Water Rationing in WWII England

[rattfan]

My mother has a question for you all: Yes, even M can come up with a good one now and then. We were discussing rain, as one does, and the level of appreciation in Australia as opposed to England. M cannot get her head around the idea that an overflowing dam is a tourist attraction.

This led her to the subject of water rationing in England during WWII. Four inch baths, M says, with the emphasis of one who has endured them. M was nine when the war began, living in Leicester. Presumably England was as wet then as it is now, with no foreseeable danger of them running out of water. Food rationing made sense. But baths? I had the theory, not based on anything, that perhaps it was a "just in case." If dams were bombed; if one was taken out, others would be able to manage if the populace were already trained to ration water. M countered this by the theory that when the Americans came over, they used too much British water as well as seducing too many British women.

I'd better add the latter part of this theory was me, quoting the "Over paid, over sexed and over here" chant of the British men towards the Americans. [Apologies to my American friends. Britain appreciated the help!] "Yes," says M, "and they were too clean."

Comments

[satyapriya.livejournal.com]

Possibly the water rationing was due to a 'just in case' scenario, or that water was being reserved for industry.

[cmdrsuzdal.livejournal.com]

I remember reading about *hot* water rationing, for fuel conservation I assume.

[ariaflame.livejournal.com]

Did they expect to need more water than usual for firefighting purposes as well?

Yes, the dams

[ozdragonlady.livejournal.com]

Yes, no fuel to heat the water with, and power and gas were frequently in short supply in the cities (gas was extracted from coal, which was needed for industry, gas and coal were necessary to make steel for armaments). You need electricity to pump water through the mains.
Yes, water was needed for industry -
and the water mains got damaged during bombing raids, so there was frequently not enough for other needs.

Everything was rationed, and frequently in short or total non-supply.

The Americans were just too everything - too big, too loud, too much used to too much food, ciggies, drink and sex. I dont think England was all that rich before the war (despite what it thought of itself), and the US held off joining in until they were pretty much exhausted - we wouldnt have won it without their ships, airplanes, tanks and men - the whole European population was decimated by the war.

Austerity in everything was made a way of life so as to be able to keep the war effort going.

Growing up in the aftermath, I found later it was a useful attribute to be able to turn on in periods of little income.

When I was born, sugar and meat rationing was still in force. Meat rationing came off whilst I was still a baby, and although I do not remember actual sugar rationing, we still didnt have as much as was necessary - my mothers dislike of lollies such as bananas and teeth (and we had "fried eggs" as well) was as much based on the fact that they had little sugar (and that from sugar beet, not sugar cane) as on their filler content. Young children were still entitled to a bottle of concentrated orange juice obtained from the chemist on a regular basis in order to make sure we got enough vitamin C. Oranges were still in very short seasonal supply until I was about 5.

This level of rationing was not experienced so much in Aus, where most folk were able to make do with chooks and the odd pig or lamb to survive meat rationing whilst growing their own veggies, and sugar rationing came off as the war ended. Generally, most stuff was available pretty quickly after the war in Aus, whereas whilst we probably had enough of most things, non-essentials were less available in the UK until the late 50s. Rebuilding and not having enough manpower took almost as much resources as the war had.