• Forum/Server Upgrade If you are reading this you have made it to the upgraded forum. Posts made on the old forum after 26th October 2023 have not been transfered. Everything else should be here. If you find any issues please let us know.

Minumum accomadation-it's gone up!?

*lily* said:
Could you not extend it or have a runaround to a further run?
Click to expand...

No room, it's permanent access and attached to their shed so they have around 40 square feet. I'm happy with that.
I think 6 x 8 is unrealistic as a run size for many owners if I'm honest (modern houses, small gardens) and it could put people off that would provide perfectly good homes to rabbits in rescue. Bit like the "5 a day" fruit and veg thing, 5 isn't actually what's best, but if they said more people would've turned off to the whole campaign.
 
Fluffs said:
Maybe it's just me but I thought the minimum was 8'x4'run, now it's 8'x6' !:shock:
http://www.actionforrabbits.co.uk/If you cant afford a decent hutch.pdf
:cry: I'm upset now, we just bought a 8'x4' run :cry:
Click to expand...

I actually think posters like this do more harm than good. The RWAF stuff I've seen is fairly good but that poster you've linked might as well just say "you're never going to be good enough so don't bother".

I know what it's trying to achieve, but it gets my back up and I HAVE bigger than recommended accomodation and exercise space. :?
 
jemjabella said:
I actually think posters like this do more harm than good. The RWAF stuff I've seen is fairly good but that poster you've linked might as well just say "you're never going to be good enough so don't bother".

I know what it's trying to achieve, but it gets my back up and I HAVE bigger than recommended accomodation and exercise space. :?
Click to expand...

I agree with you entirely.
 
jemjabella said:
I actually think posters like this do more harm than good. The RWAF stuff I've seen is fairly good but that poster you've linked might as well just say "you're never going to be good enough so don't bother".

I know what it's trying to achieve, but it gets my back up and I HAVE bigger than recommended accomodation and exercise space. :?
Click to expand...

I totally agree.

Its so unrealistic for most people to have an 8x6run, as well as the 6x2 hutch - that would take up over a FITH of my garden! I was really proud of myself for managing a 6x2 double hutch, with 8ft runaround pipe to a 6x6.5 run - thats over 60sq ft even if you deduct the space taken up by the ramp and dont count the runaround. Yet that poster just makes me feel s**t. :(

Also i think it puts people off even trying to expand what theyve got. RWAF is far better at making people WANT to improve things for their buns.
 
Their minimum size is probably for rabbits that aren't allowed out of their runs every day. In my opinion a rabbit can't run around properly in a 4ft wide run. So if you let them out into the garden as well then it would be fine. If that is all they have access to then I would go bigger.
 
me and the boyf built an 8 x 6 the other weekend but I agree, boy does it take up some space!!! def not something everyone could or would fit in their garden (ive had to give over where I sit and eat my brekkie at an outdoor table to fit it in!)
 
When I apopted my 2 the rescues recomendation was a 10ft x 5ft run that was 4ft tall (I didnt know this until I blew my budget on an 8 x 4 run). Luckily as the living accomadation was large they accepted the 8x4, but I would not have been able to aford a 10x5 therefore would not have been able to get the buns x
 
Personally I don't think it does 'harm the cause'...how on earth are things going to get better for pet rabbits if we just accept what has always been the historic wisdom without moving and adapting recommendations as new welfare evidence emerges. If we did that, we'd still be keeping our bunnies in 3ft boxes thinking we we doing what's best for them. It wasn't so many years ago the recommendation was a 5x2x2 hutch and we were having exactly this conversation when the recommendation was upped to 6x2x2, and yet recommending 6ft hutches rather than 5ft hasn't resulted in harming the cause, it has slowly become more normal and hence rabbit welfare has improved.

In many instances where the hutch is directly attached to the run, I'd have thought 8x6 is more practical than 8x4 because it would fit directly onto or underneath a 6ft hutch, far easier than trying to get sides that don't match up in size!
 
Santa said:
Personally I don't think it does 'harm the cause'...how on earth are things going to get better for pet rabbits if we just accept what has always been the historic wisdom without moving and adapting recommendations as new welfare evidence emerges. If we did that, we'd still be keeping our bunnies in 3ft boxes thinking we we doing what's best for them. It wasn't so many years ago the recommendation was a 5x2x2 hutch and we were having exactly this conversation when the recommendation was upped to 6x2x2, and yet recommending 6ft hutches rather than 5ft hasn't resulted in harming the cause, it has slowly become more normal and hence rabbit welfare has improved.

In many instances where the hutch is directly attached to the run, I'd have thought 8x6 is more practical than 8x4 because it would fit directly onto or underneath a 6ft hutch, far easier than trying to get sides that don't match up in size!
Click to expand...

Its the way the poster is written thats the biggest problem - its basically saying your not good enough, no matter what you do, so why bother? RWAF's literature (that ive seen anyway), is more along the lines of; ok, so if what you have isnt great - heres some simple ways you can improve it - it is a far more effective way. Also the way RWAF present "the bigger, the better", somehow makes you want to exceed the minimum space.

Also most people who have a hutch over run have either 6x4 (allowed by some rspca's/other rescues as minimum standard) or the have 6x6 / 6x6.5 (actually gives a larger area than rwafs 8x4).
 
Confused_bun said:
Its the way the poster is written thats the biggest problem - its basically saying your not good enough, no matter what you do, so why bother? RWAF's literature (that ive seen anyway), is more along the lines of; ok, so if what you have isnt great - heres some simple ways you can improve it - it is a far more effective way. Also the way RWAF present "the bigger, the better", somehow makes you want to exceed the minimum space.

Also most people who have a hutch over run have either 6x4 (allowed by some rspca's/other rescues as minimum standard) or the have 6x6 / 6x6.5 (actually gives a larger area than rwafs 8x4).
Click to expand...

Action for rabbits are awful it has to be said. I followed their Facebook page briefly but they were so rude an abrasive in their tone with commentators that I had to unfollow them. They're the rabbit equivalent of PETA in my mind and hinder the cause they're trying to help.

RWAF have it right; they come across as trying to help rather than trying to chastise.
 
dominoid said:
Action for rabbits are awful it has to be said. I followed their Facebook page briefly but they were so rude an abrasive in their tone with commentators that I had to unfollow them. They're the rabbit equivalent of PETA in my mind and hinder the cause they're trying to help.

RWAF have it right; they come across as trying to help rather than trying to chastise.
Click to expand...

Harsh, but I'm inclined to agree that they are off the mark with the angle and tone of the promotional stuff which is a shame. I also think RWAF pitch it right.
 
To me it reads very snobbish: "you are poor and poor people shouldn't have rabbits" is how it comes across. Very Tory-esque. Also the use of quote marks for the word hutch makes it read very condescending. Essentially they are looking down on rabbit owners, many of whom are probably trying very hard.

Simply saying "if you don't have money, don't get rabbits" is so negative. RWAF in contrast try to encourage frugal ways of keeping bunnies happy like making your own run and toys and so on: far more positive.
 
dominoid said:
To me it reads very snobbish: "you are poor and poor people shouldn't have rabbits" is how it comes across. Very Tory-esque. Also the use of quote marks for the word hutch makes it read very condescending. Essentially they are looking down on rabbit owners, many of whom are probably trying very hard.

Simply saying "if you don't have money, don't get rabbits" is so negative. RWAF in contrast try to encourage frugal ways of keeping bunnies happy like making your own run and toys and so on: far more positive.
Click to expand...

It says 'a hutch is not the only home'.

Sorry, but I agree that if people can't afford a decent hutch/run as an initial outlay, they probably can't afford rabbits. My rabbits cost me thousands.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Need advice for our two male mini lops
Replies
4
Views
1K
tonibun
T
Griff
Heartbroken
Replies
17
Views
3K
tonibun
T
JessBun
Making hay using oven
Replies
3
Views
3K
Tamsin
Tamsin
Back
Top