Hi, I would like to throw this question out to all administrators and people in the know, and heads of Service Animal Divisions, with (Police) k9 units and or Equestrian units or even Military or Prison services or any one involved in semi-Government and Government organs that works with service animals in a policing role or environment.

I am sitting with a dilemma, and need to reference my point of view when it comes to where does the training function of a k9 unit belong when it comes to accountability for training in the departments within the police organisation context.

So the question is: should the dog training function sort under the command of the training academy where all training sorts under or under the k9 unit as a separate branch called specialised animal training division.

The reason why I am asking this is our department has re-structured and now we have a deputy Chief of Police Training and Municipal courts, so any thing that has “training” in it has to be moved over to that section, apart from us – well that is my plea, and this is where I need some input.

- The Service Animal Division-, here comprises of a k9 unit (72) dogs and an Equestrian unit (80) horses.

- Now we have always done our own training for years (on a virtual training leg on each organigram with instructors and field training officers and trainers), but this has not been approved as yet in the new dispensation, now we have a move from the “people in the know” to consolidate all training under the “Directorate training” with no exceptions. Now I am asking my self if this is wise or am I just paranoid, what is the move and feeling in other agencies where does your animal training sort under? And what moved the decision to place it their, and do you support it, does it work and why?

And for those who are not administrators give me an educated argument. The for or against type of scenario that I may use, from your experience in the field etc…….

Having none of the experience you are requesting, I do have couple of thoughts.

One thing I see a lot watching Police dogs is that there is a lack of good maintance training going on. I have talked with a couple of profesional trainers and asked their opinion on the subject. What they have told me makes some sense. The general feeling is that the Training Director in most Departments is a handler that may or may not have much experience in actual dog training. Often they got their experience through work in the department, with little or no actual training experience. This often leads to deficiencies in training and the Out seems to be the first thing to go. Some departments get assistance from qualified trainers either by paying for the service or through "donation" of the services. The latter is a little hit-or-miss.

So I wonder if by moving the responsibility for the training to a training department you may be able to transefer the budget requirements to a department other than the K-9 team. I also wonder if there might be an opportunity to get the services, either full or part-time, for a well qualified trainer either sworn or not(If you can find one). The other question I would have is if the training was handled in a seperate department would it yeild increased credibility to the training, review of or initial certification, and perhaps even a review of use of force by the teams.

That may yield some benifit. I see a lot of pitfalls that I am sure you are thinking about.

Reinier,
Funny you should bring this up now. Our unit is currently in turmoil due to a new chief with some strange ideas. Our K9 supervisor and trainer worked a dog for 7-8 years. He is also a state certified K9 instructor and well on his way to getting his evaluators certification. His predecessor had the same qualifications but with more time working a dog. All of the current handlers are certified K9 instructors and for the last 18 years the unit has been self sufficient, training-wise. If a real problem developed we would enlist the help of our importer who is the best dog trainer I know.

Our chief has decided to axe our current supervisor, a leutenant, and place a Sgt in charge of the unit. There currently are no Sgt's qualified to run the unit so we are left twisting in the wind with a know-nothing person in charge.

You are right to feel wary about the goings on in your agency..we feel the same way as you right now. Personally , I liked the way our unit was managed in all aspects regarding K9. We all took advantage of having a knowledgable, experienced supervisor to handle things, now we feel lost.

BTW, your PM mail box is full

Reinier....

If there is any way to keep your departments animal training coordination "in house" go in that direction. Only people involved in animal training are going to understand the amount of time needed to maintain your animals. Someone involved in training police dogs or horses will understand the need for extra training time to solve certain problems that may pop up.

I would fear that if an outside administrator would lump animal and officer training together as if they were equal, you may loose training time or worse have your time scrutinized.

I'm lucky as my Operations lieutenant supervises K9 and Special Operations... he also supervises all of the training in the department and understands what I need in terms of training for the dog. He has no experiance as a handler or trainer but has had enough exposier that he understands how important training is to having a good dog.

Thanks you all-

Richard: Your opinion and arguments on ‘maintenance training” in my experience are not without substance I have experienced it first hand my self, it is not that far removed from the real truth either. Well I am speaking in general terms here and not for all, but yes the older the wiser and we have managed to break with that tradition long ago, and grow with the times. This is one of the reasons why I have decide that this move will take us back, back to those dark times of doing quick train, training up a dog and handler in six weeks and just let go no maintenance, no further training, let the bugger fend for him self approach etc.

Now I don’t want to point fingers, but it is my experience that dog men look out for their own, so if your dog is slacking then they will hammer you and report you,that pride is still there. But it only came about after we lifted the bar, no free rides. Now if the training gets moved to some “foreign academy” will it add value?, Will they move the bar and hold dear that which we have put in place, my experience is no, they will dismantle it and make it “normal” drop the grade etc. I for one, will keep asking this question all the time, what will add value? Until I am sure we are doing the right thing here I will keep asking and testing.

As for our training credentials, I personally have trained some 70 plus dogs, in a class context as instructor, we use the train the handler to train the dog method, and I trained some 8 by my self from scratch. Our classes are ten big and consist of two instructors per course; the courses are 13 weeks long. So yes it takes a long time to certify as an instructor and master trainer. I am lucky we have two full time instructors.

We would rather out source the specialized scent raining to other agencies that do it pour selves – this is another field of discrepancy, they want us to train all our dogs our self, I say no, we loose, every course out side the agency, forges new bonds with other agencies and creates confidence in each others dogs and abilities, no more suspicion, animosity and gossip etc.

The use of Force issue is a non issue here, a gun and a dog is viewed and used in the same category – period.

Howard – yes I share your pain brother, but I am always optimistic, there is no such thing as failure just time spent doing things the “other” way, and i have time on my side and a big department to back me up.

Matthew – In house training is our game, but only with the prepping of new dogs and the training of PSD. And then maintenance, corrective and certification training etc.
<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" /> So what more can we argue?

We are a state police agency with an authorized canine strength of 50 dogs. Canine is part of the Special Operations Division, which is home to the EOD Techs, Tactical Squad, Divers and Aviation. The Canine Section has three full time trainers (Director of Canine Services, a Sergeant, and a Trooper). We, as the canine section, conduct all initial training, which of course includes, selection of dogs, training and certification. Because the dogs are spread throughout the state, we do not get to see the dogs during all inservice training. Handlers are required to submit training records on a monthly basis, documenting the required 16 hours of inservice training they conduct. The records gives the training staff the opportunity to review the training being conducted. Practical evaluation by the Canine Training Staff allow the training staff a first hand look at the canine teams and to be frank, to see if the handlers are honestly conducting the training they have been reporting. As far as organizational structure, the Training Section is notified by letter subsequent the completion of intial training/certification and annual certification/validation exercises. We are one of a few accredited state police agencies, and our system meets with the national accreditation requirements.

DFrost

Reineir,

Empty your mail box, I can't answer your private message.

DFrost