.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

By Ronald H. Allen

Although the maritime industry has always been a target for a certain amount of contraband smuggling, since the mid 1980’s, it has additionally become somewhat of a "soft target" for potential terrorist attacks. The October 1985 highjacking of the Achille Lauro cruise ship, resulting in the murder of a U.S. citizen, sent shock waves through the cruise industry that were still being felt years later. Obviously, with the on-going terrorism events of the past few years up to the present, the danger to the maritime industry, as well as to the public that the industry serves, has never been greater.

Prior to the tragic events of September 11, 2001, the cruise industry, through the leadership voice of the International Council of Cruise Lines (ICCL), had made significant efforts to provide a safe and secure environment on its ships as well as at the ports being served. However, all the rules changed on that day that changed all of us. The challenge facing the cruise industry at that point was to find ways to increase security levels without delaying the embarkation process, or frighten away the passengers.

The enactment of the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 (MTSA), along with the updated International Ship and Port Facility Security Code (ISPS) of the International Maritime Organization, changed maritime security forever. While the need for the new requirements cannot be overstated, the new rules placed severe financial and logistical burdens on the industry. One of the key purposes of the new regulations was to prevent the introduction of explosive devices and materials to ships and port facilities. The industry has stepped up efforts to meet full implementation of those rules by the July 1, 2004 deadline.

A. Instruments

For the purposes of this discussion, we will not include the current x-ray technologies being used by the cruise lines, as these are not technically explosive substance detectors. They rely on the human recognition of a potential explosive device. While it is possible for a technically trained individual to recognize certain types of improvised explosive devices, the general use of x-ray technology now in use in ports and on-board cruise ships is not a guarantee that explosive substances can or will be identified.

The practical means available to the cruise industry for explosive detection can be placed in two main categories. The first category would be detection instruments. The second category would be detector dogs. Each of these "technologies" has strengths and weaknesses. The initial purchase or lease costs, maintenance costs and reliability of each method must be fully understood and carefully considered if one method is to be used exclusively.

The detection instruments most widely used are vapor tracers and trace detectors. Several of the major cruise lines have used hand-held, vapor tracer-type detection "wands". On the plus side of the argument, most of the instruments used by the cruise lines are relatively inexpensive (about $4,000 - $5,000 each), are light and are easily used on ships and in ports. On the negative side, of the instrument technologies available, these are the least effective and the least reliable. The most significant weakness of these instruments is in the capability of their technology. Explosives create a very limited "head space", or odor signature. The only explosive substance reliably detected by this type of instrument is dynamite. An additional problem with "wand" instruments is that when they need new parts (a frequent situation), they are difficult to get. There is also a class of more expensive ($25,000 to $30,000), yet marginally more effective, vapor detection instruments available. These are actually more sophisticated analyzers, but they are still limited in effectiveness by the relatively few explosive substances that can be identified by vapor alone. Additionally, as they are scientific analyzers, they must be calibrated and maintained by properly trained and proficient operators. Maintaining such proficiency can be difficult and expensive. These instruments still do not offer the protection and detection capabilities of the other high-end instruments in the next group to be discussed.

The next type of detection technology instrument available to the cruise industry is one that utilizes trace detection. This technology is what is used at airports to check for traces of explosive substances on luggage or other hand-held items. A pad is wiped along the surface of the item to be tested, then placed in an instrument using ion trap technology. On the plus side, extremely minute quantities of explosive can be successfully detected and identified using this technology. On the negative side, the cost of a portable version of an instrument using this technology is about $45,000 to $50,000 per instrument. Additionally, the issues of calibration and proficiency of the operators still present a substantial obstacle to be overcome. As far as being a practical means of screening cargo and provisions, these instruments are too slow and must be brought in contact with every item to be cleared. Since cargo and provisions waiting to be loaded onto cruise ships is shrink-wrapped and palletized during transportation and loading process, it is impossible to access each article with the equipment in the limited time available to complete the operation.

B. Detector Dogs

The second commonly available option for explosive detection is the use of trained detector dogs. On the positive side, dogs have the capability of detecting from very small to very large amounts of explosive odors. They are also capable of completing this task more quickly than any other technology available. Detector dogs are able to adjust to a wide range of climatic conditions and workplace environments. The explosive detection services utilized by the cruise industry are primarily focused on the search of provisions and supplies to be loaded on-board. As the majority of cruises embark in warm to hot climates, the robust work capabilities of detection dogs are perfectly suited for this type of assignment.

On the negative side, properly trained explosive detector dogs are difficult to find and acquire due to the difficulties associated with dog providers keeping an adequate supply of trained dogs "on the shelf". Once a detector dog has completed training, if it is not immediately deployed in the field, it will be necessary for the trainer to provide regular in-service training exercises to ensure that the dog remains proficient. Dogs must be maintained (trained, groomed, fed, and kept in good health). Simply buying a detector dog ($6,500 to $12,000) is not the answer. Unless there is oversight by an experienced trainer and/or administrator, a new dog program may have a difficult time succeeding in its mission. It is generally better for an agency to hire a service company for detector dog services.

The oldest explosive technology (dogs) still in use to day shows no signs of becoming obsolete. Working breed dogs have been used for their human detection capabilities since World War I. In August of 1942, the U.S. government established the War Dog Reception and Training Center in Front Royal, VA. Other dog training centers were established at Fort Robinson, Nebraska, Gulfport, Mississippi, Helena, Montana and San Carlos, California. During the course of the war, 10,425 working dogs were trained. Although 140 of those dogs were trained for mine detection (the first application of explosive detection dogs), only 2 were deployed under combat conditions in North Africa, with mixed results. In the Korean War, some 1,500 dogs were trained and deployed, mostly as patrol or sentry dogs. During the Vietnam War, 4,000 dogs were trained and deployed into combat areas, including dogs to be used in tunnels and for mine detection.

By the late 1960’s, civilian police agencies such as the Metropolitan Police Department in Washington, DC, as well as the military, were training dogs for explosive detection. As the result of a successful K-9 bomb dog search of an airplane in NYC in 1972, the Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) established a permanent explosive detector dog program. At the time of the 9/11 attacks, the FAA detector program had 176 detector dogs deployed at 39 airports around the country. Today, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) dog program, formerly the FAA program, has 285 detector dogs deployed at 64 airports, with plans to expand to 367 detector dogs deployed at 186 airports.

What are the capabilities and limitations of explosive detector dogs? A properly trained explosive detector dog is trained on 6 to 11 base odors that result in detection capabilities for several dozen military and commercially available explosive substances. In the last several years, several universities, including Auburn University and Florida International University, have established detector dog research programs. These programs have documented the technical explanations for the facts that military and police dog handlers have learned through field application over the last several decades. Those facts include the knowledge that dogs have the ability to detect and locate an explosive, narcotic or other contrabands odor in minute quantities, on people, in luggage, vehicles, cargo, ships airplanes, busses and trains. Auburn University, for example has determined that dogs can detect some contraband odors in parts per million, and other contraband odors in parts per trillion!

The majority of detector dogs are trained by means of behavior modification. Dogs learn through repetition and association. In the most basic terms, dog trainers get the dogs to respond to certain types of stimuli in a predictable way, in any work environment. They accomplish that by channeling the "student" dog’s natural hunt drive and retrieve drive to detect and locate specific odors. The dogs do the task they are trained for because they enjoy the work and get a reward of some type for successfully locating the target odor or odors. The dogs are rewarded in one of three ways. Those ways are, play (tugging on a play toy), food and praise. Play, the most widely used reward, is used generally accompanied by excited and happy praise of the dog by the handler. Once the dog has completed a behavior modification training program, it can be successfully deployed in very diverse types of working environments.

To ensure the greatest level of safety and success, reputable private companies providing detector dog services to the cruise industry use multiple dogs on each search. If one handler is assigned to a job, that handler will use two dogs. There are two reasons for this procedure. When one dog begins to show signs of fatigue, the handler rests that dog and uses the second dog. This will ensure that a strong, well-rested dog will be doing the search at the end as well as the beginning of the search. The second reason to use multiple dogs is to provide an independent "confirmation" of another dogs alert. For example, if one dog alerts to a box on a pallet of supplies being readied for loading onto a cruise ship, a second dog will be brought by that box to see if that dog will also alert to the presence of an explosive odor. This process may prevent the premature shutdown of the port operation, while local law enforcement is responding with a bomb squad. This practice may be instrumental in avoiding the loss of time and money associated with such a shutdown.

As long as the employing cruise line or port agency understands and addresses the various issues associated with detector dog programs, detector dogs offer the most flexible and complete basic explosive detection program available today. To achieve the greatest efficiency possible, the use of detector dogs, complimented by the use of the high-end ion scan equipment for confirmation of dog alerts, as well as substance identification, may offer the most effective explosive detection program for the cruise lines and other maritime applications.

Ronald Allen, President and Chief Executive officer of American Detection Technologies, Inc. (AMDETECH) has more than thirty years experience as a police officer, K-9 handler, trainer, judge, police administrator, expert witness, consultant and private business owner/operator.

Mr. Allen was formerly a National Vice President of the United States Police Canine Association; Director of K-9 Training for the Massachusetts Criminal Justice Training Council; a member of the task force teams for police dog minimum standards in Massachusetts, New York and Florida. He has taught detector dog training throughout the U.S., Canada, Costa Rica, Russia and Ukraine.

As an internationally recognized expert in his field, Mr. Allen has appeared in numerous media outlets, including the front page of the Wall Street Journal, and on several national and international radio show interviews, including the BBC and the Laura Ingraham Show.

For More Information Contact:

American Detection Technologies Inc.
225 West 34th Street, Suite 710
Tel: (508) 459-7800
FAX: (508) 459-7878
Internet: info@amdetech.com