DOG VERSUS MACHINE: EXPLORING THE UTILITY OF CADAVER DOGS AND GROUND-PENETRATING RADAR IN LOCATING HUMAN BURIALS AT HISTORIC ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES

Ground-penetrating radar (GPR) is becoming a reliable non-invasive tool in archeological investigations and can be used to precisely locate subsurface objects and discontinuities. Similarly, GPR has been utilized as a tool in locating clandestine burials in criminal investigations. However, it is often difficult to distinguish prehistoric and historic burials in GPR data, particularly when the buried materials are highly decomposed and have velocity properties similar to that of the surrounding substrate.

The use of cadaver dogs in locating buried human remains has also proven to be invaluable in criminal investigations. However, there have been very few studies on the archeological applications of cadaver dogs, especially in the detection and location of historic human burials older than seventy years. Therefore, this study explores the combined utility of cadaver dogs and GPR in locating human burials at historic archeological sites.

The study was conducted on a private, family-owned cemetery in Tuckaseegee, NC, which contained burials ranging from modern, marked graves to two-century-old, unmarked graves with limited historical records. The cemetery was initially surveyed using GPR, noting the locations of coffins and grave shafts. Subsequently, the cemetery was searched using six different cadaver dogs handled by four separate handlers. Trained final responses by the dogs were then compared with the GPR data.

GPR was found to be most effective in detecting modern gravesites where excavations and coffins were still well preserved and distinguishable, but less reliable in older, yet clearly marked, gravesites where high contrast materials had likely decomposed. In comparison, the cadaver dogs had mixed results detecting modern burials, but proved quite effective in detecting older gravesites where remains were likely in advanced states of decomposition due to minimal embalming and coffining.

The two methods proved to be most valuable when used in concert; finding recent burials that the cadaver dogs missed, and detecting subtle excavations that were not easily seen on GPR data. Thus, the two methods dovetail nicely, and may have profound implications for non-invasive examination of sensitive archeological sites.