Were fish and chips really not rationed in the UK?

Discussions on all aspects of the The United Kingdom & its Empire and Commonwealth during the Inter-War era and Second World War. Hosted by Andy H
User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: Were fish and chips really not rationed in the UK?

#16

Post by phylo_roadking » 09 Mar 2014, 23:33

Hi Hop, that IS interesting, for while...
As a result the total landings of fish of British taking on an average throughout the war has amounted to less than one-third of what it was in 1938
....the landing of freshly-caught fish by British vessels dropped by two-thirds, we can see that the consumption of fresh fish overall dropped by only a third!

That might indeed mean as Sid says that the various other fishing fleets were making up the shortfall...but it also could indicate that despite a drop in landed fish it was getting out further and to more people because it wasn't on the Ration. The problem with "average" figures is we don't necessarily know what figures/totals were factored into the calculation to achieve those results :(

Interestingly, the consumption of canned fish only dropped by 10%; but was canned fish of all types on the Ration or not? 8O
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

kingdom
Member
Posts: 5
Joined: 20 Nov 2013, 02:16

Re: Were fish and chips really not rationed in the UK?

#17

Post by kingdom » 10 Mar 2014, 02:24

The Statistical Digest of the War (HMSO) 1951 gives some rather generalised figures :
Table 70 Food and Animal Feeding Stuffs; consumption

Fresh, frozen and cured fish (landed weight) for food in UK
1934-38 average (from below) = 464,000 tons
1940 455,000 tons
1941 421,000 tons
1942 485,000 tons
1943 499,000 tons
1944 543,000 tons
1945 709,000 tons
The figure is remarkably stable from the pre-War figure up to 1943, then rises in 1944-45, I assume with the reduction in German activities in the fishing areas.

Table 70 also gives estimated food supplies per head of civilian population, which multiplied by the civilian population gives an approximate tonnage
Fresh, frozen and cured fish (in pounds per head per annum) x civilian population
1934-38 average 21.8 x 47.7 million (estimated) = 464,000 tons
1940 11.1 x 45.9 million = 227,500 tons
1941 11.3 x 44.8 million = 226,000 tons
1942 13.1 x 44.2 million = 258,500 tons
1943 14.2 x 43.7 million = 277,000 tons
1944 16.0 x 43.7 million = 312,000 tons
1945 20.2 x 43.9 million = 396,000 tons

There is quite a difference between (say) the 1943 ‘landed’ figure of 499,000 tons, and the ‘civilian’ consumption figure of 277,000 tons. Could the Services in the UK (including US Forces, for whom we supplied fresh food) have taken up 222,000 tons ?

Kingdom


pugsville
Member
Posts: 1016
Joined: 17 Aug 2011, 05:40

Re: Were fish and chips really not rationed in the UK?

#18

Post by pugsville » 10 Mar 2014, 07:18

The Royal Navy had built a large number of purpose built "trawlers" for the auxiliary patrol service. Not all trawlers in the patrol were requisitioned hundreds were built for the purpose.

Why were trawlers built? I imagine the traditional small ship yards could turn at standard design they were pretty used to fairly easily, thus it was matter of using spare capacity in the civilian boat construction area, the "trawler" design a proven sea worthy design a comprise over something more overtly military. And also as the crews were coming from that area of civilian life the boats were familiar and easy to crew.

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 10158
Joined: 12 Jun 2008, 12:19

Re: Were fish and chips really not rationed in the UK?

#19

Post by Sid Guttridge » 10 Mar 2014, 16:02

Hi Hop and Kingdom,

Thanks very much for some hard stats.

I have come across an unsourced claim that 20% of British fish came from or via Faroese vessels. I say "or via" because the Faroese apparently transported Icelandic-caught fish to the UK at times when the Icelanders themselves were in dispute with the British about ports of delivery, prices and protection.

Cheers,

Sid.

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: Were fish and chips really not rationed in the UK?

#20

Post by phylo_roadking » 10 Mar 2014, 18:00

There is quite a difference between (say) the 1943 ‘landed’ figure of 499,000 tons, and the ‘civilian’ consumption figure of 277,000 tons. Could the Services in the UK (including US Forces, for whom we supplied fresh food) have taken up 222,000 tons ?
...or were British plants processing/canning it? That's an interesting wrinkle...

But I think there's something we're not seeing there because...
There is quite a difference between (say) the 1943 ‘landed’ figure of 499,000 tons, and the ‘civilian’ consumption figure of 277,000 tons. Could the Services in the UK (including US Forces, for whom we supplied fresh food) have taken up 222,000 tons ?
....if you feed (sic) that 1943 222,000 tons' figure BACK into the equation...you're talking about enough food for 34.4 million people at civilian comsumption rates! 8O There's no way that all the soldiers in the UK of whatever nationality were eating enough fish for 34.4 million people :lol: So something else was happening to it...

I wonder if THIS is important...
Table 70 Food and Animal Feeding Stuffs; consumption
...as in - I wonder how much was being processed into fish meal for animal fodder???

The Royal Navy had built a large number of purpose built "trawlers" for the auxiliary patrol service. Not all trawlers in the patrol were requisitioned hundreds were built for the purpose.

Why were trawlers built? I imagine the traditional small ship yards could turn at standard design they were pretty used to fairly easily, thus it was matter of using spare capacity in the civilian boat construction area, the "trawler" design a proven sea worthy design a comprise over something more overtly military. And also as the crews were coming from that area of civilian life the boats were familiar and easy to crew.
Hi Pugsville - well, there's no simple answer because trawler designs weren't exactly standardised ;)

For one thing - the RNPS requisitioned many different sizes and types for different duties - fishingboats acted as minesweepers, anti-submarine warfare ships, naval auxiliaries, boomships, light patrol and picket ships....they operated in home waters AND provided convoy escort down to Africa as well as back and forth across the Atlantic...where the steelhulled oceangoing trawlers were invaluable ;) The RN had them built in U.S. and Canadian yards because BRITISH yards were overflowing with repair work and ship construction themselves, there was very little spare capacity for building trawlers.
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 10158
Joined: 12 Jun 2008, 12:19

Re: Were fish and chips really not rationed in the UK?

#21

Post by Sid Guttridge » 10 Mar 2014, 18:36

To stray off subject a little.

The deep-sea trawler design and the related whale catcher design seem then to have been the best proven small vessel designs for the open oceans. The trawler design gave rise to the specially built classes of armed naval trawlers, which were even ordered from neutrals such as Portugal and Brazil. The whale-catcher design gave rise to the Flower Class corvettes and their successors.

Perhaps the arrival of specialist naval trawlers allowed some of the commercial trawlers to be returned to fishing, which might help account fr the large increase in the catch in 1944-45?

Sid.

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: Were fish and chips really not rationed in the UK?

#22

Post by phylo_roadking » 10 Mar 2014, 18:53

Perhaps the arrival of specialist naval trawlers allowed some of the commercial trawlers to be returned to fishing, which might help account fr the large increase in the catch in 1944-45?
Sid, I'd have thought that if it allowed anything to be released back to civilian service - it would have been less capable, older and less durable wooden-hulled vessels...and the better vessels kept in service? 8O

If anything, the larger increase in annual catch might be due to old fishing grounds opening up again in 1944/45...as the war pushed back away from Europe's Atlantic coast?

However, you'd first have to determine IF any RNPS vessels were released early; enough were lost during the war to make me question of any could be released early...
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8618
Joined: 21 Sep 2005, 22:46
Location: Michigan

Re: Were fish and chips really not rationed in the UK?

#23

Post by LWD » 10 Mar 2014, 19:01

How about the other half? What happened to potato imports and production?

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: Were fish and chips really not rationed in the UK?

#24

Post by phylo_roadking » 10 Mar 2014, 20:56

I've just yelled into the livingroom....I mean, consulted a wartime potato farmer :lol: Potatoes weren't Rationed; after all, anyone who could get the seed potatoes could grow them in their own garden or allotment...and potatoes were grown in huge quantities here in Northern Ireland and the Free State and shipped across to the rest of the UK.

Where the government DID have a hand was closely monitoring what potatoes people grew - for fertilisers and various period pesticides were hard and expensive to come by, their major ingredients also being invaluable in various war industries :( So quite a few types were banned (there's over 600 varieities of potato worldwide!) because they were particularly prone to various diseases that either couldn't be dealt with in the period, or consumed too much time effort and resource for what they were worth :P So MoF inspectors were prepared to condemn and literally rip potato crops out of the ground if people were caught growing banned (but good cropping!) varieties...
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

User avatar
Terry Duncan
Forum Staff
Posts: 6270
Joined: 13 Jun 2008, 23:54
Location: Kent

Re: Were fish and chips really not rationed in the UK?

#25

Post by Terry Duncan » 10 Mar 2014, 22:29

I can add that a great uncle of mine ran fishing boats during WWII off Margate, and was even attacked by a German plane on one trip - something that has in the past featured in a couple of TV programs on wartime Kent - where he suffered an ankle wound that left him with limited movement there for the rest of his life. He died many years ago now, but did tell me when I was a child that the only limit for fish was on what could be landed as many crews refused to go to sea or at least out as far as the best fishing locations. He made quite a bit of money from fishing in the war, but he also took risks that many others refused to consider including recuing downed pilots from both sides.

Hop
Member
Posts: 571
Joined: 09 Apr 2002, 01:55
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Were fish and chips really not rationed in the UK?

#26

Post by Hop » 10 Mar 2014, 23:36

From the same statistical summary of the war, UK potato production, thousand tons:

1936-38 average - 4,873
1939 - 5,216
1940 - 6,404
1941 - 8,010
1942 - 9,393
1943 - 9,822

The figures are estimated because the text makes clear they include private production in gardens and allotments.

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: Were fish and chips really not rationed in the UK?

#27

Post by phylo_roadking » 10 Mar 2014, 23:47

The figures are estimated because the text makes clear they include private production in gardens and allotments.
Pity we don't know exactly how much this accounted for....

...as UK production visibly doubled by the end of the war! 8O

Is there by any chance a table or set of figures accounting for imports I.E. Ireland, etc.?
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

kingdom
Member
Posts: 5
Joined: 20 Nov 2013, 02:16

Re: Were fish and chips really not rationed in the UK?

#28

Post by kingdom » 11 Mar 2014, 13:07

phylo_roadking wrote:
.........

I wonder if THIS is important...
Table 70 Food and Animal Feeding Stuffs; consumption
...as in - I wonder how much was being processed into fish meal for animal fodder???
-----

I'm sorry, I did not make it clear that the 'landed' figures for fresh, frozen and cured fish were for food in the UK - eg 1940 figures for the total landed vs the food for UK figures are 495,000 vs 455,000 tons, so 40,000 tons went for animal feed

Kingdom

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8618
Joined: 21 Sep 2005, 22:46
Location: Michigan

Re: Were fish and chips really not rationed in the UK?

#29

Post by LWD » 11 Mar 2014, 14:47

phylo_roadking wrote:... after all, anyone who could get the seed potatoes could grow them in their own garden or allotment...
Your post reminded me of a couple of potato "plots" we had when I was growing up. I lived in western Washington which I believe has a climate fairly close to that of the UK. The plots actually started out with my mom disposing of potato peals as compost. So it doesn't even take seed potatoes. Those plots kept growng for years as we simply never bothered to harvest all the potatoes, not sure we could have if we tried though.

Interesting how the production rose though. Thinking about it I can understand why.

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: Were fish and chips really not rationed in the UK?

#30

Post by phylo_roadking » 11 Mar 2014, 21:28

I lived in western Washington which I believe has a climate fairly close to that of the UK.


Wet, then.... :P
The plots actually started out with my mom disposing of potato peals as compost. So it doesn't even take seed potatoes.
No, as long as there's a budding "eye" on even a section of peel it will grow...BUT

Herein lies the parable of WHY the MoF inspectors were so diligent...
Those plots kept growng for years as we simply never bothered to harvest all the potatoes, not sure we could have if we tried though.
You're really really not supposed to do that with spuds, growing them years after year from their own seed...8O Using....or letting...seed potatoes grow over and over again from the same base stock sharply reduces resistance to a large number of very nasty and infectious diseases that can enter the soil and the local water table and spread fast. There's actually still one smallholding I know of near Toomebridge in Northern Ireland that is blacked from ever growing potatoes again because this was done during the war years, and THIS - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globodera_rostochiensis - "eel worm", got into the soil there. The MoF inspectors apparently ripped the whole crop out and destroyed it, and slapped a ban on the whole farm that's till in place 70 years later!
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

Post Reply

Return to “The United Kingdom & its Empire and Commonwealth 1919-45”