FINDLAY | Dead Horse Behind Bell’s Stables Sparks Firestorm Over Animal Care, Excuses, and Accountability

FINDLAY | A recent Facebook post about a dead horse left in plain view behind Bell’s Stables has ignited a heated debate in the community, with some residents demanding answers about animal welfare and others insisting the winter weather, frozen ground, and high disposal costs made prompt removal unrealistic.

The post and comments show a community split between concern about animal welfare and efforts to normalize or minimize what happened, often using weather and logistics as justification.

Main themes in reactions

• Concerned commenters focus on patterns and public impact, noting that two horses have reportedly died in about six weeks and calling for inspections or investigations of the stables.

• Defenders emphasize that “livestock dies,” that death is part of farm life, and that outsiders should “mind your own business,” framing the original concern as overreaction or “outrage for attention.”

• Several people inject past context, referencing earlier incidents at the same stables (including prior deaths and alleged misconduct) to argue that the facility’s reputation is already questionable.

• Others counter with personal observations that the horses are cared for, highlighting regular work, cleaning, and riding, and warning against accusing the stable without direct knowledge.

How people downplay or deflect the incident

• Weather and frozen ground: Multiple commenters argue that it is “-10,” the ground is “frozen solid,” and therefore it is unreasonable to expect immediate burial, telling critics to “take a shovel right this second and attempt to dig a hole” and imagine digging one big enough for a horse.

• Cost of disposal: Commenters point to very high cremation costs (around $2,000) and the difficulty of arranging removal in a snowstorm, implying that leaving the body visible for a time is financially and logistically understandable rather than negligent.

• Normalizing carcass removal: Some say horses “die everyday” and that bodies simply get picked up and taken to the landfill, framing this as routine farm practice and suggesting that those who are upset are “crying about it” rather than understanding rural realities.

• Shifting focus to critics: A few responses mock or attack the anonymous poster (“Idiot,” “STFU until you’ve tried [to lift a horse]”), accuse them of lacking “logic,” or claim they just want attention, which shifts the conversation from the dead horse and management of the stables to the character and motives of the person raising concerns.

• Minimizing community impact: One commenter argues that after a major snowstorm, few people were using the park anyway, so the visibility of the carcass to children and the public is overstated, again reducing the perceived seriousness of leaving the horse exposed.

Ongoing concerns despite downplaying

• Even among those who acknowledge the difficulty of burial in frozen ground, some insist that the horse could at least have been covered with a tarp or otherwise shielded from view, especially given its proximity to homes and a public park, suggesting a basic respect issue rather than just disposal logistics.

• Current and former boarders dispute each other: one says the horses are clearly cared for, while another claims they are “skin and bones” and that fencing and general care are poor, reinforcing that there is a real disagreement about conditions rather than simple misunderstanding.

• References to earlier deaths and a prior scandal involving “dirty things with a horse” show that for some residents this incident fits a longer pattern of worry about the facility, so for them the weather explanation does not fully address the underlying trust problem.

FOLLOW THE FOSTORIA FREE PRESS ON FACEBOOK, YOUTUBE, AND TIKTOK FOR MORE INVESTIGATIVE STORIES LIKE THIS ONE!