How would this be possible?

Rabbits Online Forum

Help Support Rabbits Online Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

gentle giants

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2005
Messages
2,806
Reaction score
2
Location
, Illinois, USA
I'm sure several of you have heard/read about how I am taking in ten more rabbits this weekend. The situation is, the lady who owns them bought two adult rabbits that she was told were both does. Obviously not, because four weeks later she had nine babies in the cage. Now the babies are seven weeks old.

The lady swears she separated the buck and doe the same day the kits were born and they haven't been back together since, but two days ago the doe had eight more babies. I can't figure out how this could have happened, assuming the lady is telling the truth about the age of the baies, keeping the adultsseparate, etc.

If the adult buck couldn't have gotten to her, it couldn't be possible for one of her babies to have gotten to her, they would only have been like two weeks old at the time. Could the doe have just been that overdue, that she could have been pregnant for almost seven weeks? Or do you think this lady or one for her kids let the rabbits out together at some point?
 
I would be tempted to say that either the woman isn't telling the whole truth or thats one of the does I keep hearing about that can retain sperm!! I know someone who's rabbit gets 3 litters from 1 mating with the buck she is never happier than being a mama!!
 
Little Bay Poo wrote:
Was the buck separated to a cage next to the doe? Could he have gotten to her through the bars?
I don't know, didn't ask that one. I alwasy thought that the odds of that were slim enough I kinda dismissed it as unlikely.
 
My first suspicion would be that the buck was not seperated exactly when she said it was... or the babies are not as old as she said they are... (You can usually tell the difference between 4 week old babies and 7 week old babies... ) Either way, she wasn't entirely truthful with you.


Seperate the older litter and let her raise the new one...andkeep that buckaway from her!!!! Poor doe! That is a lot of babies to raise in a short period of time.


 
Well, all nine of the older litter and the father are coming here, so I hope she will be safe for a while. At least until the second litter gets older, because the lady freely admits she hasn't a clue how to tell. :?I will try to teach her when I pick them up, she is thinking about keeping a doe but can't tell which is which.
 
BlueGiants wrote:
My first suspicion would be that the buck was not seperated exactly when she said it was... or the babies are not as old as she said they are... (You can usually tell the difference between 4 week old babies and 7 week old babies... ) Either way, she wasn't entirely truthful with you.
I am a little worried about this too, I haven't seen the kits yet. I am really hoping that I don't get handed a bunch of four week old kits. Plus now I am worried about what is gonna happen to the second bunch. :(
 
Little Bay Poo wrote:
Was the buck separated to a cage next to the doe? Could he have gotten to her through the bars?
that's what i was wondering! and i'd like to see pixtoo. i'm really wondering about this lady's honesty....................
 
Sperm die after a short period of time, so we can rule out the possibility of the doe "retaining" sperm. Rabbits don't do that.

A super-long gestation can also be ruled out. Kits born around 35 days have fur.

Are you certain the kits are now 7 weeks old. Is it possible that they were only 31 days old when the 2nd litter was born.

Or as already pointed out, the doe was exposed to a buck after the litter was born.

The kits were too young to have mated back to their dam.

These situations generally have logical explainations that we can't always figure out.

Pam


 
pamnock wrote:
Sperm die after a short period of time, so we can rule out the possibility of the doe "retaining" sperm. Rabbits don't do that.

A super-long gestation can also be ruled out. Kits born around 35 days have fur.

Are you certain the kits are now 7 weeks old. Is it possible that they were only 31 days old when the 2nd litter was born.
She has told me that the second litter was born jsut about three-four days ago. And she first called me about the first litter to ask me to take them two weeks ago, and I told her they needed to be with mom for a while longer first.

Or as already pointed out, the doe was exposed to a buck after the litter was born.
I think that this is probably what has to have happened. Ithink she has kids,and I'm betting mabye they thought the bunnies looked lonely, or something. Surely the woman couldn't have been stupid enough to let them play together again.
The kits were too young to have mated back to their dam.
I was pretty sure that wouldn't be possible, even for a rabbit. LOL

These situations generally have logical explainations that we can't always figure out.

Pam
I haven't commited to takeing the second litter, and I really don't see how I could, unless I either get several adoptions or get my new building put up in the next eight weeks. :?
 
Age consensus? They don't look four weeks to me,I think she was at least telling the truth about their age.

007-2.jpg


004-2.jpg

 
cute ears, cute coloring(what breed/mix are they? they remind me of flemies a bit.....). and they do look older than four weeks! now i'm really curious!
 
They are actually magpie Harlequins, and so far as I can tell, purebred. I am actually considering seeing if Max would like one for a friend.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top