By Dr. Allison Black
Now that Colorado voters have received their ballots, they may pause at Proposition 129 and wonder what it entails and how to vote. As Colorado shelter veterinarians, we stand united in our strong opposition to Proposition 129 and encourage Coloradans to vote ‘no.’
If passed, Prop. 129 will dangerously alter the quality of care your pets and shelter animals receive. Voters want safe, reliable veterinary care for their pets, but this proposition fails to meet that standard, ultimately putting animals at risk.
Proposition 129 proposes creating a new role in veterinary care, known as a Veterinary Professional Associate (VPA). Supporters make it sound like this proposal is a step forward in increasing access to care, but there are serious flaws and risks embedded in this ballot measure that voters need to understand.
While the Denver Dumb Friends League has been leading the charge to pass this measure, investing over $1 million to promote it, the question becomes, “Does that mean all Colorado animal shelter vets support it?” Absolutely not.
We are shelter veterinarians who have dedicated our careers to aiding Colorado’s lost, abandoned, and surrendered animals and we’re firmly against Proposition 129. Here’s why.
Misleading comparisons
Proponents of the measure have irresponsibly likened the VPA to a nurse practitioner or physician assistant. This is intentionally misleading. NPs and PAs undergo years of rigorous education and hands-on clinical training — yet they still do not perform surgery.
In contrast, Proposition 129 would allow VPAs to perform surgeries on animal patients after completing just 65 credit hours, about half the credits required for veterinarians. This is alarmingly condensed training in a mostly online format with minimal hands-on experience.
As shelter vets, we see some of the most at-risk animals in Colorado and know how quickly even routine surgeries can become complicated, especially with animals that may already be stressed or in fragile health. When things take a turn during a procedure, an animal’s life is in our hands. Having an appropriately trained individual performing the surgery could be the difference between life and death.
Simply put, Proposition 129 would allow under-qualified individuals to perform surgeries, and that’s a risk shelter animals — and your pets — shouldn’t have to face.
Slowing down — not improving
Proponents of this measure are misleading voters into believing VPAs will improve access to veterinary care and reduce cost of care. In reality, the challenges to access care are complex cases, and the proposed VPA won’t be equipped to address them. Moreover, the small difference in salary between veterinarians and VPAs will not result in lower cost of care to pet owners — it will increase investor profits. We should prioritize patient care over profits.
Shelter veterinarians are committed to providing quality care to all animals, regardless of their background. Many of the animals we care for have been through significant trauma. For these vulnerable animals, quality care is essential and potentially lifesaving. Introducing under-trained individuals and expecting them to take on responsibilities meant for fully licensed veterinarians is a risky gamble.
This measure isn’t a solution to increasing access to care; it’s a dangerous path forward that could have devastating consequences for the pets and other animals we serve.
Better, safer solutions
There are better, safer solutions to address the issues facing veterinary care in Colorado. Rather than lowering standards, we should focus on elevating and fully utilizing the skills of Registered Veterinary Technicians (RVTs). RVTs are highly trained professionals who already play a crucial role in veterinary clinics and shelters across the state. Empowering them to do more is a logical, safer approach than creating an entirely new role that will be filled with under-qualified personnel.
We’re excited about the recent passing of a bipartisan bill, HB24-1047, which expands the roles of RVTs. HB-1047 was a collaborative process and is how legislative changes should be made, not through deceptive ballot measures like Proposition 129.
Motivation and risks
As you decide how to vote on Proposition 129, please take the time to consider the serious ramifications this ballot measure will have on animal safety. Reflect on the broad and diverse opposition — shelter vets, industry experts, other animal health and welfare groups, pet owners and likely your own vet, who are all voicing deep concerns about this proposal.
Support, meanwhile, mainly comes from a small handful of spokespeople.
For the safety of pets and shelter animals throughout Colorado, we strongly urge you to vote 'no' on Proposition 129. Let’s protect the quality of care that our pets and other animals deserve, and work together to find real solutions that enhance, rather than endanger, veterinary care.
Shelter veterinarians opposing Proposition 129
The following shelter veterinarians stand united in opposing Prop 129, advocating for the safety of pets and shelter animals across Colorado:
- Allison Black, DVM, Shelter Vet for 6 years
- Jennifer Bolser, DVM, Shelter Vet for 19 years
- Emily Bono, DVM, Shelter Vet for 1/2 a year
- Cara Brannigan, DVM, Shelter Vet for over 10 years
- Patti Canchola, DVM, Shelter Vet for 12 years
- Rhiannon Chapman, DVM, Shelter Vet for 6 years
- Tiffany Colglazier, DVM, Shelter Vet for over 1 year
- Cathlin Craver, DVM, Shelter Vet for 17 years
- Patricia Crystal, VMD, Shelter Vet for over 2 years
- Nellie Damrauer, DVM, Shelter Vet for 21 years
- Brooke Davis, DVM, Shelter Vet for 4 years
- Shari DePauw, DVM, Shelter Vet for 15 years
- Sarah Flanders, DVM, Shelter Vet for 5 years
- Becky Flemer, DVM, Shelter Vet for 11 years
- Elise Gingrich, DVM, MPH, DACVPM, DABVP (Shelter Medicine), Shelter Vet for 14 years
- Lesli Groshong, DVM, DABVP (Shelter Medicine), Shelter Vet for 30 years
- Cristina Gutierrez, DVM, Shelter Vet for 19 years
- Emily Hays, DVM, Shelter Vet for 15 years
- Cindy Hill, DVM, Shelter Vet for 10 years
- Kristen Janusz, DVM, Shelter Vet for 19 years
- Shannon Lu, DVM, Shelter Vet for 1 year
- Sue Lynch, DVM, Shelter Vet for 15 years
- John F. Marsella, DVM, Shelter Vet for 5 years
- Rebecca Monahan, DVM, Shelter Vet for 22 years
- Camila Monroe, DVM, Shelter Vet for 9 years
- Cynthia Nigrini, VMD, Shelter Vet for 3 years
- Meagan O’Brien, MS, DVM, Shelter Vet for over 1 year
- Destiny Ortiz, DVM, Shelter Vet for 3 years
- Andrea Palchak, DVM, Shelter Vet for 6 years
- Abby Patterson, DVM, Shelter Vet for 8 years
- Gail Rapport, DVM, Shelter Vet over 40 years
- Heather Reeder, DVM, Shelter Vet for 23 years
- Barbara Rose, DVM, Shelter Vet for 7 years
- Taylor Smith, DVM, Shelter Vet for 5 years
- Miranda Spindel, DVM, MS, Shelter Vet for 25 years
- Vivian Tran, DVM, Shelter Vet for over 3 years
- Samantha Wetz, DVM, Shelter Vet for 6 years
- Dylan Whitaker, DVM, Shelter Vet for 3 years
- Dana Windsor, DVM, Shelter Vet for 8 years
- Amber Zagrodzki, DVM, CVA, Shelter Vet for 7 years
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are our own and do not represent the organizations we are affiliated with.
This opinion does not necessarily reflect the views of Boulder Weekly.
Editor's note: This article has been updated to reflect to correct spelling of Emily Hays' name.