The shortage of veterinarians, especially large animal and food animal practitioners in rural areas, is a palpable problem the livestock industry must cooperatively address. Deferring to the legislature to solve the problem, with animal rights groups in their ears, is dicey, though a solution may require changes to current laws. I anticipate a bill will soon be introduced that proposes sweeping changes to the Veterinary Care Act and creates an avalanche of unintended consequences with the creation of a mid-level veterinary practitioner.

Ahead of any bill introductions, the Colorado Veterinary Medicine Association has been examining whether a new type of veterinary professional could positively impact veterinary care in the state. CVMA said they sent a survey to their members anticipating the low response rate typical of their surveys. Overwhelming numbers of responses poured in and, according to CVMA, most veterinarians in Colorado expressed concern about the concept.

The key concerns of the CVMA members are serious and should carry more gravity as they come directly from the veterinarians in the field in all areas of the state. Members are concerned a mid-level practitioner would struggle to successfully perform surgery with limited schooling; the liability burden would be shouldered by the supervising veterinarian; and many veterinarians said existing veterinary technicians are often underutilized and, as such, expanding their responsibilities is a more reasonable option than creating an entirely new professional.

Of course, Colorado State University’s School of Veterinary Medicine would be potentially able to create and benefit from a new degree program that is less expensive to operate than a school of veterinary medicine and would appeal to students who, for whatever reason, are unable or unwilling to be accepted into and complete the rigorous and expensive DVM program. If ever there were a cash cow, this might be it.

Rep. Karen McCormick, DVM, who is the chair of the House Agriculture Committee, convened a stakeholder group of about 35 professionals, including nine appointed CVMA members. The group heard 10 presentations by the country’s foremost experts on topics including accreditation, liability insurance, professional science master’s degrees, economics of the profession, a workforce analysis of the profession and the role of veterinary technician specialists. The stakeholder group agreed there is no cut and dry answer to veterinary care in Colorado that can be applied with a broad stroke. I cheered reading it, thinking how many other topics that could be applied to in the state.

Dr. Wayne Jensen, head of the CSU Department of Clinical Sciences, and Dr. Apryl Steele, president and CEO of the Dumb Friends League and past CVMA president, wrote of their support of the creation of the mid-level practitioner in an open letter to their veterinarian peers.

The problems facing the professions, they said, are unsustainable and using such a practitioner could enhance productivity, limit burnout and allow increased access to care. The pair also spoke to a proposed master’s program at CSU that includes five semesters of coursework, the first three online.

CVMA, in their series of articles about the topic, said the specifics of the admissions criteria to the proposed CSU program – prerequisites, knowledge, skills, abilities and curriculum – have been only loosely articulated. Additionally, graduates would diagnose, initiate treatment, prescribe and perform surgery of “uncomplicated cases” under the direct supervision of a licensed veterinarian.

Despite the support of Drs. Jensen and Steele, CVMA said it is not a workable concept and it comes with major roadblocks: The FDA allows only licensed veterinarians to prescribe medications; USDA accreditation is available only to licensed veterinarians; the laws of the state and the U.S. allow only licensed veterinarians to diagnose, initiate treatment, prescribe and perform surgery, meaning the proposed mid-level practitioners would not be legally able to perform these tasks in this state or others without changes to individual state laws; there are no assurances of competence in place for this professional; the amount of veterinarian oversight needed could prove difficult to provide; and the projected salary of $80,000 does not fit the current reality.

CVMA has now issued an official position statement strongly opposing the mid-level practitioner position. CVMA does support increased utilization and education of veterinary technicians, a group widely identified as being wholly underutilized. This is by utilizing these professionals, offering educational opportunities, improving engagement and retention of the technicians, and by paying them a living wage that reflects their importance are all reasonable steps.

Even if the creation of the program were approved despite opposition from the veterinary professionals in the state, there is no guarantee the mid-level practitioners would be tempted to practice in rural areas. The promise of less expensive veterinary care would likely be short-lived and at the expense of small, independent veterinarians who would be unable to compete with less expensive care – even if it is delivered by a less qualified individual overseen by a veterinarian in an office far from the ranch and the consequences of potentially lower quality care.

This is most certainly a real problem in need of a solution but legislating a new type of professional is not it.

Rachel Gabel writes about agriculture and rural issues. She is assistant editor of The Fence Post Magazine, the region’s preeminent agriculture publication. Gabel is a daughter of the state’s oil and gas industry and a member of one of the state’s 12,000 cattle-raising families, and she has authored children’s books used in hundreds of classrooms to teach students about agriculture.