The question posed by the title might very well occur if a recent proposal by the Wyoming Legislature’s Joint Agriculture Committee comes to fruition. The Agriculture Committee designated “Non-Certified Pregnancy Testing of Cattle and Proactive Herd Management” it’s No. 1 priority. The Wyoming Legislative Management Council subsequently approved study of the proposal during summer interim committee meetings. This could lead to the creation of a committee bill to present during the 2027 session. 

Under current statutes, pregnancy testing is considered a diagnostic procedure limited to licensed veterinary practitioners within the state. Changing that status has been discussed, and at times bitterly debated, in many states for any number of reasons.

Case in point, I have a close ranching friend with which I share a background in theriogenology, specifically beef cow reproduction. We have debated this issue several times and remain 180 degree polar opposites in our view of who could/should conduct pregnancy testing.

He views pregnancy testing as a ‘cash cow’ reserved for the veterinarian. I actually agree with him but view it more like ‘Black Friday’ for a retail merchant while providing a definite return on investment for the rancher. For many rural mixed animal or exclusively large animal veterinarians that income might determine whether they can close out a year profitably, plan and restock for another.

He further contends it is difficult to schedule a veterinarian to do fall pregnancy checking and, at times, has questioned the skill levels and accuracy of some individuals. Again I have to agree. We have allowed the collegiate academic admissions process of selecting students for veterinary schools to favor students from urban/surban backgrounds and at times even discriminated against students from rural backgrounds who could far better serve the ranching community. Over several decades this has led to a severe shortage of veterinarians serving rural areas.

Wyoming veterinarians are acutely aware of this issue and through the Wyoming Veterinary Medical Association are diligently working to resolve this situation through two complimentary programs. First, the organization itself is funding a program to support externships for current students to work as student assistants in Wyoming rural mixed animal practices. A number of these students upon graduation are more likely to return to Wyoming and maybe even that externship practice as a new employee. This can aid in attracting more rural veterinarians in the short term.  

A longer term and more permanent solution exists in an evolving program to select Wyoming students with a specifically rural mixed practice interest. Via contractual arrangements they would be placed and supported in schools of veterinary medicine that offer training focused on rural mixed and food animal practices.

These efforts will in time bolster the number of rural veterinarians and thus their availability. In addition, they will come with advanced, and likely technically assisted skill levels, that address my friend’s concerns.  

As to ‘Proactive Herd Management’ noted in the Ag Committee’s priority, the veterinarian plays a key role and often facilitates the involvement and inclusion of those with expertise in animal nutrition, range management, genetics, marketing etc. In many situations such management consulting is rather subtle. It may evolve as an ongoing conversation between the veterinarian and the owner/manager during the course of the day(s) while pregnancy checking the herd. Here you have a valuable resource bringing oft times new and scientifically sound information with insight as how best to adapt it in a specific herd situation. This many times is a bonus provided as a part of other routine herd work.

So, what happens if the regulations change and lay personnel take over routine herd work? In my opinion this will pose a significant economic impact upon a veterinary practice and likely only provide task focused work at varying skill levels by unregulated lay technicians.

The missing, very credible consideration here is community support. The issue of preg checking and herd management consulting is specific only to livestock producers. On the other hand, the veterinarian serves the entire community. That vet practice takes care of all kinds of pets, 4-H and FFA projects, ranch and recreational horses and small livestock producer operations. In addition, the veterinarian is likely a friend to all.

Being a mixed animal, rural veterinarian is economically tough. Even in a successful practice, the income level is well below their colleagues in more urban small animal practices. They are well aware of that but like their work and the rural life-style and people and choose to remain as long as they can stay solvent and get the bills paid.

Now, take away their herd work and the practice may economically collapse. The veterinarian then has limited choices: close the practice and retire or pursue other interests or move on. In addition, younger veterinaries likely still have significant school debt and are well aware that small animal work in more populated urban areas could help pay down that debt much quicker.

In either case that leaves the community without veterinary service. Now residents may have to drive 25, 50 or 100 miles to get routine pet or other care. Ambulatory and emergency service is likely nonexistent and animal care throughout the whole community is compromised.

We can help avoid the above situation by contacting our local senators and representatives and asking them to not support lay technicians conducting veterinary work. Specifically focus on members of the Agriculture, State and Public Lands and Water Resources committee. Watch for their regional summer meetings and provide input opposing their proposal and in so doing support your local veterinarian.

(Bill Bennett, DVM, lives in Powell)