Personal Thoughts Regarding Rutland Manor

[Tanya]

Ever since I have had my ALD, I have been reading this forum. It is a wonderful place to learn and get information regarding my sweet little guy who is 14 months old. I don't think that any of us wouldn't say that we just love the doodles as well as anybody else that knows or meets them.

I have been reading and staying up on the whole Rutland Manor situation. My guy is from a US breeder who I have respect for and who has always been helpful and is always interested in how her pups are doing. But here is the thing... Augie is directly related to RM Shasta/Grandmother (Shasta's first EARLY litter) and his Mother was bred at RM and sent to the states.

I have been keeping an open mind regarding everything I have been reading - all over - involving Rutland Manor. But I have been also pondering many things in my own mind. Not all these organizations, Baw Baw, neighbors, breeders that have spoken out, a university,and so on and so on,. are in a massive conspiracy out to get Beverly Manners. I feel very much that they want/need to see these unbelievable sweet ALDs rescued from these conditions of which they are living in.

I have read numerous times that people are asking for more 'proof' from these organizations. It seems clear to me that there is an ongoing investigation and they might be under advice or orders to not post all the evidence that they have in their possession RIGHT NOW. Here in the US, whether it is police, sheriff, FBI, IRS or any other departments that have investigations, they do NOT play 'all their cards' until they get their entire case together. I am wondering if this might be the case in Australia too.

In all civilized countries, children and animals are protected. They are the 'innocents' that can't protect themselves. If there is a united ongoing investigation, I am sure that these people and organizations are hopefully or SHOULD be all working together to protect these dogs. I am under the belief, after reading everything I find with a completely open mind, that many people would love to get up on the highest steeple, with the largest megaphone, and yell out all they know right now. I don't believe they can YET!

My greatest worry is regarding my totally loyal and loving Augie. There is nothing that I wouldn't do to protect him in the past, present, and future. But right now, I have NO TRUST, whatsoever, of Rutland Manor's part of the pedigree and health testing of his close relatives. I am very concerned about what might appear in future years and the heartbreak that may come. This is a new breed. I am worried.

But I love these dogs. And I wouldn't hesitate to get another one. But I feel that we all have to hold our breaths concerning any pedigree that is from Rutland Manor or the late Teagan Park for potential health problems in the future. And my hope is that all OTHER breeders of these dogs, with this BEAUTIFUL temperament, keep breeding them all over the world so other families will have the same joy that I have with my guy.

[Ryan]

Karen and Jack - I thought this was a forum for everyone to express their opinions? Sounds like, because I have my OWN opinions, you're prejudging me, which doesn't seem fair.

It is rare to find the kind of kindness and selflessness that I myself have experienced from the RM staff and community. Beverley changed my life at her own cost, without having any reason to do so. To hear people, who don't know the first thing about Rutland Manor, spreading lies about such a wonderful woman, is absolutely infuriating. If roles were reversed and someone were spreading garbage about someone you cared for, you'd have s imilar reaction I'd think.

I have owned a RM doodle in the past and I am taking one in tomorrow evening from a rescue organization, if I need to justify my presence here (which I don't). I have posted on other non-RM issues as well. But I thought all were welcome at Doodle Kisses? Seems hypocritical that I had the same reaction to the previous post that you're having to mine, but I am in the wrong. Just saying.

I was blunt and I realize that. I find it hard to swallow that someone would put such negative things out there about someone they've had no dealings with. In my opinion, if you have NO experience with someone or something, you shouldn't make general statements, or specific statements about it/them. The posts above continue on a string of false accusations that border on slander, if they don't outright cross that line.

If you have no personal experience with someone, or personal knowledge OF something, you lose credibility in my eyes when you start speaking without any info to back it up.

It's the golden rule: would you want people speaking about you this way, when you've never met, spoke, etc?

If you want to state your opinion on Rutland Manor, do so. But be ready to hear other people's opinions, especially from those of us who took the time to research Rutland Manor before contacting them for a dog, took the time to get to know Beverley and, when these allegations came out, took the time to contact her directly, hear her side of things and see PROOF that they are either outright lies or distortions of the truth. But the people spreading this garbage are confident that you WON'T take the time to do any of this. You will repeat it in forums, like what's happening here.

Don't add to the problem by helping spread a smear campaign against someone who is a genuinely kind, good person.

[Karen, Jasper and Jackdoodle]

A statement such as "How can you possibly have anything worth hearing to say?" is not the expression of an opinion, it is arrogant and insulting. You could have said everything you just said in response to me without setting yourself up as the judge of what is worth hearing.
Everyone is welcome here, and everyone is welcome to express an opinion...but not in the form of judgment about other members' ideas. That was my point about your statement, lol. But I guess you are too focused on your agenda to read what is being said.
I don't give a rat's patootie about Rutland Manor, and I have not participated in any "campaigns" for or against it. (I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that the "you" referred to in your above post is the generic "you" and not meant for me personally.) This has been going on in the doodle forums ad nauseum for over a year now, and I frankly wish the whole darn thing would just be resolved one way or the other. I am, however, completely baffled as to why you feel such a strong need to defend RM if there is in fact nothing to defend. Those in the right rarely feel such an obsessive need to acknowledge false accusations.
But regardless, I would appreciate you please following the DK guidelines and refrain from personal rudeness. Your ideas might reach more people if they were put less abrasively.

[Ryan]

I think abrasiveness and rudeness are a matter of opinion. I could easily say that I find your posts abrasive and the next person may not. Who's right in that case? I haven't called anyone any names, I haven't insulted anyone.

The fact remains that, in my opinion, if you have no firsthand knowledge of a person or a situation, you shouldn't make general statements about them or what they may or may not do. Stick with what you know. The user was clearly making implications that the crap being said about RM is true or has merit, even though she has openly said she doesn't know Beverley, RM and she has no interest in finding out what is or is not true. To me that's not concern - that's just pettiness.

I never suggested the user didn't have ANYTHING to say worth hearing about ANY topic. My point was very clearly directed at her opinions on Rutland Manor and Beverley. If you didn't catch that, then you're looking to cause problems where there aren't any.

Because someone believes in another person and the work they're doing, that means that there's something to hide? That baffles me. There's a group of people who are continuously breaking into a woman's home, who is 70+ years old and lives alone, to feed this garbage, and that's your major concern in all of this? That I passionately believe in getting the truth out there? So anyone who stands up for a cause they believe in has something to hide? I don't even understand that perspective.

I love how, all I've done is speak out in support of a woman I know to kind and devoted to her animals and you're painting me with zealot brush while the real zealots are breaking into Rutland Manor, falsifying information and launching whole websites filled with garbage.

Doesn't add up to me.

Let's just agree to disagree and move on.

If an admin has an issue with anything I've said, I'm sure they'll contact me and let me know. I don't think that being direct is rude or abrasive.

[Jacquie Yorke (DRC)]

All this from a man who re-homed his RM ALD because it didn't fit in with his lifestyle....hmmmmm..interesting....

http://www.care2.com/news/member/473677254/1176745


Posted by Justice Truth

Thursday July 2, 2009, 6:34 am

"Ryan your essay is laughable. You have never been to RM EVER and you gave away your labradoodle, Georgia, when she no longer suited your lifestyle. So do not preach your lies here.
Twyla also lives in USA so you do not have the authority to judge this Australian puppy farm. You both ended up with very cute RM puppies (Ryan gave his away). Have you ever stopped to think about the puppies mothers ? Neither of you get to see this puppy farm on a daily basis, and you have formed your opinion based on what Beverley has spoon fed you on her chat page, which are all lies. Neither one of you has commented on the fact that Beverley has not paid dog registration fees, didn't have a permit to operate a domestic animal business (issued the day Debra lodged a complaint) and proudly boasts on her website "we breed our girls back to back". What do you think happens to a dog who is forced to whelp and wean constantly without rest ? and you are actually defending this are you ?
Its so easy to sit in the USA and attack Australian people for trying to help these dogs. You know absolutely nothing about RM.
The photos are of RM and this has been proven, and these are not the only photos.
You and Twyla who are regular contributors to Beverley's chat page are simply part of her cult and will blindly follow everything Grandma says to you.
The majority of Beverley's cult followers are from overseas and the Australian people do not tolerate cruelty to animals Ryan.
Stop trying to defend that which you know nothing about."

[Ryan]

Jacquie - if I had anything to hide, why would I be posting here? Give me a break. How do you have any right to say why I made certain decisions in my life? Do you know me personally?

I love how anyone who supports RM is a member of a cult and is spoon fed by Beverley, but the people buying into this garbage put out on the internet, without any factual information to back it up, are always in the right.

Let's see here: I have spoken with numerous people who have stayed AT Rutland Manor for weeks on end, experts who have toured Rutland Manor and stayed on site, I have seen evidence which clearly disproves these allegations, I have questioned Beverley at length about each one. And I am the one who is just taking things on faith?

What have any of the people speaking out against RM done other than read lies on the internet? Far less.

And Jacquie, as I was told above, the DK rules and guidelines forbid personal rudeness, which I believe includes slandering someone you don't know. If I were you, I'd ask that your comment be removed as it's false and shows your ignorance on not only RM by me as well.

[Jacquie Yorke (DRC)]

My comment is not considered slanderous when I am providing the link to the actual source.....Which incidently, complies with the rules, guidelines and the law.......

[Ryan]

Your comment IS slanderous when it makes a statement against someone that is false, regardless of whether or not you provide a link. In my opinion, you are in CLEAR violation of the rules of this site, and more than that, you are trying to make this personal, which I have not.

Your link is to a post on a website against RM, where people who do not know me or know anything about my personal life, started targeting me because I stood up for my beliefs. And, again, you are accepting this as fact?

The facts are this: I had a labradoodle from RM that I was not able to keep. I found her a home where she's in use as a service dog and has changed the lives of her new owners, giving a woman with MS her independence back. I have also rescued 5 dogs as an adult, and am about to take in a foster labradoodle this evening. Yes, I am a terrible, horrible person who hates dogs and wants to do them harm. Seriously, get real.

If I had seriously just changed my mind and given away Georgie, do you think I'd bother speaking out?

Again, it seems unreal to me the number of people who are gullible enough to believe what they read on the internet and prejudge others. I certainly hope no one posts any lies about you.

[Denise & Hunter!!!]

Just to be curious Ryan, where is your ALD now?

[Jacquie Yorke (DRC)]

Who are you fostering a Labradoodle for Ryan?....You're not on our list or IDOG's....

[ClarkP]

Hi Ryan,
I agree with you when you say "I find it baffling that people believe everything they read on the internet without any proof." I also strongly believe that Beverly and RM need to be considered innocent until proven guilty.

But there's a problem... you appear to be presenting opinions instead of facts as well. Just on the other side of the issue. You presented your own opinions and very few facts other than 'I know Beverly' and 'I've seen really nice dogs from RM' (my paraphrases).

You stated "...there were several dog experts, who believed that RM might be a puppy mill, who came and stayed on site. They wrote legally binding testimonies stating that RM is in fact a wonderful, loving place where labradoodles and horses alike get tons of love, attention and are well cared for in a clean environment." THAT is information we would all like to see. Please give us those statements. That might put the whole issue to rest. So please, give us more facts. I'd love to see Beverly exonerated.

Thx!
Clark

[Ryan]

Here's what bothers me Clark: Beverley had all of this info posted on her site for MONTHS and yet no one noticed? The written statements were on the front page of her site, so they couldn't have been missed.

People want to assume the worst. They read this garbage and take it at face value, then move on without even seeing if there is truth to it. And then they make posts like the one above that perpetuate the cycle.

I will see if Beverley will send me some of the info and I'll post it here. I think everyone assumes that, because Beverley isn't publicly taking action against these claims, they must be true. That's false. Beverley isn't waging little battles, because new ones crop up here and there. That's the way it goes when you're dealing with a group of people who are blinded by their own good intentions and lose sight of what's right and wrong, fact or fiction. She's focusing on dealing with those responsible via the law in one swoop.

[ClarkP]

First off, I have NO agenda here. I would love to see this issue go away and find out that it was only misinformation and lies by a radical group of animal activists.

But until such things as these dog expert statements are posted, we are still dealing only with your opinions of her "goodness". And that doesn't work any better than others opinions of her "badness".

And I know you dismiss everything on Rutland Manor Exposed as lies... but there are troubling things presented by credible people. Some might be wrong, but many allegations have been confirmed by Beverly or the RM website. What do we do with those things? Ignoring them isn't an option.

Cheers,
Clark