Fran Jurga`s Hoofcare + Lameness: practice

Showing posts with label practice. Show all posts

Friday, January 30, 2015

Blacksmith Buddy Junior: The New Hoofcare Education Tool for Teaching, Practice, and Demonstrations

Sponsored Post from Blacksmith Buddy

Practice makes perfect...sense, when a new student practices on a Blacksmith Buddy or Buddy Junior. Even an experienced vet or farrier can benefit from experimenting with a trimming or shoeing technique or even a crack repair using a plastic hoof before trying it on a living horse. The lightweight new Buddy Junior fits on a standard Hoof Jack and is portable for travel.

There’s a new kid in town. Kind of a little guy, but he fits right in. He hangs out with one of the most popular pillars of the hoofcare world, and the two of them work together like a couple of old pros. He’s a chip off the block, a new age version of his old man, The Original.

Click this link to read the rest of this article

Friday, February 10, 2012

AVMA: Horseshoeing Is No Longer an Excluded Profession in the New Model Veterinary Practice Act (But Farriery Is)

What's in a name?

The American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) Executive Board approved revisions to the new 2011 Model Veterinary Practice Act (MVPA) in November 2011, and those changes became official on January 7, 2012 when the AVMA's governing body, the House of Delegates, approved the document.

The Model Veterinary Practice Act is just that: an approved sample ("model") document that is promoted by the AVMA as reflecting the verbiage and policies it would like to see adopted in each of the 50 states as the ideal state veterinary practice act.

That said, each state can and probably will make some changes; the states usually end up with documents that vary on some level related to how veterinary practice is conducted or regulated.

Each time the MVPA is changed, the AVMA opens a comment period for members and the public to have their say. That period has now passed.

The AVMA reported that it received "985 comments on individual sections of the model act. About 70% of the comments were submitted by non-members, and 10% came from organizations as opposed to individuals. The sections attracting the most comments are Section 2 (definitions, especially “complementary, alternative and integrative therapies” and “practice of veterinary medicine”), Section 6 (exemptions to the act), the preamble (general comments) and Section 3 (board of veterinary medicine)."

While horseshoeing had been previously excluded from practicing veterinary medicine, this year's edits (Section 6. Number 8) showed a line drawn through the word "horseshoeing". It was changed to "farriery".

The old document read

The document-in-progress showed the change:

The exemption now reads "Any person lawfully engaged in the art or profession of farriery."

No explanation is given for the change, and while other words are defined, "farriery" is not.

Although other professions, such as pharmacists and researchers, are also listed as exempt, farriers are one of only a few professions predicated by "lawfully engaged". And it is the only one described as an "art or profession".

Since farriery and other hoof-related professions are not regulated in the United States except on racetracks, the language begs the question of how it would be determined whether or not an individual was lawfully engaged in providing farriery care to an animal.

And what, exactly, farriery is.

The word change in the horseshoeing--or farriery--section is probably a minor matter in the big picture of things, but it should be duly noted. "Horseshoeing" is the word traditionally used in all US government documents; farriery is seldom mentioned. The word seems to have been dusted off, perhaps around the time of the formation of the American Farrier's Association and it has enjoyed a renaissance, particularly in the past 30 years or so.

That said, it remains poorly defined and some hoof-oriented professionals simply don't like the word, while others prefer it. You can call yourself whatever you please--except a veterinarian, unless you are one.

The general public, however, is behind the curve; people are usually convinced that a farrier either makes fur coats or carries people back and forth across rivers in a boat. They think "farrier" is a great word for "Words with Friends" on their iPhones.

Repeated calls and emails to the AVMA and its task force administrators were not acknowledged or returned except for one interchange with a media relations representative who referred me to the librarian. I did enjoy my conversation with Diane Fagen, AVMA librarian, who set out to find out if a farrier was defined anywhere by the association.

Being a good librarian, she cheerfully suggested we look up farrier in the ultimate reference, the Oxford English Dictionary. I warned her not to, and that attorneys roll their eyes at OED definitions, but she did anyway.

"Oh my," Ms Fagen murmured, reading aloud a lengthy definition of the term "farrier" that seems woefully outdated, though historically accurate. "It means horse doctor," she concluded.

"I can see why you called," she acknowledged. But no, she didn't have any information on why the word had been changed.

But that's how change happens, sometimes: it just does.

© Fran Jurga and Hoofcare Publishing; Fran Jurga's Hoof Blog is a between-issues news service for subscribers to Hoofcare and Lameness Journal. Please, no use without permission. You only need to ask. This blog may be read online at the blog page, checked via RSS feed, or received via a digest-type email (requires signup in box at top right of blog page). To subscribe to Hoofcare and Lameness (the journal), please visit the main site, www.hoofcare.com, where many educational products and media related to equine lameness and hoof science can be found. Questions or problems with this blog? Send email to blog@hoofcare.com.

Follow Hoofcare + Lameness on Twitter: @HoofcareJournal

Read this blog's headlines in your Facebook news feed when you "like" the Hoofcare + Lameness Facebook Page

Disclosure of Material Connection: I have not received any direct compensation for writing this post. I have no material connection to the brands, products, or services that I have mentioned, other than Hoofcare Publishing. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.

Monday, March 14, 2011

Arkansas Veterinary Practice Act Definitions Sought for Guiding Exclusion of Farriers, Tooth Floaters, Other Professions

This video requires Silverlight, a Microsoft video interface.

Before you click "play" on the video, please take a minute to read this text so you will know what you are watching.

It's time for the politics of horsecare again. Or is it the politics of veterinary care?

We're back in Little Rock, Arkansas, and here are the gentlemen of the House Agriculture, Forestry & Natural Resources Permanent Subcommittee of Agriculture. They need to review all bills under their jurisdiction before they are presented to the legislature. We met them before, in late January, when they heard testimony on House Bill 1099 (video of that hearing is also posted). H.B. 1099 would have exempted a long list of animal care professionals from the all-encompassing but loosely defined description of veterinary medicine in the Arkansas Veterinary Practice Act. That bill was not voted forward by the committee.

So Representative Gary Smith came back again on March 9, with House Bill 1712. This bill was much more specific and only dealt with horsecare. In particular, 1712 would have exempted massage therapy, tooth floating, and farriery and hoofcare, although it would have created a state certification program for equine dental technicians.

The video you'll see in this video begins as the hearing for House Bill 1712. It, however, morphed into a presentation of a second bill; likewise, farriery and hoofcare morphed into "the lawful practice of horseshoeing". There is considerable discussion of what the lawful (or unlawful) practice of horseshoeing might be.

This is a very long discussion, but probably worth your time to have a listen. The second bill, known as House Bill 1763, was received more favorably and seems to be a compromise favored by the state veterinary board. Please note, however, that HB1763 is marked by the state government as "re-referred to committee" on the official state web site rather than approved. Reports in the press indicate that the bill was approved. This is a discrepancy.

For those who don't want to go through the video, the second bill went through an amendment process, in part to clarify the description of horseshoeing. The bill was amended to read: Arkansas Code § 17-101-307(b), concerning the practices that are excluded from the practice of veterinary medicine, is amended to read as follows: (b) This chapter shall not be construed to prohibit: (8) Any person: (A) Engaging in the art or profession of horseshoeing.

The meeting to amend HB 1763 was not videotaped, or the video is not available to the public.

If HB 1763 passes the legislature, it does not exempt massage therapy and tooth floating indefinitely; it only gives them a two-year moratorium from cease-and-desist orders from the veterinary board. After two years, some other bill should be waiting in the wings to take over, or these horse professionals may not be able to work in Arkansas.

Hopefully other states can learn from what is going on in these midwest states (Oklahoma and Texas are two other states with recent legislation) as they struggle with the interpretation of what veterinary medicine is, and isn't. According to the existing law in many states, veterinary medicine pretty much encompasses all care of animals. The time to have exempted professions was back when the draft veterinary practice act was introduced, but no one's ears were up then, or else no one ever thought that cease-and-desist letters would be sent out.

It seems pretty obvious that efforts to combine large and small animals or even cattle and horses, or to combine different professions makes it difficult for legislators and for people from agencies and businesses who would testify. It may be that it's every profession for itself. Arkansas has proven that quite clearly.

Another thing that seems obvious is that the legislators are looking for highly credible testimonies on these subjects. There's no question that they don't know much about the flow of services, or what happens when a horseowner needs some work done on a horse. Before this legislation came up, they probably never gave it a thought beyond the fact that they knew that veterinarians make barn calls. They're getting an education and they're learning that the horse industry in their state employs a lot of people on a lot of levels. And it takes a support crew of professionals of many descriptions to keep a stable of horses adequately prepared for showing, racing or even just recreational riding.

No one who is elected by public votes wants to put people out of work, yet the state government is in the business of enforcing the laws and legislation it has on its books. These legislators have to stand behind their government's previous actions. Change may be necessary, but it may also be incremental...and painstakingly slow.

If I lived in Arkansas and was working in any of these professions, I think I would slow the process down even further and ask for more amendment to HB 1763 by defining each of the professions the way that tooth floating is defined. If someone has a natural hoofcare practice and does not engage in horseshoeing per se, is he or she not exempt? Must a shoe be on the horse for this law to stick? Now's the time to find that out, not when a cease-and-desist letter arrives in the mail. And to get it printed in the bill, not in a verbal assurance.

Maybe you're one of the people affected by legislative rumblings in Arkansas or other states. Maybe you're hoping this will just go away. Be careful what your wish is: it will be back, if people care about preserving your profession. If no one cares, your profession may be lost in a legislative or legal shuffle one day, and your livelihood along with it.

Follow the Hoof Blog on Twitter: @HoofcareJournal

Join the Hoofcare + Lameness Facebook Page

Thursday, February 17, 2011

New Oklahoma State Board Would Make Veterinary vs Husbandry Decisions for Professional Practices

There have probably been simpler times to be in the animal care field. Now you not only have to know what you're doing, but if you can legally do it.

As states continue to grapple with definitions of what the practice of veterinary medicine actually entails compared to the routine practice of animal husbandry, national attention turns again to the state of Oklahoma, which was recently wrenched by a battle over whether floating teeth and other aspects of what has come to be known as equine dentistry should or could legally be done by non-veterinarians in the state. That fight spilled over to other routine practices, particularly related to animal reproduction, that are performed at livestock facilities in the state.

It was a short-lived victory for ranchers who don't want to have to hire veterinarians for routine artificial insemination procedures, or for non-veterinarian professionals in the state who wanted the assurance that they were performing their work legally; the governor quickly signed emergency rules proposed by the Oklahoma State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners to prevent non-veterinarians from performing some tasks.

http://www.oklahomafarmreport.com/wire/news/2011/01/02677_Rehash3202AnimalHusbandry01212011_064424.php

This audio report from the Oklahoma Farm Report summarizes steps that led up to this week's action in the Oklahoma legislature.

To the state lawmakers and vet board's credit, a compromise has been put forward in the form of House Bill 1310, which would create a new board, tentatively called the Animal Technology Advisory Committee, made up of three veterinarians and three non-veterinarians, and chaired by a non-voting veterinarian. This board would examine procedures and decide whether they fall under the practice of veterinary medicine or animal husbandry.

HB 1310 passed out of committee yesterday and now is headed to a vote by the entire legislature.

The legislature has not made the text of HB 1310 available to the public on their web site yet.

The composition of state veterinary boards varies from state to state. In some states, the board includes non-veterinary members. In Oklahoma and Florida, five of six members are listed as veterinarians; in Ohio, four of six; in Massachusetts, four of four; in California, four of eight.

Follow the Hoof Blog on Twitter: @HoofcareJournal

Join the Hoofcare + Lameness Facebook Page

Saturday, January 29, 2011

Vet-Span: Watch an Arkansas Legislative Committee Consider a Bill to Clarify the State's Vet Practice Act

Legislative committee hearings are the first step in the life or death of a bill introduced at the state level. In the most basic process, it happens like this: a state representative or senator files a bill, it is referred to a committee, the committee approves or disproves it, and the bill either goes forward to another committee or goes to the vote of the House or Senate. If turned down, the legislation may be abandoned or it may be modified and brought before the committee again.

Each state has a veterinary practice act. Most are modeled after a draft document provided by the American Veterinary Medical Association, but there is variation among the 50 states. One of the most contentious parts of the newer practice acts has been the definition of veterinary medicine to include all acts of prevention and treatment of disease in animals.

At various times, the veterinary practice acts have been challenged with requests for changes or interpretation in different states and it is quite often the horsecare field that is the battleground. Equine massage and equine dentistry are two professions that the veterinary profession seems to have identified as trying to cross over into the practice of veterinary medicine. Horseshoeing, farriery, equine podiatry and the practice of providing hoofcare by any number of other names are often lumped in with other gray-area professions from dog grooming to acupuncture. Horse trainers in some aspects of their work may even cross over the line.

Some states have attempted to clarify or modify veterinary practice acts, but of course it is much harder to change something after it has already been signed into law. Arkansas is one of the states that tried to change, or clarify, its practice act to allow professionals besides veterinarians to legally provide their services to animals.

The Arkansas proposed change was introduced with the new 2011 legislature and had its first committee hearing on January 19. Quite unrelated, the state of Arkansas at the same time introduced live video streaming of its committee hearings. As a result, the entire meeting of the House of Representatives' Agriculture, Forestry and Economic Development Committee could be downloaded and preserved on the Hoof Blog.

At the end of the video, you will see that the bill failed its first hearing. Jim House, a horseshoer from Fayetteville, Arkansas and former state legislator who introduced the bill, hopes and believes that it will be modified and reintroduced.

I've been in touch with Jim House extensively about his attempt to clarify and/or change the Arkansas Veterinary Practice Act. The presentation of this video is not to embarrass Jim or to publicize the bill's defeat or to criticize the way the bill or the Veterinary Practice Act in Arkansas or any other state.

The purpose of posting this video is to give you a clear view of the legislative process and how the care of horses and careers of professionals (whether veterinarians or not) can be affected by men in suits sitting around tables who may or may not know what the care of a horse entails. This is democracy in action, because these men were elected by the people of Arkansas. Think about that the next time an election rolls around.

If you are planning to begin or continue a career in the horse industry, spending the time to watch this video would be a good investment. It could be any state. It could be yours.

I've known Jim House (left) for many, many years. He is a horseshoer who has always been passionate, thoughtful and enthusiastic about his work. A former state representative in Arkansas, he said that he actually didn't undertake this project to benefit himself, or even his fellow horseshoers in Arkansas, but to benefit all who work with horses, and those who own them.

The Pandora's Box that Jim opened in his state is wide open, cracked, or at least being talked about in almost every state. No one but lawyers and opportunists will benefit from much of this until the vets and the professionals get together on their own, with the men's suits left hanging safely in their closets and with women, who predominate in both the horse industry and in the veterinary profession, joining in the conversation.

Finding and agreeing on common ground is the most important first step forward, if any of the three groups (owners, veterinarians and horsecare professionals) really wants, as Jim House says, to help the horses and not just themselves.

Meanwhile, the American Veterinary Medical Association is in the process of collecting comments for a new, revised Model Veterinary Practice Act (MVPA), as announced here on The Hoof Blog in November 2010. Once completed, the new MVPA will be presented to states and the AVMA will hope that state veterinary boards will adopt some or all of its tenets and present them to their state legislatures for approval, thus replacing the existing VPA in each state that adopts it.

So, any changes made to language in the MVPA would stand a good chance of being widely adopted across the United States. And those changes are being solicited right now.

TO LEARN MORE:

Download the Arkansas Veterinary Practice Act.

Download Arkansas House Bill 1055; click on "full text" to read the entire bill proposed to clarify the Veterinary Practice Act in Arkansas.

Jim House's passion for clarifying the Arkansas Veterinary Practice Act is presented in this article for Arkansas animal owners.

Read comments from horse owners in Arkansas (both pro and con) about House Bill 1055.

Read about the AVMA's call for comments on the new model Veterinary Practice Act.

Hoofcare Publishing provides these resources as information for our readers and does not have an interest in the outcome of the legislation in Arkansas or any other state. Our goal is to pique the interest and involvement by our readers in all matters affecting the betterment of individual and collective groups who care for horses. Be informed. Get involved. But work proactively and collaboratively; remember the words of John F. Kennedy: "A rising tide will lift all boats."

Follow the Hoof Blog on Twitter: @HoofcareJournal

Join the Hoofcare + Lameness Facebook Page

Tuesday, November 16, 2010

AVMA's 2011 Model Veterinary Practice Act Process Will Be Open for Comments in January


"Moore's Shoeing Scene: The Veterinarian" was painted circa 1845 and holds a place of honor on the wall here at the Hoofcare and Lameness office. It was a gift from Walt Taylor many, many years ago and I never tire of looking at all the details (especially that dog!). But anyone visiting the office has trouble with it. They admire the print but when their eye falls on the title they don't understand. "Who's the veterinarian?" they ask. "Why is the focal point character working on a hoof?" This just proves the point that the precise definition of the veterinarian's role in the horse health scenario is far from a new topic. In the last 25 years, we've seen the emergence of diversified horsecare professions that never existed before. Farriers, on the other hand, pre-date veterinarians and once treated all ailments of the horse. At some point, farriers in Europe and North America relinquished the care of the horse and kept the hoof as their domain.

The following text is from a press release issued last week by the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA), which is integrally involved in state and national legislation regarding the practice of veterinary medicine and, overall, is influential in all matters related to animal care. Text in bold emphasized by the Hoof Blog so it will not be overlooked by those it may affect.

Do you have an idea on how animals can receive the best care from veterinarians and other members of the veterinary healthcare team? Early next year, you will have an opportunity to offer input that could help make your ideas a reality.

The American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) is soliciting public comments on its Model Veterinary Practice Act (MVPA). The current MVPA, which was last reviewed in 2003, includes sections on definitions, veterinary medical boards, licensing, client confidentiality, veterinary education, veterinary technicians and technologists, abandoned animals, and cruelty to animals, as well as other topics.

"This is an excellent opportunity for veterinarians, pet owners, the public, farmers or really anybody who cares about animals and veterinary medicine to offer input that will help guide the profession," says Dr. John Scamahorn, chair of the AVMA Model Veterinary Practice Act Task Force. "The Model Veterinary Practice Act is used by state legislatures and state veterinary licensing and exam boards to help shape the rules and laws that govern the practice of veterinary medicine."

The AVMA is issuing early notice of this public input period to encourage all interested parties to get involved and give informed comments. The current MVPA is available for public review on the AVMA website, at http://www.avma.org/issues/policy/mvpa.asp.

Organizations and individuals can contribute comments about the MVPA on the AVMA website during the 30-day public comment period, which is scheduled to start in January 2011. The AVMA requests that the comments submitted be specific and include suggested language for the new MVPA.

"The AVMA wanted to give notice of this public comment period as early as possible because we realize that there is a lot of interest in the Model Veterinary Practice Act, which is lengthy and contains many important provisions," explains Dr. Ron DeHaven, chief executive officer of the AVMA. "We feel it is important to alert stakeholders now so they can begin to review the many provisions of the act in advance of the comment period. Some organizations may even choose to meet and discuss the act in order to come to consensus on their comments, and we wanted to encourage and allow for these discussions about the future of veterinary medicine."

The first MVPA was created by the AVMA in the early 1960s. Over the years, it has been revised several times to reflect changes in the profession such as new technologies and techniques and even societal changes.

(end of text from the AVMA)

Follow the Hoof Blog on Twitter: @HoofcareJournal

Join the Hoofcare + Lameness Facebook Page

Wednesday, April 08, 2009

Oklahoma Uprising? Rodeo Star Arrest for Illegal Equine Dentistry Sends Horse Owners to State Capitol

by Fran Jurga | 8 April 2009 | Fran Jurga's Hoof Blog

They say "Don't mess with Texas," but I think there's a PS implied in there: "Or Oklahoma, neither."

I don't usually have much news from Oklahoma but between last year's disease outbreak there, horseshoeing school owner Reggie Kester's recent death, and philanthropist Madeleine Pickens's withdrawal of her multi-million dollar donation to the Oklahoma State vet school because they use live animals to teach surgery, I am singing the Broadway theme song.

Add in the growing popularity of Oklahoma veterinarian Dr. Michael Steward's clog treatment for laminitis, the recent banning of cloned Quarter horses from the state's racetracks and the stiffening of the state's veterinary practice act to classify non-veterinary tooth floating as a felony and I feel like I may as well move there just to report on the news.

But I won't be packing a tooth rasp.

And isn't it tornado season?

In a nutshell, to bring you up to date: Oklahoma's state legislature in 2008 voted to re-classify dentistry work by a non-veterinarian as a felony. It was formerly a misdemeanor. But would they actually arrest someone for illegal tooth floating?

And, if so, which of the state's twenty-odd horse dentists would be targeted?

We found out last month. National Finals Rodeo saddle bronc star Bobby Griswold apparently picks up some money on the side by doing teeth; his downfall came when he sedated a horse and did dental work for an undercover investigator for the Oklahoma State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners.

That's the first part of the story and it reads like a tv script: the first person arrested in Oklahoma for violating the beefed-up law just happened to be a celebrity. A celebrity who may be turning into a folk hero if you read the barrel racing and rodeo magazines and web sites.

I think there is interesting information in Bobby Griswold's biography: his town was hit by an F5 tornado in 1999, then five years later, in 2004, another tornado hit his new property in a new town. And now, five years again later, he's caught up in a whirlwind, of a different sort. And tornado season is just beginning.

The rest of this story is that, according to an article in today's edition of the Oklahoman, about 50 horse owners "stormed" the state Capitol yesterday and a state legislator filed an amendment to the veterinary statutes.

To quote the newspaper:
"This amendment would allow equine dentistry and other animal procedures, such as shoeing hooves and transferring embryos in cattle, to be done without a veterinary license. Those practices now fall under the supervision of the state Board of Veterinary Examiners. The amendment would put them under the state Agriculture, Food and Forestry Department."

That's the first time I have seen a reference to shoeing in this matter, and it certainly got my attention. Then I re-read it and, being the editor I am, realized that it technically meant shoeing hooves of cattle, which may or may not have been the intent of the writer.

The rally was organized by the Institute for Justice, an organization that has been actively challenging veterinary practice acts in states like Maryland, where a massage therapist stood up for her rights to rub horses.

Somehow, I don't think this is the end to this story. Stay tuned!

Please read information from many different sources before you make up your mind on this complex issue...and please be sure to stay abreast of developments and changes in legislation status affecting the care and health of animals--and who can do what to them, and where and how--in any state where you work on, show, breed, ride, buy or sell horses.

Click here for information from the Oklahoma Veterinary Medical Association (not the state regulatory board, but the association of veterinarians) about equine dentistry and regulations in the state.
Click here for an article in the Journal-Record about the new legislation and the Institute for Justice's involvement.
Click here for the Oklahoman's account of the horse owners' rally and new legislation.
Click here for the Oklahoman's account of Bobby Griswold's arrest for violating the Veterinary Practice Act, complete with mug shot.
Click here for Bobby Griswold's defense fund home page.

© Fran Jurga and Hoofcare Publishing. No use without permission. You only need to ask. Fran Jurga's Hoof Blog is a between-issues news service for subscribers to Hoofcare and Lameness Journal. This blog may be read online at the blog page, checked via RSS feed, or received via a digest-type email (requires signup in box at top right of blog page). To subscribe to Hoofcare and Lameness (the journal), please visit the main site, www.hoofcare.com, where many educational products and media related to equine lameness and hoof science can be found. Questions or problems with this blog? Send email to blog@hoofcare.com.

Friday, October 03, 2008

Working with Horses: Veterinary Practice Acts Defended in Courts

What color is your state? Blue states allow non-vet equine dentists to work on horses; orange states allow non-vet equine massage therapists to work on horses; striped states allow both professions to work independently of veterinarians; white states have either not modified their veterinary practice laws to allow dentists and massage therapists to work or have possibly not adopted the AVMA's newest model veterinary practice act, which tightens restrictions on the definition of veterinary care of animals. Some states may be more permissive, others may be tolerant but have restrictions, such as IAED certification for non-vet dentists, but charges against a non-vet are often based on complaints from horse owners or veterinarians, so everyone is still subject to discipline. In most states there are high fines and criminal statutes for practicing veterinary medicine without proper licensing. Even a a person with a DVM degree is subject to prosecution or discipline if he or she is not licensed to work in a given state. (Map: JAVMA)

An article in the upcoming October 15th edition of the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association (JAVMA) summarizes the ongoing legal confrontations going on in Texas and Maryland between state veterinary medical boards and legal consultants defending equine massage therapists and horse dentists.

A third lawsuit, questioning the legality of the veterinary practice act in Minnesota, resulted in a court decision in favor of the vet board in that state, and against the rights of an individual to earn a living as a horse dentist.

In each case, the non-veterinarian practitioners have been represented by the Institute for Justice, a civil liberties law concern in Arlington, Virginia. At question is the right of individuals to continue to earn a living, when their occupation has been redefined as within the scope of veterinary medicine under the new vet practice acts adopted in some states.

Five states--New Hampshire, Georgia, South Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Oregon--have amended vet practice acts that allow non-vet dentists and massage therapists to work legally.

In many cases, the affected parties have held up horse shoeing (and trimming) as examples of an unregulated field that is allowed to continue without interference by state veterinary boards.

In some other states, horse owners have organized to legally challenge state veterinary boards, charging that they have the right to hire whatever practitioner they wish to care or treat their animals. In Florida, a proposed state law allowing horse owners to choose their practitioners failed to pass the state legislature.

In the case of the Minnesota dentist who protested the law, he would have been allowed to continue working if he had become certified by the International Association of Equine Dentistry (IAED), but he did not want to go through the certification process.

The Institute for Justice defends the rights of individuals to pursue their chosen professions.

Reading this article, and perusing the map of US states that have granted concessions to non-vet dentists and massage therapists is recommended for anyone who makes his or her living working with horses.

What's especially interesting is that the problems seem to be centered on horse care rather than all species of animals.

From the court documents in Minnesota, as quoted by the AVMA: "The state may legitimately exercise its police power to protect public health, safety, or welfare through the regulation of occupations that require specialized training or skill and the public will benefit from assurance of initial or continuing occupational ability ... Veterinarians are the natural group to provide education and training with respect to the overall health and anatomy of animals."

Click here to read the upcoming JAVMA article.

Click here to visit the International Association for Equine Dentistry, whose certification is recnognized in Minnesota.

Click here to meet Mercedes Clemens, the certified massage therapist in Maryland who is no longer allowed to work on horses.

© Fran Jurga and Hoofcare Publishing. No use without permission. This blog post was originally published on 3 October 2008 at http://www.hoofcare.blogspot.com.

Fran Jurga's Hoof Blog is a between-issues news service for subscribers to Hoofcare and Lameness Journal. This blog may be read online or received via a daily email through an automated delivery service.

To subscribe to Hoofcare and Lameness, please visit our main site, www.hoofcare.com, where many educational products and media related to equine lameness and hoof science can be found.

Questions or problems with this blog? Send email to blog@hoofcare.com.

Comments to individual posts are welcome; please click on the comment icon at the bottom of the post.