JEFFERSON CITY - Massage: $29. Heat therapy: $10. Session in the pool: $39. Sounds like a pretty good deal.
But these prices aren't for a getaway to your local day spa -- they're for your dog.
Physical therapy for injured animals has been on the rise in recent years, and pleas to make it easier for dogs and cats to gain access to such treatment brought the likes of Missouri baseball legend Whitey Herzog and former St. Louis Cardinals trainer Gene Gieselmann to the Capitol Tuesday.
"The way the rules read in Missouri, the animals are being treated better than the damn human beings," Whitey, the former manager of the St. Louis Cardinals and Kansas City Royals, told a House committee. "It doesn't make sense to me."
At issue is a decision by the state's Veterinary Medical Board to require a vet to be on-site at all times at animal rehabilitation clinics run by physical therapists. Previously, an animal only needed a referral from a veterinarian to receive such treatment -- mirroring the rules when it comes to humans.
Gieselmann, who spent nearly three decades as the Cardinals' head trainer, started his own animal rehabilitation clinic after leaving the team several years ago. But the St. Louis-based Animal Rehabilitation Foundation (aptly known as "ARF,") was forced to close after the new rule was instituted, Gieselmann said, because he couldn't afford to pay a full-time veterinarian just to "watch us do our work."
His former teammate Whitey echoed that sentiment, saying it "wasn't a common-sense rule" to require more oversight of animals than of humans.
"I can understand having a certified trainer," Whitey said. "But what I don't understand is why a veterinarian needs to be readily available on the premises 24 hours a day just to stand around."
The proposed House measure would allow trained physical therapists to treat animals without a veterinarian present, as long as one could be "immediately contacted" in an emergency.
But the Missouri Veterinary Medical Association disagreed, saying vets needed to be there all the time to make sure there was someone "legally responsible" for the animals.
"Who is going to represent the public if there is an animal who is neglected in its treatment?" Dr. Ava Frick, representing the association, told the committee.
Frick, a St. Louis veterinarian, also offers physical therapy services for animals. And with more vets expressing interest in tapping into the growing "dog therapy" market, observers say the underlying conflict between veterinarians and physical therapists is as much about competition as it is safety.
Gieselmann addressed the issue during his testimony, telling the committee that "people should have a choice of where they want to go."
"Competition is good," Gieselmann said, saying it made sense to allow those with the necessary training to help animals in need.
"Vets go to school for eight years," Gieselmann said. "How many people want to go to school for eight years and then go swim with dogs?"
The House Professional Registration and Licensing Committee is expected to vote on the bill in the next few weeks. Its fate remains unclear, however, as some would like to see both sides work things out on their own.
Rep. Marilyn Ruestman, R-Joplin, sits on the committee, and said while she did not think a vet needed to be on staff at a rehabilition facility for animals, she thought the state had bigger issues to confront.
"My preference is for the parties to sit down at the table and work it out among themselves," Ruestman said.
A similar measure passed last year as an amendment to a large agriculture bill. That bill was vetoed by Gov. Bob Holden.