Need advice and opinions please!

For me it just wouldn't be worth the risk. I know that pregnancy is super unlikely but if it happened and then something happened to my bunny because of it, I know that I would never forgive myself.

My advice would be not to risk it. Can I ask what you hope to gain by letting them meet? Another bunny that you can let her run around with from time to time? I'm not sure how that works in terms of dynamics. My main concern would be that even if she can't get pregnant, the buck might constantly pester her anyway.

Not worth it. Do not let them meet.

Definitely not worth it. If she did get pregnant, it would be risky and she could die.
Aside from that, rabbits really don't socialize like dogs do and don't really benefit from short term meetings. A young, intact buck is apt to want to chance and hump her, which can lead to stress and fights. Rabbit fights can be pretty nasty.

If you wanted to get her a friend, then look for a neutered rabbit that is around her age (usually would be a bit calmer than a young rabbit). You would have to go through proper bonding to make sure they can live together peacefully.

Before you put them together you just have to be willing to accept that, given the slim chance of her getting pregnant, that she could have problems with kindling...and, yes, you could lose her. Rabbits are just like humans in that it would be harder on her than a younger doe or one who has had a previous litter. We have a 5 year old doe who is still producing litters without a problem, but that's different since she's had previous litters.

Ignore the people complaining about the tiniest sliver of possibilities.

Do you hermit yourself and hide in your house cowering under covers because there's "a chance" you could get mugged at the grocery store? Do you choose to walk because "there is a chance" your car could have a brake failure? Do you refrain from meeting new friends because "there is a slim minute sliver of a chance" that they could be the next Charles Manson?

No, you don't.

Everything in life--rabbits and otherwise comes with risks. Your life (or anyone else's ) would be a pitiful Hell if we spent every second avoiding the slightest unnecessary risk.

You're wanting to introducing her to a companion, not juggle her over a bed if broken glass and used syringes. This would happen in nature if it wasnt for human interference. Shelter her to a degree, but let her live a life worth living. Even in that slimmest of outcomes, she'd be happier in the meantime than living the rest of her days without companionship.

Bryant: If we were talking about a human I'd agree, but bunnies simply don't have the social needs or capabilities that we do. Bunnies don't have casual friends. All the buns that live in the same area exist in a social hierarchy, and any other bun is a stranger, rival and threat. There's a reason bunny bonding is such a tough and tricky subject! If improperly or too suddenly introduced in non-neutral territory, stranger bunnies can and will fight to the death. I'd be a lot more worried about that than pregnancy to be honest. Putting your bunny with a stranger bunny every now and then would at best confuse her and give her lots of territory stress and uncertainty.

I wouldn't think its worth that risk. Your rabbit, being a senior, is at high risk if she did become pregnant. She may have trouble delivering regardless of if the babies survive the duration of the pregnancy and there's a chance she could die while giving birth. Also, if your neighbors rabbit and her bonded, they would have to stay together or they would become depressed being apart even if you let them play for a few hours each day. They would still yearn to be together. I think if you want a companion for her, you should look on pet finder.com for senior rabbits in your area that are adoptable. Typically, at shelters, the rabbits there are already fixed. Maybe you can get her a companion that way. Otherwise, if you give her the attention and care you say you do, I'm sure she can live a perfectly happy life without a rabbit companion

whiskylollipop said:

Bryant: If we were talking about a human I'd agree, but bunnies simply don't have the social needs or capabilities that we do. Bunnies don't have casual friends. All the buns that live in the same area exist in a social hierarchy, and any other bun is a stranger, rival and threat. There's a reason bunny bonding is such a tough and tricky subject! If improperly or too suddenly introduced in non-neutral territory, stranger bunnies can and will fight to the death. I'd be a lot more worried about that than pregnancy to be honest. Putting your bunny with a stranger bunny every now and then would at best confuse her and give her lots of territory stress and uncertainty.

Click to expand...

I agree with everything you said! Rabbits just can't "play" together from time to time. Way too stressful.

whiskylollipop said:

Bryant: If we were talking about a human I'd agree, but bunnies simply don't have the social needs or capabilities that we do. Bunnies don't have casual friends. All the buns that live in the same area exist in a social hierarchy, and any other bun is a stranger, rival and threat. There's a reason bunny bonding is such a tough and tricky subject! If improperly or too suddenly introduced in non-neutral territory, stranger bunnies can and will fight to the death. I'd be a lot more worried about that than pregnancy to be honest. Putting your bunny with a stranger bunny every now and then would at best confuse her and give her lots of territory stress and uncertainty.

Click to expand...

I'll concede to that in part. But i also made the assumption that the OP was aware and familiar with the difficulties associated. However, as neighbors, i also don't think territorial disputes or stress would be an issue. That's a pretty big territory for one rabbit to think it dominates. I've seen wild rabbits share spaces plenty smaller with kids and all.

I think we give rabbits too many human qualities that aren't there. I agree that rabbits don't need companionship like humans. They can do just fine without "playdates" and "friends". You shouldn't feel quilty if your rabbit doesn't have a companion...so it comes down to taking the chance or not, and only the OP can decide that.

Bryant: You're thinking in human terms again! No matter how big the available landspace, bunnies don't share land in terms of "bunny-friend A's territory" and "bunny-friend B's territory". It's more like "collective warren territory" and "the outside which is not our territory and must be guarded against stranger bunnies". Either the two neighbour buns see each other as warren mates or evil stranger buns. No in-between.

Humans and other species in their territory is a different matter. Bunnies can hardly control the movement of migratory species or roamers like deer, so they tend not to care. But if you're a fellow bunny, you live by the bunny rules.

There is no winning situation here for the OP. If they don't like each other, they will not stop fighting. If they DO like each other, they will bond strongly and keeping them apart after the playdate will depress them. Just don't do it.

whiskylollipop said:

Bryant: You're thinking in human terms again! No matter how big the available landspace, bunnies don't share land in terms of "bunny-friend A's territory" and "bunny-friend B's territory". It's more like "collective warren territory" and "the outside which is not our territory and must be guarded against stranger bunnies". Either the two neighbour buns see each other as warren mates or evil stranger buns. No in-between.

Humans and other species in their territory is a different matter. Bunnies can hardly control the movement of migratory species or roamers like deer, so they tend not to care. But if you're a fellow bunny, you live by the bunny rules.

There is no winning situation here for the OP. If they don't like each other, they will not stop fighting. If they DO like each other, they will bond strongly and keeping them apart after the playdate will depress them. Just don't do it.

Click to expand...

You tell me coexisting in a shared environment (which rabbits Do in the wild--unless the 50+ wild rabbits that I see coexist at a single park is an anomaly) is "too" human... then you say they could essentially fall in love and have their heart broken after being separated? If not killing each other is too close to human terms, applying human emotion to them is a bit contradictory and melodramatic isn't it?

Sorry if that seems too confrontational, but I'm not getting how this would be threatening. In fact plenty homesteads use rabbit colony houses (8 x 20 ft for example) with 10 or 20 rabbits and have no problem with territory or fighting or anything (and most all say their rabbits are happier and healthier this way).

I won't just yet say i think you're wrong, but if multiple 18 does and 2 bucks can happily share a good sized shed, please explain to me how the OP couldn't have 2 rabbits happily coexist on a half city block?

Aw, I thought I was pretty clear. Sorry if I was confusing, English is not my first language, let me try again.

Rabbits are COMMUNISTS.

50+ wild rabbits in 1 park = They comprise a warren. They all know and grew up with each other, with established relationships and hierarchy, living and hopping and eating and pooping together. They are ~ohana~. They are family. They share the entire park, there is no "this is my own private square foot of park and that is yours and that is uncle bob's". No no no. Everyone owns everything. Just living like a buncha commies.

Bun A and Bun B have two options if OP puts them together.

Option 1: OMG stranger danger!!! *fightfightfight*

Option 2: I kinda like you. Let's be family. Lets be ~ohana~! We live together and share everything now. (then OP takes one bunny away) OMG where's my brotha-from-anotha-motha :cry1::cry1::cry1I am not anthropomorphizing here, bunnies can and do get depressed when separated from their family/buddy)

So, because bunnies only understand "communal warren territory" vs "evil outside" and not "one bunfriend's territory" vs "the other bunfriend's territory", do you see how putting them together and taking them apart would cause a certain level of cognitive dissonance in the mind of a bunny?

Again, I'll use the homestead example. Some people will keep their entire rabbit family in one location, only to butcher 30, 40, maybe 70 rabbits that reach fryer size. This does not appear to affect the remaining breeders in any way.

These are also not related rabbits who grew up together, etc. They've learned to relate with one another and accept this behavior.

Also, my assumptions are that the bonding requires extensive, habitual time together. In the same sense that rabbits can become used to being fed at specific times, i think they could (if capable of any remotely moderate level of cognition, which i believe must be for them to feel the depression you mention) become accustomed to having their bonded partner being around at specific times throughout the day, for instance in the evenings.

Using the 50+ rabbits at the park as an example, it wouldn't surprise me if certain members don't see one another for days. I'm sure the OP rabbit could adapt to the pattern of seeing the other rabbit in the evenings. It would be one thing if they were together 24/7 for months them taken apart. But introduced with the pattern in affect, i don't think this would be an issue

I promise I'm not purposely trying to play the contrarian, but consider these points:

1. Homesteads that breed rabbits only for meat do not really care about the longevity or quality of life of their rabbits - they're going to be eaten sooner rather than later anyway. As such, they put large numbers of rabbits together to live or die as they will. Some do manage to coexist, but those that get killed from fighting simply get first spot in the cooking pan. What's left are those who did successfully work out a crude hierarchy without serious injury or fatalities, giving the impression of a happy coexisting herd. But not really. You just don't see the ones that didn't make it. I don't think that's a risk anyone with a PET bunny would take.

2. You raise a very good point I hadn't thought of. However, the 50 wild rabbits who don't see everyone every day do see at least SOMEONE every day. Bunny foofoo decided not to hang out with me this morning? Bunny fifi got bowled over by a dog? It's cool, I have 47 other buns to frolick around with. When you only have 2 bunnies in the equation though, you're faced with either the only company you have or crushing loneliness.

That said, it's not inconceivable that OP's bunny could adapt to a pattern of visitation like you said. That would depend on OP and the neighbour keeping up their end and sticking to the schedule strictly though, which I find would be a pretty big ask.

True, it would be an all-or-nothing situation, so I can see how it would be more stressful than having numerous other options for company. And it would require dedication by the OP. That's just a necessity that the OP would have to accept if choosing to bond.

However, I disagree on your opinion of homestead growers. Pet owners, i feel like all they really want is a pretty piece of eye candy, while I think most of us who homestead are similar to farmers, in that we have so much more to gain from them that we tend to respect them more. For example, to most people a cow is just a hunk of meat made to be butchered. But to the farmer whose family depends on that animal for sustenance and profit, he's so much more than a pet.

I know there are exceptions to that, and there are people who don't care at all as long as they get a bunny to survive long enough to eat, but far fewer than those who have a degree of reverence for what their animals provide.

Hmm, I've never even met a homestead person before so I'm not going to judge. It just seems to us pet people that pets are like our children, to be loved and pampered, (although of course the eye-candy thing applies to some - side-eyeing "designer dog/cat" owners here) whereas farmers regard their animals as assets to be managed efficiently with the main goal being profit/low-cost sustenance for the human family.

I mean, just look at all the threads on this forum where pet rabbit owners make mobility carts for disabled buns, spend thousands of dollars on vet bills, make bunny diapers, give their bunny butt baths daily, take them on excursions in a harness, one even had a bald bunny wearing sock sweaters... you can't say that the average homesteader would show this level of care to all their animals.

Rabbit lump

Their care is from a different perspective. Vet bills, most farmers and reputable homesteads have medicines etc on hand to deal with their common issues and learn to diagnose common problems. It's more feasible than paying vet bills or killing every one that has a small problem. Big problems are a different story... Mobility cart, in my opinion at least, it's perpetuating a miserable existence--a rabbit that couldn't hop and bounce around like it's designed do, in my mind can't be a happy rabbit. Similar to how some states and countries like Belgium allow assisted suicide to those with chronic health problems that are eventually terminal, responsible homesteads will put down those animals who can't live a good, natural life.

In my opinion, to do otherwise isn't "caring," it's selfish--concerned with one's own desires rather than what's best for the animal.

Now ,let me clarify: I don't think these people are BAD, I just think it's a different set of morals, two opposing perspectives that don't agree, but don't necessarily have to be at odds with one another.

Let me also clarify again that I'm speaking on behalf of RESPONSIBLE homesteads. I know there are some that are (to be perfectly blunt and honest) complete asses to their pet/livestock. But i honestly hope and believe those are the exception rather than the rule.