This November, Coloradans will vote on a ballot measure stakeholders say could alter the future of veterinary medicine.

Proposition 129, the Veterinary Professional Associate Initiative, has sparked intense debate among veterinarians and animal welfare organizations around the state.

The measure aims to create a veterinary professional associate role and allow VPAs to practice medicine under the supervision of a licensed veterinarian. While supporters argue the measure could mitigate the veterinary shortage facing Colorado, opponents say the quality of veterinary care and animal safety could be at risk.

In a survey conducted by the Colorado State University Animal-Human Policy Center, veterinary professionals around the state expressed their struggles with the current veterinary system.

Seventy-one percent of practice managers and owners reported they are forced to turn away clients weekly because they are not able to fit them into their schedules or address concerns in a timely manner.

The Dumb Friends League, a leading supporter of Proposition 129 and endorser of the All Pets Deserve Vet Care coalition, consistently faces this issue at its subsidized veterinary hospital on the CSU Spur campus.

“Every day, we have a line going into the parking lot,” said Ali Mickelson, senior director of advocacy and education at the Dumb Friends League. “We serve people on a first-come, first-served basis, and we fill up in a half hour every single day for a community veterinary medicine hospital. We’re also seeing an increasing number of people surrendering pets just because they can’t find veterinary care, so that’s been really hard.”

The organization states that introducing VPAs to the veterinary workforce would not only provide options to increase veterinary resources but also reduce the costs of care.

“We just think it’s an opportunity to add more people who care for animals into the profession,” Mickelson said. “As a shelter, we’re acutely aware of the shortage, and we would be delighted to hire these folks today because they would allow us to expand the number of clients that we can see and have another level of increased care within our facilities.”

VPAs would have the ability to diagnose medical conditions, order and perform tests and perform routine surgical procedures. Critics argue that allowing someone with less training than a licensed veterinarian to provide such services would lower the standard of veterinary care and put pets at risk.

“The disparity is shocking,” reads a statement from Dr. Will French, former president of the Colorado Veterinary Medical Association, and Kylie Yancey, DVM candidate at CSU. “Proposition 129 would allow VPAs to take on critical duties reserved for licensed veterinarians, putting them in real-life medical situations that they are not trained for and, as a result, placing pet patients in unnecessary danger.”

Organizations including the American Veterinary Medical Association and the Student American Veterinary Medical Association have come out firmly against the measure as well.

“Given the considerable risks the proposed veterinary professional associate in Colorado would pose to animals, public health and our food supply, the SAVMA Executive Board has taken a position in full support of the AVMA’s position opposing Proposition 129 and the creation of the mid-level practitioner,” SAVMA President Tara Fellows Barron said.

Currently, the CSU College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences is creating a program that will train VPAs and provide them with a master’s degree in an effort to address the shortage of care in shelters. Per Colorado law, graduates of the program will not be allowed to work in veterinary clinics but could work in spaces including animal shelters and rescues unless Proposition 129 passes.

While CSU cannot take a stance on the legislation, the university has released a statement addressing its plan to launch the program.

“It’s important to remember that CSU’s program plans started long before the ballot measure was in existence, and CSU will continue to develop this master’s program regardless of the outcome of the election,” the statement reads.

As the debate continues, some veterinarians express optimism about VPAs and CSU’s program. One of them is Dr. Paige Garnett, founder of Care Animal Hospital.

“I see this idea as my right arm — I would use these people,” Garnett said. “There’s nothing that says these people will deliver substandard care — nothing. The preparation is solid, and I think CSU has their act together and their heads straight on this.”

Veterinarians who oppose the measure simultaneously support CSU’s program as well.

“I just don’t think the solution to (the cost of veterinary care) is this particular measure,” said Dr. Joya Migliaccio, associate veterinarian at Family and Friends Veterinary Care. “I do think that this would help immensely in our shelter situation. … If we can provide them with some relief and some ability to have other people who are helping take some of their work burden off, I think that would be absolutely instrumental.”

Reach Laila Shekarchian at news@collegian.com or on Instagram @CSUCollegian.