Antianimal Biological Weapons Programs - Deadly Cultures: Biological Weapons Since 1945 - page 227

“no capability in anti-animal BW,” a claim that contradicted documenta-
tion from Fort Terry. There was a resurgence during the years that fol-
lowed, however; a 1957 Air Force historical study of US BW activities in-
dicated that two weapon systems had been successfully tested for use
with antianimal agents. 7
Contemporary studies of this program provide additional details of
these antianimal activities. Agents were arranged into three schedules
that presumably related to desirability and utility: schedule 1 contained
foot and mouth disease and rinderpest; schedule 2 included classical
swine fever (hog cholera), fowl plague, and Newcastle disease (of fowl);
and schedule 3 consisted solely of wart hog disease (African swine fever).
In addition, the antianimal utility of anthrax and Venezuelan equine en-
cephalitis were noted.
Four weapon systems suitable for use with these agents were devel-
oped:
• Spray tanks, developed by a commercial corporation for use by the Navy
with hog cholera and Newcastle disease
• Balloon bombs, codenamed E77, for use with a variety of agents and
considered a strategic weapon
• Feather bombs, codenamed E73, which were developed from a leaflet
dispersal device and contained four packets of inoculated feathers
• Particulate bombs, which were still under development in 1950 8
As well as these four military delivery devices, antianimal agents were
considered for sabotage operations. The 1950 Creasy report asserted that
covert contamination of animal food should initiate an animal disease
outbreak and that contamination with certain agents would also prevent
the reestablishment of animals in certain areas. Such capabilities, the re-
port declared, were easily attainable. 9
It has proved difficult to trace the history of antianimal biological sabo-
tage because, although there are references to sabotage capabilities, there
are few details about what these were or how, why, or when they were
developed, and if they were used. It is unclear when antianimal activities
were abandoned in the US, or whether they were sidelined before the of-
fensive antipersonnel program. Certainly, there are no indications that