I thought I would forward this from Henry Heymering:

The American Veterinary Medical Association is in the process of revising their Model Veterinary Practice Act of 2003. The public is invited to comment until Feb 14, 2011. Section 2:19 defines veterinary medicine: "to diagnose, treat, correct, change, alleviate, or prevent animal disease, pain, deformity, defect, injury, or other physical, dental,or mental conditions by any method or mode."

This definition is incredibly broad. While horseshoeing and horse training are exempted; presumably equine dentistry, saddle fitting, chiropractic, massage, nutrition, etc. etc. are recommended by the model act to be illegal unless done by licensed veterinarians. You may read and comment on changes to the 2003 model here:

http://www.avma.org/issues/policy/mvpa.asp

The vets in Texas tried this. It didn't work out. The Equine Dentists fought back pretty hard and finally won out in the end.

They (the AVMA) are asking for your input. I gave them mine, and I would suggest that if you disagree with the model act as it is currently written, you have until February to voice your opinion.

If click on the button on the right side of the link, it is a relatively easy process.

reillyshoe in gray

They (the AVMA) are asking for your input. I gave them mine, and I would suggest that if you disagree with the model act as it is currently written, you have until February to voice your opinion.

If click on the button on the right side of the link, it is a relatively easy process.

I wonder if the AVMA would get upset if we asked them to voluntarily exclude themselves from the practice of farriery, other than at the order of, or when supervised by, a farrier.

Tom Stovall, CJF wrote:

Tom,
All I can tell you is that my suggestions were based upon my beliefs- not what I expect they want to hear. It seems a bit like voting in an election- if you don't tell them what you think now it is a bit unfair to criticize their position later.

PAT

At first glance. I didn't see any reference to either farriers or trainers, could you tell me where it is?

Jack Evers wrote:
There is an exemption for "Any person lawfully engaged in the art or profession of horseshoeing" in section 8, and the word "trainer" does not appear in the act.

reillyshoe wrote:
Section 6-7 specifies the horseshoeing exemption, and section 6-11 specifies:
"Any person who provides appropriate training for animals that does not include diagnosing or the prescribing or dispensing of any therapeutic agent." so although it doesn't use the word "trainer" . . . neither does it use the word "farrier"

This is interesting tho. . . in NY pretty much anyone providing services for animals such as massage, chiro, etc has to be a licensed vet tech. . . not so in other states? (once again, shoeing is exempted. You can almost imagine the vet board meeting "oh, make sure to put the shoeing thing in there! I don't want to shoe horses!")

Thank you Greg. I imagine the vets saying "I don't know how to shoe a horse, do you?".

reillyshoe wrote:
'Eww, no! It's gross! There's nails and burning horn and . . . hammers! The horse stops at the coronary band.'

reillyshoe wrote:
What constitutes unlawful engagement in the art or profession of horseshoeing? Sounds kind of like a starting place for more laws about horseshoeing.:confused:

I might guess that the word horseshoeing rather than farrier could be deliberate. draining an abscess, dremeling and or lacing a crack , etc may be an area of some dispute. I assume trimming would be included in "horseshoeing" since we do trim to shoe.

I have a question along the line of this topic. Here at my farm in NJ a trimmer was visiting regularly for two clients.On several occasions the trimmer would show up with an xray machine and do a full set of pictures on the horses she was trimming. Presumably use the pictures to help her practice and to my knowledge charge for them...... Allowed ?

lonestar wrote:
I think it depends on the state. I am certain the trimmer would have to have completed courses in radiation safety, but in some states veterinarians can send technicians to take radiographs. For the sake of trimming, radiographs provided (internal) landmarks just like the external ones we all use- P3 position is not really different from a level coronet or even footfall as a trimming parameter (although these might be questioned as vet practice in some states). The only obvious issue is is one uses the radiographs to form a diagnosis, navicular disease, laminitis- then you could really get in trouble.


I think New Hampshire has an exemption for farriers in the "traditional practice of horseshoeing". In this case, it might not be legal as we have not traditionally mused radiographs to assess hoof balance.

Interesting points. One of the horses being radiographed for trimming was a mare that had foundered a few years ago. The horse was sent to this trimmer for rehabilitation and I'm certain the pictures with respect to this horse were used as a means to diagnose.