PARTNER/TOOL/WEAPON

The K9 Unit of the Rochester Police Department

CHARIS KANAKI

I first visited Chicago in the winter of 2024. While waiting to take the bus home one day, I saw three police cars parked, all marked as K9 units. One of the officers opened the trunk of a car to take out a dog with a thick chain and leash. He transported it to another car a few feet away. As a dog lover myself, I keep thinking about that dog. How do humans use police dogs? What does it take for a dog to join the K9 unit? What is it like to be a K9 in the police force?

To answer these questions, I have been investigating, more specifically, the ways that canine belonging is determined in the police department in Rochester, New York. I am interested in how members of the Rochester Police Department (RPD), human and non-human, demarcate and negotiate the social and political sphere between species.¹ To do so, I conducted an interview with the Sargeant and Head of the RPD’s K9 Unit. I also read police training manuals, analyzed legal documents, and looked for articles about police dogs in the archives of the Democrat & Chronicle, the city’s leading newspaper.

Combining textual analysis with audio recordings of my readings of the interview transcript, this multimodal essay will be sectioned into the different aspects of life and experience of the canines and their handlers. In particular, I will showcase how such relationships prove to directly shape the geographies of multispecies life as well as the experiences of human and nonhuman animals. In her scholarship on security dogs and their expertise in sensing danger and alerting their handlers, the anthropologist Rivke Jaffe has described dogs as “prosthetic species.”² They expand human sensory capabilities, providing an extra layer of security by surpassing their biological limits. On the converse, I discovered that humans often act as prosthetic species toward police canines; they extend their power and authority.

JOINING THE FORCE

K9s are dogs that have been adopted into police forces. Dogs are supplied to the Rochester Police Force through third party brokers, who reach out to breeders and report on the availability of certain breeds. These breeds, such as German and Belgian Shepherds and Belgian Malinois, have been preferred for police work due to their morphological and physiological characteristics.³ As mentioned by the Head of the RPD’s K9 Unit, dogs are preferred based on “reliable bloodlines.” Through selective breeding, “bloodline” and “reliability” become cooperative characteristics in the selection process. A candidate is matched with a K9 based on their compatibility in character and lifestyle. Taking into consideration the “character” of a dog highlights how human characteristics are extended to non-human entities. 

LANGUAGE AND OBEDIENCE

Once admitted to the force, each K9, like any other sworn officer, human or non-human, acquires its own badge, as well as patch (they even hope to raise funds to acquire bulletproof vests). Their patches have the following inscription sewn onto them: “Semper Fidelis” (see Picture 1).⁴ This phrase in Latin means “Always Faithful”; it is the motto of the U.S. Marine Corps, signifying loyalty and commitment to the Corps, the country, and fellow Marines.

FIGURE ONE
K9 badge
(Charis Kanaki, 2025)

The process of initiating a canine through material objects like a badge and a patch is anthropomorphic. Anthropomorphism refers to the interpretation and/or attachment of human characteristics to non-human things/behavior/events.⁵ Much as a dog’s recruitment into the force is, in part, judged by their “human” capacities such as character (i.e., a heritable trait that is said to surpass morphology and physiology), dogs come to resemble humans through the cultural system of uniforms and other modes of identification.⁶

Naming practices are another anthropomorphic aspect. The handler has every right to either keep, or change, the original name of the dog. When choosing to change the name, the RPD has a sort of tradition, where, after an officer has passed away on duty, the first K9 to join the department will be named after them. In this way, they become more-than-animals, assuming human characteristics.

TRAINING AND WORK

After receiving their gear and names, police dogs undergo training. The specific commands used in training could not be disclosed by my interviewee, as they could put dogs, handlers, and other civilians in danger. Commands used for apprehending a suspect, which involve biting, are a “secret” between dogs and handlers to prevent misuse, confusion, and unwanted response from the dog. More basic commands for sitting, going down low, or jumping are more standard, but can be different at the discretion of the handler. Depending on the dog’s origin (they are usually imported from Germany or the Netherlands), handlers may choose to learn the dog’s “native” tongue and adjust their wording accordingly.  

The training manual for K9s provided by the New York State Department of Criminal and Justice Services, is mainly focused on the non-human counterpart.⁷ Its descriptions about the evaluation criteria and courses all follow the same formula: “The canine will… on command.” The only action item referring to the handler is the one about giving the command or simply walking around. Even when the handler is active, there are no explicit criteria that evaluate their behavior; everything comes down to the canine’s performance and response toward the handler. This showcases the dynamic of handler-dog as superior-inferior, established through the dog’s obedience. As a prosthetic species, the canines can extend not only the human capabilities of policing, but also the status of the police officer via their obedience and overall performance. Factoring in the magnitude of influence their performance has on their overall scoring, it is highlighted how the dog’s attitude has a direct impact on the police officer’s success as a handler in the unit. 

In terms of the work they do, the police dogs of the RPD are trained for either track and narcotics, or explosives and narcotics. Their embodied skills, such as their smell and memory, are used to very precisely identify chemicals or locate individuals. These sensory capacities become enhanced through “enskilment,” through training and stimulation.^8,9,10 In this regard, K9s are seen as devices for enhancing the limitations of the human body—a prosthetic species in Jafke’s terms. Prosthetic species are, as Donna Haraway would say, “cyborgs”: “a cybernetic organism, a hybrid of machine and organism, a creature of social reality as well as a creature of fiction.”¹¹ Their capacity for violence, portrayed almost as desensitized through vigorous training, is utilized for suspect apprehension, making them a remotely triggered, and capable of tracking, weapon.

NON-HUMAN AGENCY

Once dogs finish their training, they become seen as different from, and superior to, everyday citizens, as they have the right to be in locations and spaces other citizens are not, and to track, pursue, apprehend, and act violently toward them (when commanded). 

The law grants permission to certain behaviors of canines, or exempts others. For example, Chapter 31 of the City of Rochester’s charter states that dogs are not permitted to be present in most public, but also private spaces; to commit a nuisance on property; to howl or bark; or to not have a dog licensing paid.¹² All these restrictions come with exceptions toward police dogs or other working dogs; in other words, police dogs are not subject to regular dog laws regarding barking and trespassing, especially while on duty, which underlines the impact of police canines to otherwise city-wide rules and laws. 

Additionally, police dogs are considered both “non-lethal” and “non-criminal” by default. Dangerous dogs are defined as “a dog acting violently unprompted or without justification, toward a person causing injury or even death.” Since police dogs are considered a non-lethal force and are trained to attack and act violently only when on command, no police canine can ever be a dangerous dog and have any of those laws apply to it. Moreover, they are considered non-criminal since their “function” is to battle crime, whereas human citizens are always under suspicion of criminal activity.¹³ 

Apart from expanding human capabilities, we can say that the addition of dogs to the human-animal duo benefits them as well; humans become a prosthetic species that enhances the canines’ power and agency—that is, their socio-culturally mediated capacity to act.¹⁴

BOUNDARIES

Boundaries separate spaces at all scales, from the house and expanding outward; they separate the inside from outside, private from public, forbidden from the permitted.¹⁵ Boundaries are often species-specific, whether human or non-human.¹⁶ In the context of the RPD, canines have little in the way of boundaries. 

There is little physical or emotional separation between handlers and K9s. These dogs are with their handlers through virtually all life stages and circumstances: They participate in family life; they take space, and are not nuisances or invisible, within the home; they take time to be cared for; and they are a crucial aspect of the police force. Even when retired, the dogs remain at their home, with their “family,” while the handler will most likely acquire an additional K9 within the workplace.

Furthermore, these dogs are allowed in virtually all spaces, and certain spaces are even modified to fit their needs. Such modifications include the K9 patrol cars and take-home SUVs. Gated “boxes” are installed at the back seats; this could be seen as a a form of restriction, but it is, in reality, a protective measure that prevents interruptions and movements that might distract the driver. When needed, the cage gates can even open remotely and release the K9.

Other professional spaces—offices at the station, crime scenes and private properties, for example—are a few of the places that are usually gatekept from the general public, disallowing their access, yet police dogs have absolute access to them.

CONCLUSION

K9s act as a prosthetic species to the human police force by expanding their capabilities. Simultaneously, humans also become prosthetic species to K9s as they increase their agency, mobility, and power. This realization can help us understand our own place, our own belonging, in society, and the impact that non-human entities have on us as much as we have on them. Understanding how these relationships are formed and facilitated—understanding the rules and frameworks of their operation—illuminates multispecies practices of lawmaking, change-making and community-building in a more-than-human world.

APPENDIX

The following is a historical timeline of the Rochester Police Force and its use of dogs from 1819 to the present.

NOTES

1. Youkhana, Eva. ‘A Conceptual Shift in Studies of Belonging and the Politics of Belonging’. ResearchGate. Accessed 9 May 2025. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279905010_A_Conceptual_Shift_in_Studies_of_Belonging_and_the_Politics_of_Belonging.
2. Jaffe, Rivke. ‘Prosthetic Species: Security Dogs and the More‐than‐human Sensing of Urban Danger’. City & Society 36, no. 1 (April 2024): 35–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/ciso.12476.
3. Pearson, Chris. ‘Between Instinct and Intelligence: Harnessing Police Dog Agency in Early Twentieth-Century Paris’. Comparative Studies in Society and History 58, no. 2 (April 2016): 463–90. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0010417516000141.
4. Cunningham, Robert D. City of Rochester, Monroe County, New York State- Rochester N.Y. Police Department K-9 Unit Patch #4. (Front). Accessed 14 March 2025. https://nyheritage.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/VRT/id/497/.
5. ‘Anthropomorphism | Definition, Examples & History | Britannica’, 27 March 2025. https://www.britannica.com/topic/anthropomorphism.
6. Pearson, “Between Instinct and Intelligence.”
7. New York State Municipal Training Council. ‘Police Canine Training Standards’. eJusticeNY – NYS Integrated Justice Portal, January 2003. https://www.ejustice.ny.gov/.
8. Jaffe, “Prosthetic Species.”
9. Ingold, Tim. ‘The Perception of the Environment: Essays on Livelihood, Dwelling and Skill’. Routledge & CRC Press. Accessed 9 May 2025. https://www.routledge.com/The-Perception-of-the-Environment-Essays-on-Livelihood-Dwelling-and-Skill/Ingold/p/book/9781032052274.
10. Gilsing, Sterre. ‘The Power of Silence: Sonic Experiences of Police Operations and Occupations in Rio de Janeiro’s Favelas’. ResearchGate, 2020. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/345370463_The_Power_of_Silence_Sonic_Experiences_of_Police_Operations_and_Occupations_in_Rio_de_Janeiro’s_Favela.
11. Haraway, Donna J. ‘A Cyborg Manifesto’. University of Warwick, n.d. https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/english/currentstudents/undergraduates/modules/fictionnownarrativemediaandtheoryinthe21stcentury/manifestly_haraway_—-_a_cyborg_manifesto_science_technology_and_socialist-feminism_in_the_….pdf.
12. City of Rochester, NY Code. ‘City of Rochester, NY: Animals — Dog Control’. Accessed 9 May 2025. https://ecode360.com/8674339.
13. Rochester, NY Police Department. ‘Rochester Police Department General Order: Canine Use’. RPD Open Data Portal, 20 April 2015. https://data-rpdny.opendata.arcgis.com/documents/rpdny::go-555-canine-use/about?path=.
14. Vorhölter, Julia. ‘Agency’. The Open Encyclopedia of Anthropology, 12 August 2024. https://www.anthroencyclopedia.com/entry/agency.
15. Kaika, Maria. “Interrogating the Geographies of the Familiar: Domesticating Nature and Constructing the Autonomy of the Modern Home.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 28, no. 2 (June 2004): 265–86. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0309-1317.2004.00519.x.
16. Biehler, Dawn Day. “Permeable Homes: A Historical Political Ecology of Insects and Pesticides in US Public Housing.” Geoforum 40, no. 6 (November 2009): 1014–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2009.08.004.
17. ‘History of the Rochester Police Department | City of Rochester, New York’. Accessed 22 March 2025. https://www.cityofrochester.gov/departments/rochester-police-department/history-rochester-police-department.
18. Ibid.
19. McKelvey, Blake. ‘A History of the Police of Rochester, New York’ 25, no. 4 (October 1963).
20. Ibid.
21. “History of the Rochester Police Department.”
22. McKelvey. “A History of the Police of Rochester.”
23. Ibid.
24. ‘The Brutal Dog-Fight’. Democrat and Chronicle 52, no. 266 (22 September 1884): 6.
25. McKelvey. “A History of the Police of Rochester.”
26. Ibid.
27. ‘The Police Dogs of Paris’. Democrat and Chronicle 75 (18 August 1907): 31.
28. ‘Dogs Follow Trail to Road’. Democrat and Chronicle (1884-) 76 (25 October 1908): 18.
29. ‘Police Dogs on Duty Monday’. Democrat and Chronicle 76 (17 January 1908): 14.
30. ‘Latest Suspect in Murder Case Is Former Employee at Cemetery’. Democrat and Chronicle (1884-) 77 (08/13/1909): 13.
31. ‘For Sale: Police Dog’. Democrat and Chronicle (1884-) 77 (15 August 1909): 6.
32. McKelvey. “A History of the Police of Rochester.”
33. Ibid.
34. “History of the Rochester Police Department.”
35. Ibid.
36. ‘Sperr’. Democrat and Chronicle (1884-) 177, no. 61 (3 February 2009): 14.
37. Sharp, Brian. ‘Changes Coming: Adjustments to Rochester Police Department’s Protest Response Draws Tempered Praise and Criticism’. Rochester Democrat and Chronicle, 28 April 2022. https://www.proquest.com/docview/2655979979/citation/96DD7D7E1293497EPQ/5.