You've probably seen a "shell game" being played on TV. This is a game in which a pea is placed under one of three walnut shells and the person running the game scrambles the shells round and round. The person betting on his ability to pick the shell under which the pea rests - and thereby "winning" the game - inevitably loses the bet every single time.

Here is a replay of a deplorable shell game of animal cruelty going on now in Idaho. Let's say that some person is starving one or more animals that they are keeping, and also that a complaint is filed with the "authorities" against this abuser. The next step is for the police/sheriff's department to investigate the complaint of abuse. After having found conditions supporting the complaint, the officer and animal control person file their reports and advise the prosecutor's office of the situation they found and strongly suggest that charges be brought against the abuser, because the abuser has been cited before for the same offense and in the past, the abuser "got away with it" because they were cited for not properly disposing of a dead animal (no mention of the fact that the animal died of starvation). Oh, did I say the animal? Sorry . . . three of the abuser's animals died of starvation. Fast forward to the present: the old scenario is repeating itself. No ticket was actually issued, just a strong recommendation for six counts of animal abuse made to the prosecutor. The "pea" is now under the first shell, and the prosecutor is now "it" and then the prosecutor goes to the rule book looking for an out. Lo and behold, there is one, it reads: 23-3511 "Permitting animals to go without care - Abandoned animals to be humanely destroyed" - Every owner, custodian or possessor of any animal, who shall permit the same to be in any building, enclosure, lane, street, square or lot of any city, county or precinct, without proper care, and attention as determined by an Idaho licensed Veterinarian or a representative of the division animal control, shall on conviction, be found guilty of a misdemeanor. " The prosecutor just needed to find a licensed veterinarian or a state animal control person and have he or she go and check on the alleged abuser (already witnessed by the first-response officer). Now shell No. 2 is on the table. The veterinarian goes to the site, finds the deplorable conditions, recognizes that all the animals are significantly underweight, even without any knowledge of the previous behavior on the part of the abuser, inspects the horses, does not mention the conditions - foot-deep mud, absence of water supply, absence of feed - however, he does mention that the conditions for the animals as well as the condition of the animals "can be corrected." An agreed-upon program of treatment is created and no charges are filed. The third shell is on the table.

This scenario leads us to the time when the abuser claimed to have no funds for hay, was feeding the animals from bags of old bread and otherwise ignoring the dangers presented by the lack of water, the animals being tightly tied to trees and vehicles 24/7 and practically non-existent fencing, but does agree to be "monitored" over six or eight weeks. Suddenly, hay becomes visible on the property and is being fed to the horses. They are no longer tied down 24 hours a day and so have some access to water. Naturally, their weight begins to improve. Since no money for feed was available previously, we will, for the moment, assume that the hay is being donated. So, the question remains: since the "shells" keep being moved round and round, what will become of these animals when the legal system stops watching and the hay donor stops the free flow of food? I suppose that we are only left to pray that we don't have to wait until history repeats itself again and again, and others file third, fourth and fifth complaints and that these animals won't die of starvation. Any logical person would expect with this abuser's previous history of animal starvation that were in his care at the same location, that this current episode would have been treated more seriously and ended by the removal of the horses from the unacceptable conditions under which they exist. I guess the operative word here is "game" and, sadly, this is what seems to be being played in Idaho again and again. Our animals are the ones who keep losing - often, their lives.

Tony Mangan is president of Panhandle Equine Rescue, Inc. Email Tony at [email protected]