Rutland Manor. Is this the truth behind the legend?

General discussion on all labradoodle-related matters - anything not otherwise covered by specific forums on the site.
User avatar
Carole g
Posts: 2194
Joined: 23 Aug 2006, 20:20

Re: Rutland Manor. Is this the truth behind the legend?

Post by Carole g » 14 Jul 2009, 10:21

I agree that the last matter was probably too much off course, my apologies. I do think though that the UKLA is the only place where some concerns can be addressed in a civil manner without the owner of the site removing anything antagonistic to their own view as is reported elsewhere. This site is not run by breeders or groups with an agenda, a reasoned discussion is therefore possible.

While Rutland Manor is taking an interest in this forum I would like to bring up again the matter of underage breeding. We are told that Rutlands Snuggle's first litter from a mating at 10 month old may have been accidental as suggested by Rutland Manor.

In my internet research involving online labradoodle databases, archives, and responses from private owners I have come across Rutlands Shasta in a significant number of pedigrees and would like some clarification from Rutland Manor. The pedigrees all show her date of birth as 11th of August 2002 but her first litter with a signed and dated pedigree for the progeny was 7th of June 2003 and the second litter 24th of January 2004. There are several other litters, the last one for which I have a signed and dated pedigree is 19th of May 06.

Is this correct Rutland Manor? Was Rutlands Shasta mated to Rutlands Woody a few days before she was 8 months old? Are these dates correct as per the pedigrees?
Could you also put our minds at rest as to what happened to her after what appears to be a lot of successive (back to back) litters?
ALWAYS visit the premises and see mum with pup. There are no excuses!
DONT BUY FROM PUPPY HARMERS
Image

linny
Posts: 5008
Joined: 30 Oct 2007, 11:25
Location: Newton Abbot Devon
Contact:

Re: Rutland Manor. Is this the truth behind the legend?

Post by linny » 14 Jul 2009, 10:45

I think this question is deserving of an answer?....
.I have no concerns with regard to "Trademarks "... I do however have concerns about breeding under age bitches and consecutive litters, therefor I would like RM to reply to Carol's question
LInny (UK)

User avatar
MrsAdmin
Posts: 4845
Joined: 15 Feb 2008, 01:29
Location: Brixham, South Devon

Re: Rutland Manor. Is this the truth behind the legend?

Post by MrsAdmin » 14 Jul 2009, 13:13

Carole g wrote: I do think though that the UKLA is the only place where some concerns can be addressed in a civil manner without the owner of the site removing anything antagonistic to their own view as is reported elsewhere. This site is not run by breeders or groups with an agenda, a reasoned discussion is therefore possible.
I thoroughly agree with this statement. There are many sites where it is impossible to discuss anything that is deemed 'controversial' i.e. against someone's vested interests.

Whilst I love to look at puppies and have quirky, off-the-wall humour with the best of them, UKLA is a site where a civilised discussion on important matters such as animal health, breeding and exploitation can take place.

99.9% of members here love their dogs to bits but it is imperative for us, the dog loving public, to raise a voice for those poor animals doomed to a life of misery and exploitation at the hands of puppy farms and fools. They cannot speak for themselves (especially if they are debarked - another claim against Rutland Manor that seems to be doing the rounds).

By the way, where is Fattysplash? She is a brilliant guardian of animal rights and has not posted here for ages :cry: . I hope she has not been hounded away by one (or two) post wonders/sock-puppets. This site needs informed and concerned people to bring us facts and information so we can see what is happening out there, hidden away in barns, kennels and pet shops.

The poor, exploited bitches may be out of sight but they should not be out of our minds.
ImageImageImage
ImageImage

heike
Posts: 61
Joined: 11 Jul 2009, 02:18

Re: Rutland Manor. Is this the truth behind the legend?

Post by heike » 15 Jul 2009, 03:19

Mrs.Ad, Just because you "heard" another rumour doesn't make it true!! Have you been to Beverley's place??, no didn't think so. She recently has had the DAd AND the RSPCA at her place doing through inspections. If you need further info, why not just visit her site. Make a visit to the NAIA site to and see what other "pure bred" well respected breeders practices are, you many be enlightened.
Enoug said on this whole topic, I for one is putting this to rest.
Sincerely,
Heike

linny
Posts: 5008
Joined: 30 Oct 2007, 11:25
Location: Newton Abbot Devon
Contact:

Re: Rutland Manor. Is this the truth behind the legend?

Post by linny » 15 Jul 2009, 10:14

Heike,
I will be glad when this subject is "put to bed......BUT "whilst important questions raised remain unanswered, this topic should continue to run.
When we purchase a pup we want to know that the pup is not the product of some poor under age bitch that is being used as a production line!....surely Beverley can confirm the age and number of litters a bitch produces and the dates of whelping?
A reputable breeder certainly could :!:

CAROL SHAW
Posts: 518
Joined: 08 Feb 2006, 23:33
Location: SPRINGWELL HOUSE FARM WASKERLEY CONSETT CO DURHAM
Contact:

Re: Rutland Manor. Is this the truth behind the legend?

Post by CAROL SHAW » 15 Jul 2009, 22:40

Heike? or whoever you really are have you been to Beverleys and can you confirm what is going on to put all our minds at rest?

aussiedoodles
Posts: 57
Joined: 04 Jul 2009, 01:02
Location: Windsor Castle

Re: Rutland Manor. Is this the truth behind the legend?

Post by aussiedoodles » 16 Jul 2009, 04:51

There is a great deal more to this than most of you think and the truth WILL be revealed.
This topic should remain open as more information becomes known so that people who have been mislead for so many years can learn the truth behind the breeding practices of RM.
Don't put your head in the sand and hope it goes away ...because the truth always comes out eventually!!!
maybe now IS "Eventually"
Carole you have done some fabulous research and you should be commended on what you have uncovered regarding certain pedigrees and breedings etc.
I will check back regularly as more information comes to hand.
I would look forward to hearing Beverley Manners' response to your question.
The longer it takes for the answer to come - the more it looks as if there is truth behind this issue.

Ms Manners is generally VERY quick to reply...why is she not answering this latest question?

heike
Posts: 61
Joined: 11 Jul 2009, 02:18

Re: Rutland Manor. Is this the truth behind the legend?

Post by heike » 16 Jul 2009, 08:53

Well Linny since you seem to be the expert on breeding, take a look at the website Rufflyspeaking.word.press.com, type in breeding frequency and bitch age. This site is very informative and the author has done much research on this issue. Then reply to her what you have said on here.

chilipepper
Posts: 345
Joined: 03 Apr 2007, 08:18
Location: chester, cheshire

Re: Rutland Manor. Is this the truth behind the legend?

Post by chilipepper » 16 Jul 2009, 09:02

Carole g wrote:I agree that the last matter was probably too much off course, my apologies. I do think though that the UKLA is the only place where some concerns can be addressed in a civil manner without the owner of the site removing anything antagonistic to their own view as is reported elsewhere. This site is not run by breeders or groups with an agenda, a reasoned discussion is therefore possible.

While Rutland Manor is taking an interest in this forum I would like to bring up again the matter of underage breeding. We are told that Rutlands Snuggle's first litter from a mating at 10 month old may have been accidental as suggested by Rutland Manor.

In my internet research involving online labradoodle databases, archives, and responses from private owners I have come across Rutlands Shasta in a significant number of pedigrees and would like some clarification from Rutland Manor. The pedigrees all show her date of birth as 11th of August 2002 but her first litter with a signed and dated pedigree for the progeny was 7th of June 2003 and the second litter 24th of January 2004. There are several other litters, the last one for which I have a signed and dated pedigree is 19th of May 06.

Is this correct Rutland Manor? Was Rutlands Shasta mated to Rutlands Woody a few days before she was 8 months old? Are these dates correct as per the pedigrees?
Could you also put our minds at rest as to what happened to her after what appears to be a lot of successive (back to back) litters?
Thanks Hieks, still doesn't really answer the question though. And welcome to the board it's nice to see someone new having such passionate opinions.

heike
Posts: 61
Joined: 11 Jul 2009, 02:18

Re: Rutland Manor. Is this the truth behind the legend?

Post by heike » 16 Jul 2009, 09:15

To Carole, I am Heike, I speak only for myself, I do my homework and yes I do know several people who have stayed at RM and/or visited, remember the Lindleys?? I have posted now several websites that will educate and inform, has anyone bothered to visit them?? Has anyone asked the people who wrote the articles questions or better yet slander them in public?? It is much easier to accuse someone of this and that, then to do the reseach to have formed an educated opinion. I am finding that none of you want to do this, so no matter what I say or do it will never change or enlighten any of you.

linny
Posts: 5008
Joined: 30 Oct 2007, 11:25
Location: Newton Abbot Devon
Contact:

Re: Rutland Manor. Is this the truth behind the legend?

Post by linny » 16 Jul 2009, 09:49

heike wrote:Well Linny since you seem to be the expert on breeding, take a look at the website Rufflyspeaking.word.press.com, type in breeding frequency and bitch age. This site is very informative and the author has done much research on this issue. Then reply to her what you have said on here.
:?: :?: Are you refering to me ..or to Linny2 Heike??

You are also voicing your opinions based on other peoples experience as I gather that you have not been to RM yourself.?
If you have posted on other forums to inform and educate, I invite you to share this information here on UKLA.
Linny(UK)

heike
Posts: 61
Joined: 11 Jul 2009, 02:18

Re: Rutland Manor. Is this the truth behind the legend?

Post by heike » 16 Jul 2009, 10:28

Sorry, yes Linny2, and I have posted here on this site the first is NAIA and the second is Rufflyspeaking.worldpress.com, breeding frequency and bitch age is the name of the essay.

aussiedoodles
Posts: 57
Joined: 04 Jul 2009, 01:02
Location: Windsor Castle

Re: Rutland Manor. Is this the truth behind the legend?

Post by aussiedoodles » 16 Jul 2009, 10:42

Let us not get side tracked because i am sure that is what Beverley would prefer that we do.
There has been some significant information come to hand here and we are still waiting for an explanation.

I have a feeling that we have only just began to find out the truth behind the legend!!!!

linny
Posts: 5008
Joined: 30 Oct 2007, 11:25
Location: Newton Abbot Devon
Contact:

Re: Rutland Manor. Is this the truth behind the legend?

Post by linny » 16 Jul 2009, 10:43

I repeat what I have said on here and that is,......
I am against the breeding of under age bitches and consecutive litters and I invite the Breeder herself
to clarify.
It's better to get this information direct from the person concerned.... rather than surmise.
Linny (UK)

heike
Posts: 61
Joined: 11 Jul 2009, 02:18

Re: Rutland Manor. Is this the truth behind the legend?

Post by heike » 16 Jul 2009, 10:50

Just because "you" are against something doesn't make it true. Have you read the information??

Locked