reillyshoe wrote:
Pat, I think your exercise demonstrated the adage, "It is easier to beg forgiveness than to ask permission".

Ever get the feeling that we get to do what we do largely at the whim and leisure of the AVMA? Gives one pause to wonder at what "triggers" might change that situation.

Has anyone here ever met a veterinarian that feels farriers should not be allowed to shoe horses without some kind of academic credentials, certification or license?

Cheers,
Mark

Western Hill Forge wrote:
We don't have to defend it because it isn't any of our business.
A lot of people do all sorts of things that are unacceptable to me. Maybe I should just seize control of everything?...or I could just leave the next guy alone to do what he thinks is best.
We have a very small minority of farriers represented on this board or even in the AFA. I think the AMVA opinions probable represent a small percentage of vets too. None of the vest I come in contact with try to tell me how to shoe a horse and they sure don't seem to want to do any shoeing.

I don't think we should stick our head in the sand but don't give the small minority of trouble makers any of what they want. Don't give them any help.

IMO getting involved with any of these people in any of their hair brained ideas for regulation, organizations or any of this nonsense is just playing into their hands. It just gives them legitimacy. Just tell them to go suck an egg.

tbloomer wrote:
That might be the way to go.

reillyshoe wrote:
Don't file the complaint against yourself. If what we do is veterinary medicine and the vets can't do what we do, then they are clearly incompetent and should have their licenses pulled.

The next time a vet tells you to administer a treatment or a device to prevent lameness, turn him in to the board of veterinary medicine or call a cop!

If what we do is veterinary medicine and the vets can't do it, they're incompetent. If the are complicit in having us do it, they are criminal.

Just hit them with their own rules.

Mike Ferrara wrote:

Yes, file a complaint with his peers - that'll work

By the way, for what it's worth, I'm finding this thread, and it's brother the AVMA thread, very thought provoking. Please keep poking it.

Regards

reillyshoe wrote:
Thanks for taking the time to clearify what the board of VM in NJ and Delaware is thinking. The stand almost sounds as if you can not apply a shoe in any circumstances. Most horses have some form of lameness that you shoe for everyday. It really concerns me as I practice in the state of NJ.

My question is "are you even allowed to pick up the hoof and commence to use your tools on an overgrown sore footed horse?"( to prevent lamness) ....."Or do we call the vet to have a look see?" (to treat the horse"

Interesting how you can be held liable...... for touching someone's horse with out the vet on sight!

And this should explain it a little better; at least in NJ.

do so.

Sounds as if shoeing is illegal in this state already!!

tbloomer wrote:
End of story! Unless your a trainer, your just a peon!

There are a bunch of questions involving the interpretation of practice laws. What constitutes an "appliance"? What constitutes a diagnosis? Every time we trim a hoof, we must be forming a diagnosis that the hoof is too long....

The difficulty is that is appears that many states put the onus on us to interpret the law, which seems a bit silly. The state board enforces the law, but they will not tell you in advance what is allowed. The is no guarantee that the interpretation of the laws by those enforcing the law today will be the same as the interpretation of those individuals enforcing the laws tomorrow.

Western Hill Forge wrote:

The complaint might not work but sometimes following the rules to the letter makes for a very clear demonstration of how ridiculous the rules are.

I think you may have hit on a real flaw in the existing system. Maybe the board of veterinary medicine isn't such a good idea as it's been implemented. We could send them home.

When you want to fix a "system", you start by documenting the existing system and defining the problem. We're back to asking what is the problem that we're trying to fix?

Come on. If what we do is necessary and we're the only ones who can do it and it's illegal for us to do it, we have a hosed up system that just can't work.

Isn't there an exemption for horseshoeing? I think we see why that's there. Vet work is vet work unless it's something like horseshoeing that vets can't do. LOL How long are we going to suffer these goof*****?

reillyshoe wrote:
There is a solution that is painfully obvious. We're talking about livestock here. Unless it relates to food safety (restraining one person from causing harm to another person), keep government the HELL out of it!

They're our horses. We can pet on them, make them do our work or eat them. It's none of the government's business what we do with their feet!

There is no exemption for horseshoeing in many states. Even in states where there is an exemption, routine acts of corrective applications (bar shoes or pads) can be interpreted as the practice of veterinary medicine.

The point I have been trying to make over the years is that the status quo is not a good option. Twenty years ago, I do not think equine dentists figured to be in their current legal situation, and I bet they wish they could go back and change their course of action.

reillyshoe wrote:
Right. So now is the time to bring back the idea of private ownership of property. Horses are property.

Mike Ferrara wrote:

What do you think is more likely to happen Mike, rewriting the entire book or just the few lines which apply to farriers? It is a daunting enough task to convince the legal system to allow farriers to shoe a horse without bringing other issues into the conversation.

I would suggest we start with something we (as farriers) can agree upon-

1. shoeing horses should be legal for non-veterinarians

2. The repair of hoof defects should be within the domain of the farrier

3. Hoof trimming and the choice of shoes and pads does not necessarily constitute the formation of a diagnosis.


These are tangible starting points which would allow us to legally practice our area of expertise.

Mike Ferrara wrote:Mike, put that "systems approach" stuff in this thread. You'll just confuse people.