K9 Units in Small Departments
K9 Units in Small Departments:
Overcoming Budget Constraints for Forming and Maintaining the Unit.
A Thesis presented to the Faculty of Mount Olive College in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Science in
Criminal Justice Administration
by
David Eric Anderson
Approved by: _______________________________ Date: _____________
Project Thesis Advisor: Prof. Mike Bumgarner
Cohort #17 Wilmington, North Carolina
ii
K9 Units in Small Departments:
Overcoming Budget Constraints for Forming and Maintaining the Unit.
By
David Eric Anderson
David Eric Anderson is presently employed by the Wilmington International Airport
Public Safety Office, Wilmington, North Carolina, as a Police Officer. Attaining the rank
of Lieutenant in 2005, David supervises the "C" shift which operates from midnight to
8:00 am. The Public Safety Office provides law enforcement support, aircraft fire
fighting and rescue response, and medical assistance to the airport and surrounding area.
David has worked with the Public Safety Office as a Public Safety Officer, Field Training
Officer, K9 Officer, and a supervisor since 2002. David holds an Intermediate Law
Enforcement Certification, North Carolina Law Enforcement Instructor Certification, and
has completed training as a Field Training Officer, K9 Officer, and the North Carolina
Justice Academy Police Law Institute. He is currently completing his degree in Criminal
Justice Administration at Mount Olive College. David lives with his wife, Beverly in
Wilmington, North Carolina. After graduation, David hopes to seek a Master's Degree to
help further his criminal justice career. David would like to teach criminal justice
courses at a local college.
iii
Abstract
This research provides guidance to the administrators of police departments with less
than twenty-five sworn law enforcement officers when forming and maintaining a K9
unit. Budget constraints are always a key focal point for police administrators. This
information will give ideas for overcoming monetary issues. A sample of 22
professionals in both administration and K9 units were surveyed using questionnaires
developed by the researcher. Four informal interviews were conducted with selected K9
experts. All subjects where chosen by convenience. Findings show that K9 units may be
proportionately expensive for small departments to develop and maintain, but offer an
invaluable asset to even the smallest department. Money is available to help relieve some
of the financial burden; the key is simply knowing where to find it. More research is
recommended in this area.
Keywords: K9, Administration, Budget, Canine, Police.
iv
Table of Contents
Personal Information Page ii
Abstract iii
Section 1. Introduction 1
Section 2. Literature Review 3
Section 3. Research Methods 15
Section 4. Research Findings 17
Section 5. Conclusions and Recommendations 22
References 23
Tables and Charts 25
Appendices 27
1
Section 1
Introduction
There are situations that are unique to small law enforcement agencies. One
unique concern, despite the agency's size, is budgeting. An agency will always need one
more officer, one more patrol car, or have a liability suit pending. The focus of this
research study will be small agencies comprised of twenty-five or less sworn law
enforcement officers. This research study will help small agency administrators make
clear decisions when considering forming a K-9 unit. This study will provide insight to
the challenges that may, or may not, be faced and the rewards available from a wellreceived
unit.
Challenges include, but are not limited to, public and municipal government
approval, funding, handler and canine selection, labor standards, sustainment issues and
many others. The rewards include improved public perception, decrease in crime, and
increased department moral, to list a few. Strategic planning ought to address
environmental and community challenges and expectations.
Eden (1993) explains that while cutting costs is difficult, it is a necessary "evil"
with any size agency budget. He adds that being conservative with training costs, which
may include training courses, in-service training, or associated equipment, will only put
the program and department at risk of liability.
During the past two decades, law enforcement officials have confronted
budgetary concerns influencing their organization's resources and ability to mobilize
strategic plans for the purpose of combating crime and distress (Bumgarner & Sjoquist,
2
1998). The utilization of police dogs has been instrumental in the ongoing conflict
between collaborative social actions, budget concerns, and crime (Charles, Henych, &
Wolf, 2002). The problem this study will address is grounded on budget constraints and
the formation and maintenance of police K9 units in small law enforcement agencies.
The lack of small agencies having the ability to form and sustain K9 units may, or may
not, have an adverse effect on a department's ability to effectively deter or prevent acts of
crime and antisocial behavior.
3
Section 2
Literature Review
Hess (2006) states that canines are one of the fastest growing tools for police to
use in the fight against crime. Canines can be used in narcotics detection, bomb
detection, tracking, arson detection, and as patrol dogs. Canines can be trained as single
or dual purpose dogs. Hamilton (2003) adds that some might think a canine unit in a
small department is unnecessary. There are many reasons why having a K9 unit with a
department, no matter the size, makes sense.
A few definitions should be addressed before moving forward to give a universal
understanding of terms. Hess (2007) has given then following definitions:
Patrol dog – a service dog selected by the trainer and qualified by recognized
standards to perform basic patrol functions. The tasks of property detection and
tracking are tasks of a patrol dog;
Detector dog – a service dog selected by the trainer and qualified by recognition
standards to perform searches for hidden substances, including narcotics and
explosives;
Dual purpose dog – a service dog selected by the trainer and qualified by
recognized standards to perform two distinct functions, traditionally, these
functions include general patrol and another specific type of detection;
Certified – A K9 team meeting the performance standards of the police
department or law enforcement agency. Certification is recommended no less
than once an annual schedule.
4
Many articles have been written on the use of canines in police departments. A
few articles, specifically addressing cost analysis, have also been written. When dealing
specifically with small departments with less than twenty-five sworn law enforcement
officers, few articles have been found. This may be due to small budgets that do not allot
for professional analysis. By specifically targeting small departments, unknown options
may be available to assist these administrators when faced with the question of starting a
K9 unit.
History
Imagine a 19th century constable walking the beat in the bustling cities of Paris,
London, Berlin or New York. At this time the only weapon the constable had at his
disposal was a night stick. On-duty injuries and deaths became a topic of great concern.
Criminals armed with knives or pistols were quick to take advantage of the meagerly
armed constable. At this point in history, German Shepherds were used as farm dogs
(Thurston, 1999). Wallentine believes that dogs were being used as tools long before this
and refers to ancient Egyptian papyri, which is several thousand years old, shows that
dogs were used as law enforcement tools during that time.
In 1896, Dr. Ham Gross had a cutting-edge notion for decreasing the injuries and
deaths of constables patrolling the night beats by teaming them up with canine partners.
In his book, Yearbook of the Austrian Constabulary, Gross referred to canines as "ideal,
ever-watchful companions of the constable in his arduous official rounds, gifted with
senses far more acute than those of his master." Law enforcement officials throughout
Europe loved Gross's idea and quickly implemented canines into their agencies. Van
5
Wesenmael, the Police Chief of Ghent, Belgium stated "I am not certain that a night
policeman dare intervene when he sees a crime committed by several criminals. I am
certain that in the future, when the service of night-dogs is organized, their success will
be brilliant." Three years later, in 1899, Wesenmael added 70 "night-dogs" to his police
force. The result was astounding, arrest rates went up and police casualties dropped to an
all time low. The next ten years brought about trained and certified dogs by the
thousands working in many European cities (Thurston, 1999).
German Shepherds were revered as the best fit for a law enforcement canine. The
American Ernest Baynes referred to them as "staunch, loyal and conduct themselves with
quiet dignity equaled by few." Police dogs fell into one of two categories in the first
years in service, Executive Dogs or Criminal Trackers. Executive Dogs were used as
bodyguards, which could disarm and restrain a fugitive until arrested. Criminal Trackers
were exactly that, canines with scent-tracking skills. German courts allowed the work to
be entered as evidence (Thurston, 1999). In the United States during the 1800s, when
municipal police departments first began using canines, Gardener (2001) claims, the ideal
was a dog so vicious that he had to be muzzled at all times except when on chase or
attack.
Major Edwin Richardson was a British canine trainer and president of the Berlin
Police Association. He toured Europe, visiting canine training centers in 1907. While in
Berlin Richardson "witnessed a murder trial in which the 'testimony' of a police dog was
entered into evidence" (Thurston, 1999). Richardson wanted to change training protocol
using positive reinforcement because he felt the canines where "exceedingly savage".
6
Richardson wanted police dogs to "release on verbal command". Newfoundland had
implemented non-aggressive dogs along its riverbank to assist people who fell or jumped
into the water (Thurston, 1999).
The trend in police canines has continued to grow to the present and will surely
continue in the future. Russ Hess, Executive Director of the United States Police Canine
Association speculates the number of canines serving in the Unites States is above 10,000
(Thurston,1999).
Research and Development
Research and development planning is crucial for administrators when making the
decision to create a canine unit. There are many thought processes and levels of
awareness needed to accurately plan for the new unit. Hess (2006) states that the first
thing administrators need to address is the community and sell its citizens on the need for
the canine. Once the public is aware, they may be involved in the process, which leads to
strong public opinion. The public may view the dog as belonging to the community, not
just the handler or department.
While the overwhelmingly most common complaint amongst K9 handlers is
funding, Eden states that the second most common complaint is how the unit is
administered. Eden also points out that it is crucial for the administration to understand
the needs and potentials of their dog sections. Hess (2007) provides great insights on the
pros and cons of forming a unit and what should be considered. Hess (2007) lists the
following pros:
1. To support the preventative patrol.
7
2. To perform safety checks, ensuring that unauthorized personnel
are not in restricted areas.
3. To support preparation for and management of special events.
4. To track fleeing suspects and support patrol officers in
apprehensions.
5. To support the delivery of warrants and high-risk arrests.
6. To search for narcotics and explosives.
7. Deterrence and Order maintenance.
8. Public relations.
9. Supports a higher level of officer safety.
10. The criminal element fear of dogs reduces resistance during
apprehension.
11. Facility searches.
12. Possible funding from Federal resources.
Hess (2007) also lists the following cons:
1. The Fair Labor Standards requirement for handler care and
overtime generated for at-home maintenance.
2. Loss of unit for continued maintenance training, which should
be at least sixteen hours a month.
3. Reliance on outside technical support.
4. High program start-up costs.
5. Difficulty in finding good dogs.
8
6. Difficulty in selecting the right handler.
7. Legal and public relations consequences of bites.
8. Demands of K9 administration.
9. Scheduling challenges limit availability of K9s for service.
10. Success requires a long-term investment.
11. Constant efforts are needed to ensure the unit is being used
appropriately.
By being aware of these issues up front, administrators can better prepare during
the planning process.
Hess (2007) continues by stating that once an administration has considered the
pro and cons, they then have to make the decision. This decision is based on five factors
listed by Hess: level of commitment, understanding and support of challenges, ability to
provide adequate resources, ability to provide adequate supervision, and the willingness
to enforce policies and procedures.
With all of the pros and cons weighted, what can a canine do that an officer can
not do? "The dog's ability to detect and distinguish between odors is hundreds of times
greater that man's. The dog's ability to see movement is unquestionably better than
man's (Rapp, 1990). Gary Duncan says that a dog's sense of smell is about 700 times
that of a human. Duncan also states that a dog can search a building in about ten minutes,
while it would take two to three hours for officers to search the same building (Hamilton,
2003) The Spokane, Washington Police Department's world wide web page,
http://www.spokanepolice.org/k9.htl, references a study done in Lansing, Michigan. The
9
study indicates that a single K9 team was able to complete building searches seven times
faster than a team of four officers. Additionally, the K9 team had a 93% success rate,
while the human team had a success rate of 59%, suggesting K9's are 44% more effective
than their human counterparts. The cost effectiveness of the increase success rate and the
time saved will be discussed later.
It is important to research all aspects of the canine program development. It is
important to find a dog with the right temperament (Hamilton, 2003). "German
shepherds are extremely popular due to their intelligence and adaptability.
Unfortunately, they are one of the highest priced work-dogs on the market" (Mesloh &
Wolf, 2002). "Purchasing a dog from a reliable working dog vendor costs more initially,
but should eliminate the need for extensive evaluations" (Hess, 2007). Duncan says the
Metropolitan Nashville Police Department won't use donated dogs anymore because it is
cheaper for the taxpayers to use a vendor who will select and provide the right dog and
warrant them (Hamilton, 2003). Mesloh and Wolf suggest the work life of a narcotics
dog is eight years (2002).
Handler selection is a crucial step in the research and implementation of the K9
unit. Eden sums this topic by saying, "you can handle a well trained dog by giving it
appropriate direction and working with the animal. However, you cannot train a dog by
simply learning how to handle it." Many of the same qualities needed for a successful
handler are the same for a successful supervisor. Hess warns of the mistake of trying to
have more than one handler for the same unit (2006). Other considerations include the
family's thoughts and feelings, since the dog will become part of the family. There must
10
be a bond between the handler and the dog and a "natural ability to communicate with
animals" (Anderson, 2006). Eden states that administrators should keep the fact in mind
that when using vendors to train handler candidates, they only have what the department
sends them, and do the best the can with that applicant. Don't try to place the blame of a
poor handler on the vendor alone.
"The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C. 201 et seq., sets the rules for
payment of overtime for most workers who are not administrators or executives"
(Anderson, 2006). "If administrators would take the time to investigate liability issues,
they would realize that it's not the problem they might perceive it is" (Hamilton, 2003).
Small departments may be entirely exempt from the FLSA if there are fewer than five
sworn police officers on the force.
"A strict agreement on how to compensate canine handlers for dog care is
important. Beginning with clear procedures for every aspect of the K-9 unit and sticking
to that plan will help guarantee a successful program" (Hamilton, 2003). "Under a FLSA
ruling, time spent by the handler in caring for a city-owned dog at the handler's residence
is compensable including time spent on days off and during vacation periods. Any offduty
training, unless specifically expressed, is also compensable" (Hess, 2006).
Costs
"The implementation of a canine program was found to be 33% more effective
than officers without narcotics trained dogs when calculating the number of possible
arrests" (Mesloh & Wolf, 2002). Hess states, "K9 programs require most of their
investment up front, many weeks and months before the unit enters service. Limiting
11
investment in dog selection, dog testing, dog and handler training, and procedures
development is the very activity that will damage the program down the road" (2007).
Hess also claims that first year expenses may be as high as $118,650, which
includes handler salary, overtime, per diem, canine and handler training, and a basic
equipment package (2007). Mesloh and Wolf suggest the total cost for a narcotic K9 at
$26,610 over eight years (2002). This figure only includes wages for the initial four
weeks of training, and using vehicle from the current fleet. "This figure places the hourly
cost of a trained narcotic canine at $1.81 per hour", compared to an average of $38 per
for an officer (Mesloh & Wolf, 2002). Wing figures the start up costs of a K9 unit as
$23,990.45 in 2004, excluding the cost of a patrol vehicle and estimating a year's worth
of supplies. Wing also figures the average handler's salary at $31,682 per year (2004).
In an accreditation inspection of the Orange County Sheriff's Office K-9 Unit
(dated 2001), when asked if costs and expenditures outweigh benefits derived, the answer
was: "The benefits from the K9 Squad's activity, arrests, and seizures far outweigh the
operational costs of the unit. The K9 Squad continues to apprehend criminals, look for
lost people, assist other members of the agency, as well as the public. The over all
efficiency of our agency would suffer if not for the cost effectiveness of the K9 Squad"
(T. Fleck, personal communication, 9/2/06).
"One team of three dogs can thoroughly search an area of one square mile in three
and a half hours. It would take 88 humans to search the same size area in the same
amount of time and with the same rate of success. In financial terms, the cost of the
12
canine search is approximately $200, versus $6,046 for the human one, according to the
New Hampshire Working Dog Association Newsletter" (Gardner, 2001).
"Essential equipment for starting a K-9 unit includes a dedicated car with a kennel
insert in the back seat, a temperature monitor to make sure the dog doesn't overheat, a
door popper to release the dog, leashes, tracking leads, bite sleeves and other training
equipment, an outdoor kennel at the handler's home, and of course, food" (Hamilton,
2003). Sergeant Kevin Rofidal, Edina, MI Police Department figures the cost of a K9
ready patrol vehicle, including gas, to be $27,000 the first year and $7,000 each year after
(Hamilton, 2003). The University of Central Florida Police Department overcame the
costly vehicle issue when a solution presented itself. "The department adopted a 12-hour
shift plan and found that it no longer needed several patrol vehicles to maintain the same
level of coverage. The department removed two vehicles from the fleet" and assigned
them as K9 take-home vehicles. They also had surplus pool vehicles after the shift plan
change (Mesloh, 2003).
Local businesses may be able to donate products or services. A fence company
may donate the fence for the kennel. A veterinarian may provide free or discounted
services and/or medications. (Hamilton, 2003)
Training
"The industry standard for canine maintenance is a minimum for four hours per
week, on average. This is recommended by the United States Police Canine Association,
the North American Police Work Dog Association, and the National Police Canine
Association. This training ensures that you do not have a misbehaving dog.
13
Memberships to any of these organizations could be very beneficial. The annual UPSCA
certification will support credibility as an effective team. The certification attests to the
canine team meeting a national standard" (Anderson, 2006). Anderson also states, "K9
Officers do more frequent emergency responses than other members of the department;
therefore they need to be very proficient in driving techniques" (2006).
Hamilton (2003) states, "you can buy a dog completely trained, but if the handler
hasn't gone through training with the dog, then you might run into trouble". Hamilton
goes on to say, "ideally, police dog training involves the canine handler as much as the
dog. Working together from the start builds a bond and makes sure both completely
understands the procedures" (2003).
Mesloh (2003) stated, "Small agencies can 'piggyback' off larger agencies.
These larger agencies usually have many more resources to draw upon and may allow
handlers to attend the training that they conduct. Moreover, by participating with other
agencies, handlers are exposed to varied methodologies of training, while the relationship
between agencies is strengthened by the interaction of their personnel". Hamilton
supports Mesloh (2003) warning, when handlers attend other agencies' training academy,
it can cost a lot of money for food and lodging. "But cutting training short to save money
will not be cost-effective or as safe in the long run" (Hamilton, 2003). Chapman
concluded in a 1980 study that the top five reasons canine programs were discontinued
were:
1. Insufficient public funding,
2. Handler left the force; and no other officer was interested in the unit,
14
3. Handler was promoted to another role in the agency,
4. Low volume of crime for which K9 was needed, and
5. Unit administration/supervision was decentralized (1990).
15
Section 3
Research Methods
Data for research was collected to prove that K9 units can be cost-effective tools
for law enforcement. Merriam-Webster defines cost-effective as economical in terms of
tangible benefits produced by money spent.
Data for research was collected using two methods. The first method
administered was a quantative instrument this study will refer to as the questionnaire. A
questionnaire produced by the researcher was sent to 35 recipients via email and in
person. Twenty-two (63%) completed questionnaires were returned. The second method
used was a qualitative instrument this study will refer to as the interviews.
The questionnaire consisted of twenty questions using the Likert-type Scale. The
answers to the questions are strongly agree, agree, do not know, disagree, and strongly
disagree. The researcher was looking for any instances where handler perceptions and
thoughts differed from those of the administrators. Unfortunately, no administrators
responded.
Questions covered four focus arenas. They were cost versus benefit, funding
sources, public perception, and unit effectiveness. The last four questions collected data
pertaining to the current number of active K9 teams, the amount of time the agency had
employed a K9 unit, the total number of sworn officers, and what areas of training each
active canine specialized in. In addition to the questionnaire distributed via email or by
hand, each interview email contained a digital copy of the questionnaire for distribution
to that agency's K9 handlers. None of these questionnaires were returned.
16
For convenience, the interview process was comprised of ten questions sent to 17
recipients via email. Four of the seventeen recipients, or 36%, responded. Nine chiefs of
police were emailed; one response was received from this group. This response was
generated by the handler himself, which was appropriate. Four expert trainers were
emailed and three responded almost immediately. The remaining six interview emails
were sent to a group of K9 supervisors and two researchers, none in this group replied.
17
Section 4
Research Findings
The total of all responses of the questionnaire were tallied into a Microsoft Excel
database for statistical evaluation. Chart one displays the results broken down by
questions. To make it easier to view, the researcher grouped strongly agree and agree
responses together in one category. This same method was used with disagree and
strongly disagree responses.
Ninety-five percent of the respondents agreed that public perception is important,
and services provided by the K9 unit greatly out weigh the costs. One hundred percent of
the respondents agreed K9 handlers should be provided with take home vehicles, the
canine should be kept at the handler's home, handler selection is critical to success, and
monthly training requirements promote success. With respect to funding, 50% disagree
that grants are available to cover most costs associated with K9 unit costs, while 23%
disagreed and 27% did not know. Nine percent of the respondents are employed by law
enforcement agencies that are not funded by tax base. This does not mean that these are
private entities. Wilmington International Airport, NC, for example, is not funded by tax
dollars. As a public entity, it is funded with generated revenue and grants. All 22
respondents disagreed that public demonstrations by the K9 unit equate a waste of
financial resources.
When asked if their local government planners are advocates for the K9 program,
36% of respondents did not know, the remaining 64% was split evenly between agree and
disagree. Ninety-five percent of respondents said that publicity is good for educating the
18
public about the unit and its uses. Sixty-eight percent claimed that donations greatly
reduced costs at their respective agencies, conversely, 27% disagreed and 5% did not
know. Sixty-four percent of all respondents believe that K9 units should be a part of
every department, regardless of size. Hamilton (2003) agrees with this by stating, "one
of the biggest problems in not having your own K9 unit is depending on another
department to have theirs available when you need it." Twenty-seven percent of the
respondents disagree with Hamilton and 9% did not know.
The researcher was surprised to learn that 5% of the respondents did not believe
that K9 units would reduce crime and 9% stated that they did not know. Also, 64%
believe it is not cost effective to use units from other agencies. Eighteen percent of the
respondents think that it is cost effective, while 18% did not know. Ninety-five percent
of respondents believe K9 handlers should be compensated for at-home care, 5% did not
know.
The goal was to survey departments with twenty-five or less sworn law
enforcement officers. Due to convenience and for a greater knowledge base, some
officers with larger departments were asked to complete the questionnaire. The average
department size of respondents was 102 sworn law enforcement officers.
19
Table 1
Respondents by Department Size
Position ƒ %
Less than 25 10 46
26-150 6 27
151-400 6 27
Total 22 100
The average number of canines per department was four with the largest being ten
belonging to a department of 125 sworn law enforcement officers. Seventeen years and
four months is the average service to date of canine units surveyed; 41 years is the oldest
unit surveyed. The specialty and training break downs are as follows: Patrol =64%,
Narcotics Detection =58%, Explosive Detection =12%, Tracking =76%, Detention =
10%, Cadaver = 8% and no respondents are operating with Arson trained canines.
Of the seventeen interviews emailed, four replies, 24%, were received. For
confidentiality purposes, the interviewees will be referred to only by first and last initial.
Responses came from three experts, R.H., T.F., and G.G. A response was also received
from a local canine handler and supervisor C.M.
The interviewees were asked what advice they may have for small agency
administrators when forming K9 units. Commitment is the key, once a program is
started; plan to stick with it for the long term. Administrators should be cautious with
20
handler selection, be aware of FLSA laws and attend seminars specific to K9 unit
administration.
The respondents stated the funding is available through local resources,
Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security. T.F. commented
further about local donation; "most communities will donate to a canine program. The
key to success is 'ownership' of the dog. The community must believe they are donating
'their' dog and be a part of the ownership of the dog. Therefore, community dog
demonstrations, community canine newsletters, etc., will assist the community in funding
and having ownership in your canine program" (personal communication, 3/2/07). The
average response of what the average annual cost of a canine unit was $2,000.
Common mistakes that occur during K9 unit administration was answered as lack
of training for administrators and handlers, long-term funding, improper deployment,
accidental bites and how they are handled, and FLSA knowledge. R.H. broke it down
into eight problem areas:
• Span of control – assigning a K9 unit to work under multiple
supervisors,
• Unity of command – each supervisor feels they know the best way to
utilize the unit,
• Poor Utilization,
• Lack of goals for the K9 unit,
• Unit is placed under control of disinterested supervisor,
21
• Failure to recognize training as a required on going liability to
maintain an effective unit,
• Selecting a bad handler, who has the wrong reasons for the
assignment,
• Failure to address FLSA requirements (personal communication,
3/2/07).
Examples that were given concerning standardized, K9 specific record keeping
were national certifications, use of force occurrences, all training conducted, and
deployments. Also addressed was a complete diary of every action anytime the
canine was transported, even during off-duty hours, equipment inventories, and
medical records. When asked about handler selection, T.F. summed it up with
traits such as maturity, patience, initiative, flexibility, dependability, enthusiasm,
emotional stability, good communications skills, good physical condition and
health, comfortable with and around dogs, good interpersonal relationships with
the public and co-workers, home life that is compatible with canine, and a
minimum of five years law enforcement experience (personal communication,
3/2/07).
The researcher asked each interviewee their feelings on contracts for the
K9 position and a fair tenure. T.F. stated that labor laws prevent written
contracts. The consensus was an understood 4 – 5 years, with one dog. R.H.
added the best person should be "selected, not eliminated, from consideration for
promotion.
22
Section 5
Conclusions and Recommendations
From the information collected, the majority of K9 units in service today are
relatively new. The oldest of the units that responded to the survey was 41 years old,
while the youngest was 3 months old.
It is the researcher's opinion that if a department is truly serious about forming
and maintaining a K9 unit that there are many options available to facilitate it. It may
just be a matter of doing some leg work. One important facet to keep an eye on is
mentioned by Chapman (1990), in which he refers to "characteristics of jurisdiction"
when developing the unit model. Obviously, if the jurisdiction has no warrant for a K9
unit, which is very few unique instances in the researchers opinion, do not form one.
The researcher would also like to comment on a quote cited by Rouhib (2003),
"research indicates that the canine would generate more revenue than any other unit in
the police agency". This may be true, but should never be used as a "selling point",
because there will be pressure to produce funds. While the K9 unit will or should
certainly produce its own revenue, there should be no pressure of minimum seizures.
Mesloh and Wolf believe "the cost range of $1.98 to $2.38 per hour to fund a
canine program provides an opportunity for even the smallest college [or municipality] to
reap the benefits of this law enforcement tool (2002). "Dogs do not require minimum
wage. They are happy employees as long as they are fed, cared for, and allowed to work"
(Rapp, 1990).
23
References
Anderson, D. (2006, October). Basic K9 handler's orientation. Unpublished lesson plan
presented in fulfillment of North Carolina General Instructor Certification.
Bumgarner, M., & Sjoquist, D.L. (1998, Summer). The impact of crack enforcement on
police budgets. Journal of Drug Issues, 28, 3.
Chapman, S. (1990). Police dogs in North America. Springfield, Ill: Charles C. Thomas,
Publisher.
Eden, R. (n.d.). Administrating the K9 unit. Retrieved May 18, 2007, from
http://www.policek9.com/html/k9admin.html.
Eden, R. (n.d.). Vendor vs. agency training. Retrieved May 18, 2007, from
http://www.policek9.com/html/vendoragency.html.
Eden, R. (1993). K9 Officer's Manual. Bellingham, WA: Temeron Books Inc.
Hamilton, M. (2003, February). How to start a K-9 unit. Police: The law enforcement
magazine, 27-2, 18-23.
Hess, R. (2006). The forming of a canine unit. Retrieved August 26, 2006, from
http://www.uspcak9.com/training/formingacanineunit.shtml.
Hess, R. (2007). The K-9 program. Manuscript in preparation.
Mesloh, C. (2003, October). Canines and community policing: An Introduction to K-9
Lite. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 72, 14-18.
Mesloh, C., Henych, M., & Wolf, R. (2002, November/December). Sniff test: utilization
of the law enforcement canine in the seizure of paper currency. Journal of Forensic
Identification, 52, 6.
24
Mesloh, C., & Wolf, R. (2002). Establishing a canine unit on a university campus: A
cost-effective analysis for the University of Central Florida. Orlando, Fl: University
of Central Florida, Department of Criminal Justice and Legal Studies.
Rapp, J. (1990). How to train dogs for police work. Fairfax, VA: Denlinger's
Publishers, LTD.
Rouhib, F. (2003, September). Implementing a canine unit in a small police agency.
Retrieved June 1, 2007, from
http://www.emich.edu/cerns/downloads/papers/PoliceStaff/Patrol,%20Operations,%2
0Tactics/Implementing%20a%20Canine%20Unit%20in%20a%20Small%20Police%
20Agency.pdf.
Thurston, M.E. (1999, September). The constable's companion. Dog World, 84, 46-50.
Wallentine, K. (n.d.). Successful risk management for K9 programs. Retrieved May 18,
2007, from http://www.policek9.com/html/wallen1.html.
Wing, J. (2004, March). Canine drug program cost analysis. Boise, ID: Idaho Criminal
Justice Council.
25
Tables and Charts
Chart 1
Questionnaire Results
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Questions Number
Frequency
Agree 21 21 22 22 5 20 22 7 21 15 22 19 14 21 4
Don't Know 6 8 1 2 2 1 4
Disagree 1 1 11 2 22 7 1 6 1 6 14
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Questionnaire Key
1. Public perception is important for a successful K9 unit.
2. The service provided by a K9 unit greatly outweighs the cost of maintaining the unit.
3. K9 handlers should be provided with specially equipped "take home" vehicles to transport the canine.
4. To ensure the strongest possible bond between handler and canine, the dog should be kept at the handler's residence.
5. Grants are available to cover most costs associated with K9 units.
6. My agency is funded by tax dollars, as opposed to being a privately funded agency.
7. Handler selection is critical to a successful K9 unit.
8. Public demonstrations by the K9 unit are a waste of time and money.
9. Local government planners are strong advocates of the K9 unit.
10. When forming a new K9 unit, publicity is good for educating the public about the unit and its uses.
11. Public and/or corporate donations greatly reduce the costs of the K9 unit(s) at my agency.
12. Monthly in-service training requirements promote successful K9 units.
13. K9 units reduce crime.
14. K9 units should be a part of every department regardless of size.
15. Handlers should be compensated for the time spent caring for the canine at home.
16. It is more cost effective to use K9 units from other agencies utilizing mutual aid agreements.
26
Chart 2
Responding Agency Sizes
59%
18%
14%
9%
50 -
50 - 200
201 - 300
301 +
27
Appendix 1
Questionnaire
K9 Unit Budget Questionnaire
Do not write your name on this questionnaire since the information you are giving is confidential. It will
not be used for or against you in any way. The data received will be compared with data from other
individuals to better understand operating budgets for K9 units in departments with less than twenty-five
officers. This research is being conducted by Lieutenant David Anderson in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Science in Criminal Justice Administration from Mount Olive
College, Wilmington, North Carolina. Your cooperation will be greatly appreciated and your opinions are
important to this research. Thank you!
Please circle the selection that expresses your feelings about each statement.
SA = Strongly Agree A = Agree DK = Don't Know D = Disagree SD = Strongly Disagree
1. Public perception is important for a successful K9 unit.
2. The service provided by a K9 unit greatly out weighs the cost of maintaining the unit.
3. K9 handlers should be provided with specially equipped "take home" vehicles to transport the canine.
4. To ensure the strongest possible bond between handler and canine, the dog should be kept at the
handler's residence.
5. Grants are available to cover most costs associated with K9 units.
6. My agency is funded by tax dollars, as opposed to being a privately funded agency.
7. Handler selection is critical to a successful K9 unit.
8. Public demonstrations by the K9 unit are a waste of time and money.
9. Local government planners are strong advocates of the K9 unit.
10. When forming a new K9 unit publicity is good for educating the public about the unit and its uses.
11. Public and/or corporate donations greatly reduce the costs of the K9 unit(s) at my agency.
12. Monthly in-service training requirements promote successful K9 units.
13. K9 units reduce crime.
14. K9 units should be a part of every department regardless of size.
15. Handlers should be compensated for the time spent caring for the canine at home.
16. It is more cost effective to use K9 units from other agencies utilizing mutual aid agreements.
28
17. My agency currently has _______ active K9 units.
18. My agency has been utilizing K9 units since __________.
19. My agency has _______ sworn officers. (Please include vacant positions.)
20. My agency utilizes K9 units in the following specialties. (Please denote number.)
• Patrol (Aggression) _______
• Narcotics Detection _______
• Explosive Detection _______
• Tracking _______
• Detention _______
• Arson _______
• Cadaver _______
Thank you again for you time! If you would like to make any additional comments please feel free to
email me at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..
NOTE: Font reduced on questionnaire to allow for proper formatting.
29
Appendix 2
Interview Questions
Reproduction of Email:
Gentlemen,
I am requesting your assistance. I am a Lieutenant, and a former K9 handler, with Wilmington
International Airport Police Department in Wilmington, NC. I am currently completing my
baccalaureate degree in Criminal Justice Administration and required to complete a thesis paper.
My paper pertains to forming and administering K9 units in small departments. I believe that
each of you has valuable knowledge in this area of research. The questions below are
considered an informal interview. I want to thank you in advance for any assistance you provide.
Please cut and paste the following questions into your reply email and answer as you see fit.
1. What advice do you have for small agency administrators when forming K9 units?
2. What are the best resources for grant research and other funding?
3. What would you say is the average annual cost per K9 team/unit?
4. What are some common mistakes that may occur while administering K9 units?
5. What standardized, but K9 specific, forms or records should be used and how frequent?
6. What criteria should be considered when selecting a handler?
7. Does your department have contract agreements with your handler(s)? For example,
pertaining to the time in that position.
8. What is the size of your department? How many K9 teams do you have, and what areas do
the perform? (i.e. narcotics, patrol, or explosives)
9. Is there anything else that you feel would be helpful to my research?
10. Please provide your name, rank, and department mailing address.
Once again, I know that each of you are very busy with the administration of your perspective
agencies and I truly appreciate the time you have taken to assist me in my research. I have also
attached a questionnaire in the event your handler(s) may want to contribute to my research. It
can be faxed to the number below, please provide a cover sheet, Attn: Lt. D.Anderson. If there is
ever anything that I can do for you, please contact me.
Sincerely,
David Anderson
Lieutenant, 103
Wilmington Int'l Airport Police
1740 Airport Boulevard
Wilmington, NC 28405