The Oregon Capitol.

Oregon lawmakers have abandoned a proposed task force on horse dentistry to improve the likelihood of non-veterinarians being allowed to conduct livestock pregnancy checks.

The two issues became linked earlier this year with the introduction of Senate Bill 976, which originally sought to legalize both equine dentistry and livestock pregnancy checks being performed for pay by people without state veterinary licenses.

Under an amendment to the bill, the initial equine dentistry language was replaced with a task force meant to study the subject, but now even those provisions have been removed to relieve SB 976 of fiscal expenses that could stand in the way of its approval.

Organizing the task force would cost the Oregon Department of Agriculture an estimated $225,000, as it would require hiring a licensed veterinarian for consultation, while the rule-making costs for enacting the livestock pregnancy check provisions were limited to $50,000.

Dropping the equine dentistry task force is expected to improve SB 976’s chances of passing the budget-setting Joint Ways and Means Committee, which is scheduled to vote on the proposal on June 18, said Todd Nash, R-Enterprise, the bill’s chief sponsor.

“We didn’t want to lose the preg check portion of that for the sake of a task force,” Nash said. “We don’t want it to die in Ways and Means due to a lack of funds.”

Nash said he expected “pushback” from the veterinary industry to the original equine dentistry provisions, which would likely require the certification requirements for horse dentists to be better defined.

Meanwhile, the provisions allowing trained non-veterinarians to be paid for livestock pregnancy checks “seem like an organic fit,” given the abundance of technicians qualified for such work and the insufficient number of large animal veterinarians in rural areas, he said.

Supporters of SB 976, including the Oregon Farm Bureau, argued the proposal’s initial version would help alleviate the veterinary shortage by allowing trained individuals to conduct common procedures for which veterinarians seldom have time.

However, the Oregon Veterinary Medical Association and others strongly opposed the bill’s original version, claiming it would undermine professional vets by allowing “minimally trained” people to perform medical tasks that could expose them and the animals to danger and complications.

For example, critics said the “power tools” involved in horse dentistry require the use of pharmaceutical sedatives to which non-veterinarians should not have access.

Meanwhile, the “rectal palpation” involved in livestock pregnancy checks, in which reproductive organs are examined by inserting an arm into the animal’s anus, can be injurious if done incorrectly, according to critics.

Though the OVMA and individual veterinarians objected to the entirety of the bill, the Senate Natural Resources Committee unanimously approved the livestock pregnancy check portion after the language on horse dentistry was scaled back to a proposed task force.