I am concerned that the proposed regulatory language unreasonably  limits the use of experienced assistants under the direct supervision of  a veterinarian.  It will also increase costs for clients especially for those who provide low cost spay and neuter services for shelters and rescue groups since often lvts are not available  to service these procedures or the cost of providing them would limit access to these services for lower income individuals.  The summary in the town hall language is also inaccurate and does not truly reflect the proposed language.  I would suggest language which supports the use of assistants to help monitor patients under the supervision of a licensed individual. This recognizes the role of lvts but maintains the ability of veterinarians to provide cost effective and timely services. It also discourages the use of less than ideal anesthetic techniques (injectable only) to meet regulatory guidelines by veterinarians who are unable to hire adequate numbers of lvts.