PK9M Feature: The 1% by Kenneth Gregory
All K-9 Teams working the street must be ready to deal with the most violent suspects.
Generally, 90% of the suspects that patrol dog teams encounter surrender with no force or bite needed. Nine percent of suspects give up immediately when a bite is used. One percent of those suspects bring the fight to us and the mere use of the K-9’s bite is not enough. These suspects may be under the influence of drugs, may have mental disorders, or have anti-authority sentiments. Whatever their mental or physical state, they are motivated to resist and not give up, and, therefore, must be overwhelmed by enough force to be taken into custody.
These percentages are not backed by any known study or book. There are some K-9 teams whose personal percentages throw these percentages off drastically, but as a whole, these percentages are pretty accurate and are used to support a point.
Many K-9 teams only deal with the nine percent type of suspects their entire careers. However, K-9 teams that must deal with the one percent will fortunately be equipped with the training and skills to be successful.
One of the main deciding factors in training a K-9 team to move to operational status should be that team’s ability to deal with this one percent. A K-9 team may have success with the nine percent of suspects, but they are a ticking time bomb if they are not ready for the worst of the worst. Dogs must be at a level in their training to be called out of a fight and take the fight to these types of suspects while other force options are being deployed. Handlers must be able to read this encounter and make decisions quickly, including deciding to call the dog out of the fight if the dog is in over its head or add additional force to assist the dog. Training gives the handler and dog the skills needed. The better trained the handler is, the quicker his or her reaction time will be. With any force we use, the more skilled we are at using it and the faster we apply it, the better the results. The dogs and handlers must have solid training programs that emphasize preparedness for the one percent of suspects.
As law enforcement agencies, trainers, and handlers, we must address the one percent and make preparing for them the priority. Other disciplines like tracking, area search, building search, and evidence article search require a basic foundation and reliability, but can all be worked on throughout the career of a canine team to make them increasingly proficient and reliable locating tools. However, the K-9 team’s ability to deal with the one percent of suspects must be viewed as pass or fail. Lives are at stake. The night a K-9 team graduates and goes operational, they could face that one percent of suspects.
Preparing K-9 teams for this one percent is not the standard in our industry as a whole. Why?
The first reason is the lack of a unified standard to measure police service dog teams, leaving our industry open to suggestion and lack of focus. While there are states and agencies with clear standards that prepare teams for the one percent and much more, many do not. This leaves those agencies open to suggestion from administrators, trainers, associations, and vendors, which is a weaknesses in many law enforcement K-9 programs.
Administrators with varying guidance, knowledge, and standards on which to base their decisions historically do more harm than good concerning K-9 programs. Administrators need a standard so they are forced to make certain decisions. They need to understand that training and preparing K-9 teams costs money and takes time. Shortcuts in training and funds as well as a lack of understanding about the minimum level K-9 teams should be operating at opens these agencies up for liability and puts handlers, officers, and the communities they are sworn to protect at risk.
Trainers without clear standards of training vary in skill level and motivation. I am not the best trainer in the world. My heart is in the right place, but my mind is always trying to catch up. What do I mean? I am not a trainer because it’s an easy duty assignment or because it feeds my ego. I am a trainer to prepare K-9 teams to perform on the street at the highest possible level based on my knowledge, experience, and skills; to reduce liability for my agency; and increase the safety of the K-9 teams in my charge. When that storm comes, I want my teams to not only fight, but also win. I can’t rest if I think one of my teams is not trained and prepared for at least that one percent of suspects. That motivates me to train and to learn everything I can to become the best resource for my agency and handlers. This is not so for every trainer. Many exist because of the lack of unified standards and accountability as an industry. Year after year, they put teams out that are at risk and open their agencies to liability. These trainers could be members of an agency or a vendor. When an agency has no standard to which they can hold a trainer accountable, that trainer’s skills, opinions, and motivations become the agency’s standard. Depending on the trainer, that could be good or very bad. I have seen K-9 programs go from good to bad and bad to good overnight with just a change in trainers. I believe agencies that have solid standards for trainers experience have far fewer drastic shifts in training consistency.
Police canine organizations do provide a standard. However, with new organizations created every year claiming to be better than the last one, it is difficult to determine which to join. Some claim to be more street oriented and some are run like a protection dog sport. It is suggested that federal, state, and government-run K- 9 teams belong to at least one of these private organizations for a standard, but it is still not mandatory unless an agency makes it so. The saying that belonging to one of these organizations is better than nothing doesn’t fly. A K-9 team can belong to one of these organizations and still not be prepared for the one percent of suspects. When looking into joining one of these organizations, it is important to find one that adequately prepares teams for the one percent and that this is an element in their certification. Then we have the vendors. There is big money in training and importing well-trained police dogs. There are very reputable vendors that help our industry, but there are many more every year that are trying to make a quick buck. The vending of dogs and the training of dogs and handlers by these private vendors is unregulated. The standards of service and training are dictated by what that vendor wishes it to be. This is a business for them, and the less time and money they put into vending and training, the better their bottom line will be. A vendor may be reputable or they may be corrupt. There are agencies that trust unregulated private vendors to train officers in one of the highest liability concerns for their agency — the K-9 team. Research is necessary when an agency relies on a vendor for training. Over the years, I have had the opportunity to work with three K-9 teams that were products of three different private vendors. All were touted as pre-trained patrol dogs with two having a six-week handler course and one an eight-week handler course. After my evaluation, I found that the team’s training was not complete enough to go operational. My patrol dog class is 18 weeks long at a minimum. These vendors only prepared dogs through what would be the equivalent of weeks ten to twelve in my program. Additionally, the handler training was no better. Yes, they had some dog handling skills, but the operational training of applying their dog to the street was inadequate. How could they practice street scenarios when the dogs were six to eight weeks from being street worthy? So, my standards were higher than those of the vendors. If the team is not ready and prepared for the one percent of suspects, then all the pre-training the vendor claims are just part of a dog and pony show. We are talking about police K-9 teams. I wouldn’t send a police officer on the street with a malfunctioning gun or with inadequate force training. Vendors need to stop using the term pre-trained because it is misleading to agencies that don’t know better. The dogs and handlers are either trained and prepared for police operations on the street or they are not. Due to the lack of consistency I observed within vendor pre-trains and handler training, I recommend that vendor K-9 teams be evaluated by independent reputable police dog trainers before they hit the street.
At no other time in the history of the police canine has information been so available to agencies, trainers, and handlers. This is in part due to the formation of this magazine, the many seminars held each year, and the Internet. The industry needs to have unified street-oriented standards for police K-9 operations. No one handler’s life is more important than another’s. While we have well trained and prepared K-9 teams, there are many that are not. We all should be able to agree to start with one standard. All patrol dog teams should be prepared to deal with the one percent of suspects before going operational. When we accomplish this standard and get administrators, trainers, associations, and vendors all on the same page, we can then work on standards for the other needed skills and disciplines. This would create well-trained, reliable, and consistent locating tools across the board, all of whom are prepared for the one percent.
Kenneth “Kent” Gregory is a Sergeant with the Calvert County (MD) Sheriff's Office. He is a K-9 Unit supervisor, handler, and trainer who is responsible for six fulltime handlers and 10 working dogs. Gregory has been with the Sheriff's Office for 14 years and in K-9 unit for 12 of those years. Prior to that, he spent four years in the U.S. Air Force as a military working dog (MWD) handler. Contact him at [email protected]
