegated certain responsibilities to take staff action as an assistant to the local director of supply.

In November-December 1943, after a year and a half of this non-Medical Department headquarters supervision of the Army Veterinary Service within the service commands, Headquarters, Army Service Forces, set up its own organizational chart as a pattern for reorganizing the various service command headquarters. At the same time, the chiefs of the headquarters' medical branches were reinstated as service command surgeons, who as chief representatives of the Medical Department were designated to act as staff officers and advisers to the commanding generals of their service commands.  


182

CHART 2.-Functional organization of the office of the service command surgeon, winter 1943-44

In other words, the service command surgeons replaced the headquarters' directors of supply divisions as the responsible supervisors and technical advisors to the commanding generals on Medical Department activities within the service commands. Following a pattern of organization suggested by the Surgeon General's Office, each surgeon's office was then reorganized to include a veterinary division headed by the service command veterinarian (chart 2).

There was no uniformity of internal organization among the veterinary divisions of service command headquarters. Usually they comprised the office of service command veterinarian, one to three veterinary officers as assistants, occasionally, a Medical Administrative Corps officer and civilian clerical employees. In the Seventh Service Command, this divisional organization was subdivided into three branches, each with two to four sections: Administration branch, food inspection and milk sanitation branch, and animal service branch. There were four subsections in the Ninth Service Command headquarters veterinary division: Control (or personnel), professional service, inspection service, and animal service. In other service commands, such as the First, Second, and Eighth, the divisions also included the central offices for service command veterinary units or detachments as were com-  


183

manded by the service command veterinarians. Throughout the war period, the service command veterinarians frequently promulgated letters of instruction or technical directives relating to veterinary matters that were distributed through command channels to the service command veterinary detachments and personnel; in fact, information received from the Surgeon General's Office, either by official correspondence or informally, was coordinated into the service command headquarters procedures and disseminated in this manner by the service command veterinarians.

After November-December 1943, there was little further change in the wartime service command organization relating to the Army Veterinary Service. Then, with the reorganization of the War Department and abolishment of Headquarters, Army Service Forces, that took place, effective on 11 June 1946, the nine service commands were discontinued (24). By substituting six army areas for the service commands, the number of service command veterinarians was reduced to six and their names changed to army area veterinarians. The latter were continued in the offices of the new army area surgeons who then, with regard to medical matters, received orders and instructions from the War Department General Staff. They were responsible for the areas' veterinary service except "veterinary services at Quartermaster and general depots charged with supply of food products and veterinary food inspection within the metropolitan areas in which such depots are located" and the "veterinary service at Quartermaster remount depots and remount area headquarters."

Station Veterinary Service

The Army Veterinary Service below the level of service command veterinarians included a varying number of so-called station veterinary detachments, each commanded by the senior Veterinary Corps officer assigned and present for duty. He conducted the station veterinary service under the general supervision of the post, camp, or station surgeon assigned to the class I (or service command-controlled) installation or to the camp or class II installation where Army Ground Forces troops were housed. The Army Veterinary Service with service commands also included the veterinary sections of service command medical laboratories and so-called area or district veterinary detachments. The latter comprised a new type of organization in the service commands and gradually came into existence as actions by Headquarters, Army Service Forces, and service command headquarters in regard to command and personnel controls virtually destroyed many station veterinary detachments. The numbers of Army Service Forces veterinary personnel in the service commands at one time, in December 1944, approximated 650 officers. In the Fourth Service Command, the veterinary officer and enlisted personnel strengths reached wartime peaks of 101 and 306, respectively, by the end of 1943; in the Sixth Service Command, these numbered 99 officers and 213 enlisted personnel as of V-J Day. As of the end of 1944,


184

both the Second and the Seventh Service Commands veterinary personnel strengths approximated 80 officers and 240 enlisted personnel, each, but the Seventh's continued to increase to 96 veterinary officers and to 260 men by mid-August 1945.

These numbers of personnel were commented upon by the respective command veterinarians as being either adequate or too low for the successful accomplishment of the veterinary mission. Thus, in the Third Service Command-

Even while at its peak the force was not adequate for the work required. A surplus of inspectors never existed; on the contrary the available force was usually spread so thin that the quality of the inspection service suffered thereby. Excepting sometimes in the case of officers, it was not a problem of being unable to obtain authorization, but rather a problem of obtaining the actual personnel, trained or untrained, from any source. This condition became more critical as the war progressed and physically qualified Veterinary Service Trained enlisted men were withdrawn from our service for assignment to combat units.

This loss of personnel for nonveterinary utilization in the Army Ground Forces comprised a complaint more serious than that which was made by the service command veterinarians earlier when their personnel were being withdrawn for assignment to new stations or the Army Air Forces in the expansion period or for oversea assignment. Needless to say, the losses were tentatively identified with requisition demands for correspondingly larger numbers of limited service and untrained personnel. In the Sixth Service Command-

The numbers of veterinary personnel available were considered to be no more than adequate at any time, and were occasionally insufficient for the rising scale of wartime duties. * * * It was very difficult at many times during the war period to obtain sufficient veterinary personnel in the Command for accomplishment of inspection responsibilities. The necessary T/O increases and personnel authorizations could be obtained without undue difficulty, but the problem was in filling personnel requisitions in time for the recurrent workload increases. A complicating factor was that veterinary replacement personnel had to be technically qualified, dependable and with initiative, to be of value for the individual type of duties performed. The problem was solved each year by various means, but grave doubt sometimes existed as to whether food inspection requirements could be satisfied.

Another service command veterinarian believed that the personnel shortages were caused by overall headquarters planning which did not project for more than day-to-day operations of the veterinary service and that the additionally required personnel often became available long after the given situation was met by a local reorganization or had long since ceased to exist. In only one service command was the veterinary personnel strength regarded as being so critical that it could not be satisfied, at least temporarily, by readjustments in the deployment of available personnel.

With few exceptions, the veterinary personnel in the service commands were male officers and enlisted men. The Third and Seventh Service Commands, however, each eventually gained one or two assigned Women's Army


185

Corps officers who were graduate veterinarians and a varying number of enlisted female personnel. Civilian employees were used for clerical purposes in many veterinary offices and as animal caretakers in medical laboratories; the trend toward the substitution of military personnel by civilian employees in veterinary inspection work was enforced upon detachments in three service commands. Actually, qualified or experienced civilian meat inspectors were unavailable, but those who were available could not be utilized under any or all conditions for the irregular and long periods of inspection work normally required of the veterinary enlisted personnel. In the First Service Command, 2 civilian meat inspectors were employed (as of October 1945); in the Third Service Command there were 17 but, as of the end of 1945, only 7 remained.

A varying percentage of the personnel assigned to the service commands were trained in Medical Department schools and courses for officers and in replacement training centers and Medical Department enlisted technicians schools for enlisted personnel. Nearly all service command veterinarians experienced difficulties in the acute lack of any additional personnel to replace those who were temporarily released from their duty assignments for such school training, but at the same time there was every reason for properly training them before their selection for oversea deployment sometime in the future. After September 1943, the service command headquarters, rather than the Surgeon General's Office or War Department, ordered veterinary officers into school training. This school training was implemented by on-the­job training of the personnel at their assigned stations, particularly on those subjects which better qualified them in carrying out the mission of the local station veterinary detachments. Usually no formal schedule for such on-the­job training was prescribed by the service command headquarters, and pertinent directives and publications of a technical nature which were promulgated by the Surgeon General's Office and service command veterinarians most frequently became the source material for conducting this on-the-job training in the station detachments. The equipment and supply for station veterinary detachments among the various service commands were readily obtained and were generally adequate. In at least one service command (the First), however, difficulty was experienced in obtaining suitable clothing for veterinary personnel on duty in cold storage warehouses, and, in others, some shortages in the supply of meat and dairy hygiene inspection equipment, especially thermometers, existed during the early part of the war period.

Station veterinary services were the basic activities of the Army Veterinary Service with service commands in the Zone of Interior, and station veterinary detachments comprised its basic functional organization. These station veterinary services were comparable to the routine, housekeeping-like meat and dairy hygiene and veterinary animal services which were conducted by those detachments assigned to depots and ports, as previously described, and those assigned to bases and airfields which were controlled by the Army Air Forces. These routine services were provided by the Army Service  


186

Forces service command detachments at such installations as replacement training centers, recreational and personnel redistribution centers, convalescent camps and general hospitals, arsenals and motor depots, internment camps, and prisoner-of-war camps, and at the camps where Army Ground Forces units were being trained and prepared for oversea deployment.

Each station veterinary detachment included all officers and enlisted personnel who were assigned for veterinary service at the station and was administered and commanded by the senior veterinary officer, the latter being designated the station veterinarian. The detachment's personnel strength was to be determined by the number of animals at the station, whether a station veterinary hospital was operated, and by the extent of the local meat and dairy hygiene inspections. Control over the discipline, training, equipping, and assigning to duty of the detachment personnel were responsibilities vested in the station veterinarian in his capacity as commanding officer; the station veterinarian also was responsible for the conduct of the local veterinary services and activities, but in this he was supervised by the station surgeon. In fact, so far as staff relations were concerned, the station veterinarian was an assistant to the surgeon who in turn was the representative for the Medical Department on the staff of the commanding officer of the station concerned. Sometimes, by local arrangement, the station veterinarian was directly named to the staff of the station commander, but this was the exception in common station organization.

Unfortunately, the regulatory provisions for station veterinary functional organization were changed by Headquarters, Army Service Forces, which through a series of staff actions virtually destroyed station veterinary detachments. For example, all station Medical Department functions were fully subordinated to local commanders without channels of communications for referring professional or technical matters to senior Medical Department officers who now had been removed from their staff officer capacity in all service command headquarters, as previously noted. In another, but less successful, staff action, Headquarters, Army Service Forces, attempted a station reorganization which would have placed all Medical Department activities under the supervision of station supply officers and responsibility for duty assignments of Medical Department personnel under the local station personnel officers-a situation which paralleled the service command headquarters organization of 1942-43. Of course, the latter reorganization plan was not forcibly effected, and, throughout the war period, the station surgeons continued to represent Medical Department affairs direct to their station commanders. However, the latter were guided in their command responsibility over the local station veterinary services by the director of supply of the immediate service command headquarters or by that headquarters' personnel division, until November-December 1943, when service command surgeons (and veterinarians) regained their staff officer status.  


187

In another staff action, in mid-1943, Headquarters, Army Service Forces, changed the procedures which were being used by the service commands in allocating space authorizations for personnel at the stations. Thus, the service command headquarters were authorized to consolidate the existent personnel space authorizations for medical, dental, veterinary, and all other station service complements into a single bulk allotment for the station concerned; furthermore, the authorizations for veterinary personnel were "bulked" with the total Medical Department personnel authorizations. Now, station veterinary detachments were discontinued and merged with the station medical detachment, and veterinary personnel lost their identity. Between the station commander and the station surgeon, who now assumed command over the veterinary detachments, trained veterinary enlisted personnel were transferred, utilized in nonveterinary duties, particularly in the station hospitals, and often had little chance of promotion. This had a very deterrent effect on morale and efficiency of station veterinary detachments, and equally important was the fact that service command veterinarians lost all accounting of the availability and capabilities of each station detachment to participate in the Army Veterinary Service functions of the concerned service commands as a whole (25 through 30). By the end of 1944, this situation had become progressively worse as more and more physically qualified personnel were withdrawn for oversea deployment, and the stations, encountering shortages in numbers of personnel, restricted their personnel to carrying out only the station's immediate missions and functions. Veterinary detachments which were conducting off-station food inspection services in commercial food establishments were cut back by local authority. Not the least concerned in this last action were the service command headquarters control divisions.

Although it would seem that the status of the Army Veterinary Service at the station level was markedly reduced, there were saving provisions for its continuance and for centralized supervision by the service command veterinarian on a command-wide basis. One such provision was that veterinary personnel were designated in a critical occupational specialty for which trained replacements had to be available before they could be transferred from their assigned stations. Another was, as previously noted, the independent actions on the part of one or more service command headquarters to continue the service command veterinarian as a staff officer to supervise the veterinary activities and personnel in the command, even though Headquarters, Army Service Forces, had specifically advised against such functional organization in the service commands. Also, in many service commands, with the assistance of the headquarters control divisions which earlier had been active in reducing station veterinary detachments, separate veterinary detachments were organized to conduct all off-station veterinary services within a specified geographic area. This latter development, which gave origin to area or district veterinary detachments, together with the service  


188

command headquarters reorganization of November-December 1943 which reinstated the service command veterinarians, actually accounted for continued effectiveness and efficiency of the Army Veterinary Service with the service commands, though station veterinary detachments were now virtually ineffective. The status and developments among the various service commands regarding station veterinary service are described in later paragraphs. The developments were contingent on the gradual restriction of station veterinary detachments to duty on the post or camp proper and the emergence of new area or district detachments which took over all off-station duties, particularly the inspections of meat and dairy products at contractors' plants, commercial warehouses, and shipping points in specified areas.

In the First Service Command, station veterinary service was conducted at a dozen or more class I and class II installations, including that at two distributions centers (at Hartford, Conn., or the Willimantic Distribution Center, and at Medford, Mass.). Beginning in 1943, these station veterinary detachments were reduced in their personnel strengths, and their off-station activities at commercial food establishments which were supplying the Armed Forces were transferred to the inspection responsibility of a single service command veterinary unit; namely, Service Command Unit 1100 (or Service Command Unit 1135) as it was called before its redesignation, in February 1945, First Service Command Veterinary Service at Large. It was organized during November 1942, first with veterinary officers and, after May 1943, also with veterinary enlisted personnel-the latter being formerly assigned to a general dispensary organization. Under the command of the service command veterinarian, Service Command Unit 1100, First Service Command Veterinary Service at Large, reached a peak strength of 17 officers and 39 enlisted personnel and 2 civilian inspector employees. Their activities approximated two-thirds of the total quantities of foods inspected in the service command during the first 6 months of 1945. This unit's inspections in Boston were assumed by the Boston Quartermaster Depot in the fall of 1943, but, by the end of 1944, it had taken over inspection responsibilities in most areas previously serviced by station and airbase veterinary detachments and in parts of Connecticut and Massachusetts that once were serviced by veterinary personnel assigned to the two distribution centers. At various times, suboffices or substations of the unit were established, such as at Hartford and New Haven in Connecticut; Gloucester, New Bedford, Springfield, and Worcester in Massachusetts; Manchester in New Hampshire, and at Portland, Maine.

In the Second Service Command, station veterinary detachments were kept intact for the greater part of the war period. Some few stations were expanded to satisfy the veterinary food inspection needs at procurement and storage points in towns and cities near them, such as Fort Totten, N.Y., whose veterinary detachment inspected in the Poughkeepsie-Kingston-Chester area, and as Pine Camp, N.Y., whose detachment inspected in the nearby  


189

cheese centers. Later, however, the origin inspections of foods in areas outside of routine traveling distance from the stations were conducted by newly organized district detachments. Thus, the inspection services, which were begun in Newark, N.J. (at an issue commissary installation, in May 1943), in Syracuse, N.Y. (in March 1944), and in Buffalo, N.Y. (in 1941), were later reorganized as veterinary detachments of districts 1, 3, and 4, respectively, and assumed the inspection responsibility for origin inspections of foods over relatively large areas. Then, on 4 June 1945, all station and other veterinary detachments lost their area inspection responsibilities to the 1217th Service Command Unit, Veterinary Inspection Unit, which was then created with 28 officers and 100 enlisted personnel under the command of the service command veterinarian. This last action with respect to the removal of area food inspection responsibility from station veterinary detachments in the Second Service Command essentially paralleled that of the First Service Command; the same occurred, as will be observed, in varying degrees in many other service commands (except in the Third, Fourth, and Fifth).

In the Third Service Command, veterinary services were expanded from four permanent posts as of the start of the emergency periods to as many as 24 class I and class II installations during the war period. As of V-J Day, veterinary officers of the command were assigned to 17 installations, rendering service to 5 others on an attending basis and supervising origin food inspections at a multitude of places away from their assigned stations. Thus, the end of war saw inspection responsibilities in food establishments, commercial warehouses, and shipping points assigned to many station veterinary detachments-there being no tendency to transfer these responsibilities into a single detachment such as had occurred in the First and Second Service Commands.  In fact, at this time, eight or nine such detachments were rendering inspection services at more than 20 towns and cities in the vicinity of their respective stations. However, there was one service command unit, the 1300th Service Command Unit, with station in Baltimore, Md., a parent unit of which had been organized before 1939, and the detachments of three railhead facilities, which were organized in the spring-summer of 1942, at Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, Pa., and Richmond, Va., that conducted origin inspections more or less on an area basis; as of mid-1945, these four detachments were inspecting in approximately 50 towns and cities and were doing more than 95 percent of the total food inspections in contractors' plants in the service command, equaling 100 million pounds of meat and dairy products each month.

In the Fourth Service Command, the number of station veterinary detachments increased from 25 during the prewar emergency periods to more than 40 before the end of hostilities. As in the Third Service Command, there was no trend toward the centralization of off-station activities into one or more service command or district detachments. Throughout the war period, nearly all of the veterinary detachments maintained inspection respon-  


190

sibility for the foods which were processed, stored, or otherwise handled in their localities. As of V-J Day, 19 veterinary station detachments were providing 35 officers and 57 enlisted personnel on detached service in 25 towns and cities. Similarly, there was no major centralization of origin inspections in the Fifth Service Command, where the increased veterinary food inspec­tion activities at contractors' plants, commercial storage warehouses, and shipping points were satisfied by the enlargement of certain station detachments (such as at Camp Breckinridge, Ky.; Fort Benjamin Harrison, Ind.; Camp Perry, Ohio; and Fort Thomas, Ky., or later, at Fort Hayes, Ohio). These located their personnel in about 15 large towns and cities on full-duty status.

In the Sixth Service Command, station veterinary detachments were at first fully developed. Many, such as those at Forts Brady, Custer, and Wayne and Camp McCoy in Michigan and Fort Sheridan and Camps Ellis and Grant in Illinois, assumed inspection responsibilities on the perishable meat and dairy products which were procured in their respective areas. Then, during September 1943, the off-station duties of many of the detachments were wholly or partially transferred from them to the jurisdiction of three newly organized veterinary food inspection service sections, each being assigned to a district subcommand headquarters: Detroit, Mich. (or district 1), Milwaukee, Wis. (or district 2), and Chicago, Ill. (or district 3). These sections, later designated and reorganized as the 1697th, 1698th, and 1699th Service Command Units, Veterinary Food Inspection Service, respectively, established area offices in 14 towns and cities from which veterinary personnel were detailed to inspection duties in contractors' plants, commercial warehouses, and shipping points. The area offices were established in the Michigan district at Alma, Detroit, and Grand Rapids; in the Wisconsin district, at Green Bay, La Crosse, Madison, Marshfield, Menomonie, Milwaukee, and Plymouth; and in the Illinois district, at East St. Louis, Freesport, and Hoopeston, and also at Gary, Ind. As of December 1943, the three district detachments, as well as a few station veterinary detachments of stations, airbases, and other installations (which continued off-station activities until September of the next year), were inspecting the output from more than 200 contractors of meat, poultry, eggs, butter, cheese, fish, powdered milk, evaporated and other milk products for the Armed Forces. The Sixth Service Command district organization was as extreme in the reduction of station veterinary activities as were the First and Second Service Commands, but the latter had centralized their off-station activities in single service command units, whereas the former decentralized these among three district veterinary food inspection organizations. However, soon after the cessation of active hostilities, the district commands were discontinued so that, by November 1945, the district veterinary organizations were also inactivated and their personnel, without change of place of duty assignments and their areas of inspection responsibility, were transferred to the newly reorganized 1699th  


191

Service Command Unit-Veterinary Food Inspection Service, with central office location in Chicago. In other words, the last reorganization resulted in a formation of a detachment that was no different than Service Command Unit 1100, First Service Command Veterinary Service at Large, or the Second Service Command's 1217th Service Command Unit, Veterinary Inspection Unit.

The Seventh Service Command station veterinary detachments were numerically increased from 8 in 1940 to 12 as of August 1945, but this last number does not include general hospital installations and prisoner-of-war camps to which veterinary personnel were assigned or had only veterinary enlisted personnel. Most of the station veterinary detachments eventually were limited to the conduct of on-station duties, such as occurred in the Sixth Service Command, and to all off-station activities that were being centralized under control of three or four station veterinary detachments in one or more States. However, these veterinary detachments were not assigned by district commands; instead, as in the Fifth Service Command, certain station detachments were specially developed and given area-wide responsibilities. Thus, the Veterinary Food Inspection Detachment, 1745th Service Command Unit, Fort Omaha, Nebr., performed inspections throughout Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, and eastern Nebraska, as well as in the cities of Sioux City, Iowa, and Sioux Falls, S. Dak.; the Medical Department Detachment (Veterinary Service) of the Station Complement, 1775th Service Command Unit, at Fort Snelling, Minn., operated in Minnesota, North Dakota, and South Dakota; and the Veterinary Section of the Headquarters Detachment, Station Complement, 1798th Service Command Unit, at Fort Des Moines, Iowa, inspected in Iowa. A fourth veterinary food inspection detachment with station at Fort Warren, Wyo., assumed control over origin inspections in western Nebraska and Wyoming.

The Eighth Service Command effected no great change in the status of its station veterinary detachments and, in fact, continued to enlarge them in order to perform off-station services in their immediate areas.  One service command veterinary unit, the 1875th Field Service Unit, was established, however, as a part of the service command headquarters, but it was limited to the conduct of food inspection services at procurement areas which were too far distant from the existing detachments.

In the Ninth Service Command, as of October 1944, veterinary personnel were assigned to 30 service command installations including 17 camps, 7 general and convalescent hospitals, 2 prisoner-of-war camps, a redistribution center, and 3 service command veterinary units. For the most part, the station veterinary detachments were kept intact or were enlarged in order to conduct off-station food inspections in their immediate areas; in fact, a few of them at one time were referred to as area veterinary detachments. However, only four true area detachments were ordered into organization as autonomous units with assignment to the cities of Los Angeles, Calif. (in  


192

1939), Phoenix, Ariz. (in March 1941), Salt Lake City (in July 1941), and Spokane, Wash. (in November 1941). While each assumed inspection responsibility in contractors' plants, commercial warehouses, and shipping points in its respective city, the area detachments also established subsistence inspection services in a large number of towns and cities such as were not adjacent to stations and airbases in the service command. These area detachments of the Ninth Service Command were not limited in their activities as were the service command, district, and area food inspection detachments of other service commands, because they also performed a variety of duties including veterinary animal service to installations and facilities in their areas. Beyond these area detachments there was no tendency to centralize food procurement inspection activities.

These area, district, and single service command veterinary detachments seemed to satisfy the needs of the concerned service command veterinarians. Their advantages were that administration was simplified in regard to training, selecting, and specially instructing the personnel who were permanently assigned to off-station duty, that morale and efficiency was maintained by proper promotion and by nonuse in other than the duties for which they had been trained, and that technical matters relating to the administration of Quartermaster contracts for subsistence were readily coordinated and made uniform throughout the service command area.

There were a number of service command controlled installations, other than Army camps, which were provided with meat and dairy hygiene and veterinary animal services. Included in this group were the named general hospitals, regional hospitals, convalescent hospitals, and hospital centers. A number of these were serviced by the local station veterinary detachment just as were other facilities located at that camp. Where a hospital was a completely separate installation, such as a general hospital, its veterinary service was provided either on an attending basis by an existing detachment from a nearby camp or by veterinary personnel assigned to it. By the end of the war, approximately one-half of these hospital installations had their own organically assigned veterinary detachments or personnel.

At these hospital installations, the veterinary detachments inspected the food supplies which were received for use in the hospitals and, in particular, surveyed the local dairy industries that were supplying fresh milk. Later, with the increased emphasis on programs for the rehabilitation and recreation of convalescents, Army horses were issued to many hospitals, and these veterinary detachments also provided veterinary animal services-in several instances, actually managing or supervising the hospital stables. A few hospitals also operated vegetable gardens, and at least one (Stark General Hospital) also established a poultry farm which came under the management of the hospital veterinarian. Elsewhere, these veterinary detachments managed the local laboratory animal colonies for hospital clinicodiagnostic laboratories and inspected the messhalls and the kitchen compartments on hospital  


193

railroad cars. Aside from the purely, on-station veterinary activities, the hospital veterinary detachments were often designated by service command veterinarians to assume inspectional responsibilities in nearby cities and towns in the same manner that other class I station detachments assigned such responsibilities. This was particularly true in the Third, Fourth, Eighth, and Ninth Service Commands; in fact, in the Ninth, the Barnes General Hospital veterinary detachment purposely reached a strength of 8 officers, 26 enlisted personnel, and 4 clerical employees (as of the fall of 1944). It is a matter of record that, until 1945, veterinary personnel were excluded from tables for the organization of general or other so-called fixed hospitals in the Zone of Interior; in the summer and fall of that year, presumably reflecting on the studies of hospital organization that were made during the earlier war years, Headquarters, Army Service Forces, and the War Department in manuals and other directives concerning hospital organization provided for a Veterinary Corps officer on the administrative staff of the commanders of named general hospital centers when operating as independent installations.

In the category of specialized service command-controlled installations, there were also the Army Ground and Service Forces distribution stations where soldiers were provided recreational leave pending their reassignment or redeployment overseas for a second time. Then also, there were the War Relocation Authority camps for interned Japanese, the many prisoner-of-war camps, and a few Army disciplinary barracks. Infrequently, these camps had mounted horse patrols, Army guard dog detachments, and sometimes their own vegetable gardens or hog farms. Usually, such installations were provided veterinary food inspection and animal services on part-time basis by Veterinary Corps officers designated as attending veterinarians from nearby Army camps.

Veterinary Animal Service

Of the three major activities of the Army Veterinary Service in the service commands-veterinary animal service, military meat and dairy hygiene service, and veterinary laboratory service and research-the second was by far the most extensive, and it together with the last-named activity was the most important during World War II. Veterinary animal service at station level in the service commands, though generally greater than in the peacetime years immediately preceding the war period, reached a maximum in 1940-42, and after that time progressively decreased (fig. 16). There were no auxiliary remount depots in the stations or camps such as had developed in World War I; now, motor pools provided the camp transportation facilities, and ground combat units were, with few exceptions, motorized and mechanized. By the end of the war, only Fort Riley, Kans., and Camp Carson, Colo., which were Army Ground Forces centers for training Cavalry and Mountain Warfare units, had any great numbers of animals; elsewhere, only small groups of horses and mules were being utilized such as at the  


194

FIGURE 16.-Post stables, Fort Douglas, Utah.

Army Service Forces installations concerned with hospital patient convalescence, rehabilitation and recreational projects, in rest camps, sometimes for drayage to conserve motor gasoline, and in ordnance depots and prisoner-of­war camps for guard patrol purposes. Many of the animals at the stations, as they became surplus to military needs during the war, were sold at public auction by U.S. Treasury Department officials; others were returned to the Quartermaster remount depots.

Station veterinary detachments experienced no major problems in the care of Army horses and mules. Stabling was generally adequate at the larger, permanent installations; elsewhere, temporary or makeshift facilities were provided, but generally even these proved to be adequate. Almost the same situation existed in regard to station veterinary hospitals. Feeds and forage for the animals were generally obtained through regular quartermaster channels of supply, these products being inspected by Veterinary Corps officers at the time of their procurement. The quantities of grains and hay inspected varied among the service commands and gradually decreased, along with the reduction in animal strength, as the war progressed. Diseases occurring more frequently in the camp animals included equine influenza and the related shipping-fever types of diseases, and ringworm. Both became commonplace, during the early war years, when the Army was handling large numbers of newly procured remounts and before an energetic  


195

program was undertaken for dipping animals before their issue from Quartermaster remount depots. Also, a vesicular stomatitis enzootic was experienced at stations and maneuver areas in southwestern United States in 1941 and 1942. Periodic mallein testing for glanders and the annual programs of immunization against equine encephalomyelitis and tetanus proved to be completely successful. Animals used in civilian educational institutions having Reserve Officers' Training Corps units also were attended by veterinary officers.

Station veterinary service with animals usually meant the professional care and management only of Army horses and mules, but, during World War II, for the first time, the Army dog and signal pigeon were added to the general definition of Army animals such as would be routinely cared for by the Army Veterinary Service. This station service with Army dogs paralleled that, with horses and mules; including the conduct of quarantines, physical examinations; immunization programs to prevent or control infectious diseases (such as canine distemper, rabies, leptospirosis, canine dirofilariasis); veterinary sanitation and hygiene; and the care, treatment, and hospitalization of the sick and injured dogs. For the most part, veterinary hospital facilities and supplies, already available at many stations and being used in connection with Army horses and mules, were modified as required; elsewhere, small veterinary hospitals with kennels were constructed or improvised. In some service commands, the Army dog population among the stations totaled as many as 260 to 600 (in the Second and the First Service Commands, respectively), but others had considerably smaller numbers; only a few of these dogs died or were destroyed on account of disease or injury while assigned to the stations. In regard to veterinary service with signal pigeons, one large loft with approximately 3,000 birds was located at Fort Benning, Ga. (in the Fourth Service Command). Of course, there was also the Signal Corps pigeon breeding and training center at Fort Monmouth, N.J. (in the Second Service Command), later removed to Camp Crowder, Mo. (in the Seventh Service Command), where Veterinary Corps officers were assigned. In the First and Sixth Service Commands, pigeons were located at a number of airbases and fields. However, by the end of 1944, many Army animals-horses, mules, dogs, and pigeons-had been disposed of by return to depots and centers, so that the end of the war found veterinary, service with animals at station levels in the service commands to have virtually disappeared.

The Army Veterinary Service with the First, Second, Third, Fourth, Eighth, and Ninth Service Commands provided professional care and treatment to approximately 1,500 horses which, pursuant to the agreement reached during September 1942 between the Secretary of War and the Secretary of the Navy, were loaned by the Army to mount U.S. Coast Guard beach patrols (31, 32, 33). Sometimes, Veterinary Corps officers were assigned full-time duty to the concerned Navy district headquarters but, in other


196

service commands, the Coast Guard patrol station commanders utilized the services of nearby station veterinarians. The animals of Coast Guard dog patrols also were cared for by the Army Veterinary Service; however, dogs were not a part of the interservice agreement, so that the required veterinary supplies were obtained, not through Army Medical Department supply channels, but by requisition on the U.S. Coast Guard. The station veterinarian, Fort Belvoir, Va., in the Military District of Washington, pursuant to periodically renewed agreements, since 1929, between the Secretaries of War and Navy, continued during the war to attend the animals which were maintained by the U.S. Marine Corps at Quantico, Va.; after September 1944, the horses belonging to the U.S. Marine Corps at Camp Crane, Ind., also came under the supervision of a Veterinary Corps officer. Another, but unofficial, veterinary animal services activity was the professional care and treatment of dogs, cats, and other pet animals belonging to military organizations or privately owned by military personnel. For the most part, this professional activity in Army camps was kept minimal, consistent with the requirements of concerned station commanders and the capabilities of station veterinarians to conduct it with the personnel already available; that is, no veterinary officers were specifically assigned to stations for full-time, official duty to conduct a veterinary practice on nonmilitary animals. In regard to these animals, however, station veterinarians, under supervision of the station surgeons, inaugurated programs for immunizing dogs and other pet animals against rabies and cooperated with local provost marshals in freeing Army camps of stray animals.

Veterinary Food Inspection Service

The veterinary meat and dairy hygiene services among the service commands were quite variable. Some services were concerned largely with food procurement inspections (such as the Sixth and Seventh), others with the surveillance inspections of products which were being moved to the ports of embarkation for oversea shipment (such as the First and Second), while others were areas for the concentration of troops in training and thus were consumer areas (such as the Fourth and Eighth).

At the start of the emergency periods, all station veterinary detachments were concerned with the inspections of meat and dairy products which were procured, received, and issued by the local Quartermaster officers. Occasionally, off-station veterinary inspections were made of fresh meat and some chicken or turkey, and, at least once each month, the veterinary officers inspected the local dairies and ice cream plants which were supplying the camps. Even less frequently-but after many endorsements on a basic communication (that is, "redtape")-so-called courtesy inspections were conducted by a few station veterinary detachments in contractors' plants of the meat and dairy products which were being processed for delivery to one or more far-distant camps, to a maneuver area, or to an oversea department.


197

Later, during the emergency periods, the veterinary meat and dairy hygiene inspection services at station levels were reorganized, and station veterinary detachments, which up to this time had so infrequently conducted courtesy inspections of products for delivery to far-distant points, were then requested by Army purchasing officers to perform inspections at commercial food establishments in nearby cities and towns almost continuously. This changeover took place concurrent with the centralization of procurement of nonperishable subsistence in several Quartermaster depots and with the establishment of the Quartermaster market center system of perishable subsistence supply. These new Quartermaster procedures for subsistence supply also saw the lessened activity of local Quartermaster or supply officers in procuring foods for Army camps because the latter were supplied from depots or Quartermaster market center distribution points. The station veterinary detachments, although continuing to perform surveillance or sanitary inspections of the foods received and used within their camps, soon found that the major part of their workload was not in the camps but off of the station or in an adjacent city or town. There, among other military activities, they conducted inspections on meat and dairy products during manufacture in commercial food establishments to determine compliance of the products with the sanitary or grade qualities, such as were specified in Army contractual documents, and conducted surveillance inspections of foods received, stored, transshipped, or otherwise handled at commercial cold storage plants, warehouses, and shipping points.

In connection with these off-station veterinary meat and dairy hygiene services by the station veterinary detachments, it may be noted that, in the early months of 1941, the Secretary of War authorized procuring depots to call on service commands (then designated corps areas) to issue temporary duty travel orders for their station veterinary detachments to inspect nonperishable products in contractors' establishments. Later, on 17 October 1941, a similar authorization was set up with regard to the inspection of perishable foods being procured by Quartermaster market centers. As the war progressed, the depot and market center demands on station veterinary detachments soon became overwhelmingly large; in fact, service command veterinarians, in order to relieve their workloads, frequently called on the Army Air Forces veterinary detachments to perform the required inspections, particularly, if the latter were located near a procurement point. Unfortunately, the service command-controlled veterinary inspections extended into geographic areas where depot veterinary detachments also were conducting origin inspections because the latter were granted inspection responsibilities over both perishable and nonperishable subsistence procurements in nearby cities and towns that were not unlike those assigned to the service commands. This situation became acute in a few of the larger metropolitan areas contiguous to Quartermaster depots and sections of Army Service Forces depots but, in some service command areas, no such overlap or duplication of effort


198

occurred because the concerned service command veterinarians either had restricted depot veterinary detachments to on-depot activities only or had encouraged the depot veterinary detachment to assume inspectional responsibility over a prescribed geographic area. Thus, in the fall of 1943, Headquarters, Army Service Forces, on request by the Surgeon General's Office, which had investigated the developing service command depot controversy in the metropolitan areas and had obtained concurring approval from the Office of the Quartermaster General, directed the assignment of veterinary food inspection responsibility throughout the Zone of Interior to the service commands, with the exception of those metropolitan areas that were contiguous to Quartermaster depots and sections of Army Service Forces depots where the depot veterinary detachment would conduct the inspections. The outcome of this directive was that some service commands gained personnel by transfer from depots located in their areas, and, in other service commands, just the reverse occurred. Actually, many service command veterinarians were of the opinion that the depot-assigned veterinary detachments were conducting a large percentage of the meat and dairy hygiene inspection workload within their geographic boundaries (in metropolitan areas over which they had no formal jurisdiction or technical control); in practice, the depot veterinary detachments generally coordinated their operations with those established for and used by the service command-controlled veterinary detachments. There was no change in this division of responsibility for meat and dairy hygiene inspection services in the service command areas for the remainder of the war period.

Concurrent with the origin inspections of food products, sanitary inspections were conducted in the food establishments or contractors' plants and commercial warehouses where these products were manufactured, processed, stored, and handled for Army procurement and distribution. However, abbatoirs and meat establishments which operated under the supervision of the Bureau of Animal Industry, U.S. Department of Agriculture, were exempted from Army veterinary sanitary inspections, as were any establishments that were inspected by recognized agencies which enforced sanitary standards equal to or above those of the Army. At the beginning of the war period, each Army veterinary detachment was conducting initial sanitary inspections of those establishments and dairies (and then at intervals of at least once a month) that were involved in the local meat and milk supply to the post, camp, or station concerned. Then gradually, with the developing system of regional and centralized procurement by market centers and depots, these veterinary sanitary inspections at the local level were newly coordinated on a service command-wide basis, and service command lists of approved establishments were promulgated. These lists were furnished to the buyers in market centers and depots as well as to the Army Exchange Service and other military procurement agencies. Routinely, the latter restricted their procurements from the establishments named in these  


199

lists. Owners of establishments not so listed, but desirous of becoming Army approved, were requested to submit requests for veterinary sanitary inspections direct to the procurement agencies which, in turn, endorsed the request to the service command headquarters where the service command veterinarian made the necessary arrangements for the sanitary inspection to be made by a veterinary officer at station in the immediate locality of the establishment. The results of the initial inspection and of subsequent monthly inspections of so-called approved establishments were continually summarized by the service command headquarters in officially changed lists of approved establishments.

The veterinary lists of approved food establishments included all processing plants, cold storage warehouses, and commercial distribution points located in the geographic area of the concerned service command-naming not only those under the inspectional jurisdiction of Army Service Forces station veterinary detachments but also those inspected by depot veterinary detachments and Army Air Forces base veterinary detachments. There is no information to indicate whether a format was prescribed during the war period for obtaining uniformity in the lasting of approved establishments by the nine service commands. Apparently, no uniformity was obtained, because in the list of one service command, the establishments were itemized by State, together with the city or town of location and the types of products for which approved. Another service command list contained an itemization of the food establishments according to the type of food product for which approved, together with the city of location and the specific veterinary detachment (station, area, depot, or airbase) which was responsible for performing inspections in the plant. In a manner, the lists of approved establishments were closely identified with lists of location of veterinary inspection stations, and, thus, each establishment or town was assigned the inspection responsibility of a certain detachment without chance of duplication of effort and overlapping of jurisdictional boundaries among the stations, depots, and airbases.

Aside from the inspection of foods procured and distributed to the Armed Forces, the Army Veterinary Service in the service commands inspected for nonmilitary Federal agencies and other agencies, when so requested and particularly when it had a bearing on the sanitary condition of foods supplied directly or indirectly to military personnel. A few such agencies were the Civilian Conservation Corps, War Relocation Authority, War Shipping Administration, Panama Railroad Company, British Ministry of War Transport, Veterans' Administration facilities, and military programs for feeding civilian population in liberated and occupied countries. At many Army camps, pursuant to authorization by local commanders, or on request of camp Quartermaster officers, veterinary personnel also conducted sanitary surveillance inspections of the fruits, vegetables, and other non-animal-origin foods that were received and issued at the camps.  


200

References

1. War Department Circular No. 59, 2 Mar. 1942, subject: War Department Reorganization.

2. TM 8-285, 27 Nov. 1942. 

3. TM 8-285, 15 Apr. 1944. 

4. TM 3-220, 15 Nov. 1943.

5. Letter, Col. J. E. Ash, MC, Curator, Army Medical Museum, to The Surgeon General, 22 Mar. 1944, subject: Establishment of a Registry of Comparative Pathology; with 1st indorsement of reply, American Registry of Pathology, 23 Mar. 1944.

6. Letter, Dr. J. G. Hardenbergh, Executive Secretary, American Veterinary Medical Association, Chicago, Ill., to Army Medical Museum, 5 May 1944, with reply thereto, 10 May 1944.

7. Surgeon General's Office Order No. 183, 4 Sept. 1944. 

8. AR 40-2005, 15 Sept. 1942.

9. AR 30-440, 18 June 1942. 

10. AR 40-2045, 2 Mar. 1922.

11. Memorandum, Office of The Quartermaster General (Brig. Gen. H. D. Munnikhuysen, QMC, Assistant The Quartermaster General), for The Adjutant General, 6 Jan. 1941.

12. Memorandum, from Chief, Veterinary Division, for Military Personnel Division (Commissioned), Surgeon General's Office, 10 Jan. 1941.

13. Radiograms, The Adjutant General, to the commanding generals and officers of New York and San Francisco Ports of Embarkation; Chicago, Boston, Jeffersonville, and Kansas City Quartermaster Depots, and San Antonio General Depot, 18 Jan. 1941. Amended by radiograms, 27 Jan. 1941; by radiograms, 27 Jan. 1941, to commanding officers of the Fourth Corps Area and New Orleans Quartermaster Depots; and radiogram, to commanding officer, Charlotte Quartermaster Depot, 5 Sept. 1941.

14. Radiograms, The Adjutant General, to Commanding Generals, First through Ninth Corps Areas, 18 Jan. 1941.

15. Letter, Commanding General, Chicago Quartermaster Depot, Chicago, Ill., to The Quartermaster General, 18 Dec. 1941, subject: Veterinary Inspection Service, with 1st indorsement thereto, to The Surgeon General, dated 22 Dec. 1941, and 2d indorsement of reply, by Col. R. A. Kelser, VC, Veterinary Division, Surgeon General's Office, 30 Dec. 1941.

16. Letter, Office of The Quartermaster General, to depot commanders, 10 Feb. 1943, subject: Courtesy Inspection of Subsistence Supplies.

17. Circular No. 63, Headquarters, Army Service Forces, 19 Aug. 1943, subject: Veterinary Inspections.

18. Dildine, S. C.: History of the Army Veterinary Service, Field Headquarters, Perishable Branch, Subsistence Division, Office of the Quartermaster General, Chicago, Ill., 1941. [Official record.]

19. Radiograms, The Adjutant General, to Field Headquarters, Perishable Subsistence Section, Office of the Quartermaster General, Chicago, Ill., and all Quartermaster market centers, 17 Oct. 1941.

20. Wardlow, C.: U.S. Army in World War II. The Technical Services. The Transportation Corps: Movements, Training, and Supply. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1956.

21. War Department General Orders No. 23, 5 May 1942. 

22. AR 40-2010, 27 Nov. 1942.

23. Services of Supply Organization Manual, 10 Aug. 1942.

24. War Department Circular No. 138, 14 May 1946, subject: War Department Reorganization.


201

25. Derrick, J. D.: Historical Report of the Army Veterinary Service, First Service Command, Army Service Forces, 8 September 1939 to 14 August 1945. [Official record.] 

26. Curley, E. M.: Historical Report of the Army Veterinary Service, Fourth Service Command, 8 September 1939 to 30 November 1945.  [Official record.]

27. Greenlee, C. W.: Historical Report of the Army Veterinary Service, Fifth Service Command, 8 January 1946. [Official record.]

28. Shook, L. L.: Historical Report of the Army Veterinary Service, Sixth Service Command, 8 September 1939 to 7 December 1941. [Official record.]

29. Wight, A. C.: Historical Report of the Army Veterinary Service, Eighth Service Command, 19 December 1945. [Official record.]

30. Medical Department, United States Army. United States Army Dental Service in World War II. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1955.

31. Letter, Col. E. M. Daniels, QMC, Office of the Quartermaster General, for The Surgeon General, 26 Sept. 1942, subject: Veterinary Service for Horses Assigned to Coast Guard for Coastal Patrol.

32. Letter, Office of the Quartermaster General, to The Surgeon General, 2 Dec. 1942, subject: Veterinary Personnel for Mounted Patrol, U.S. Coast Guard.

33. Finance and Supply Circular 125-43, U.S. Coast Guard, 15 June 1943, subject: Procurement of Veterinary Supplies for Horses and Dogs.

RETURN TO TABLE OF CONTENTS