Donate SIGN UP
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 13 of 13rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by stewey. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Oh my heavens no!!! I couldn't read that, how very sad as you say.
I agree it was terribly sad but also perhaps the kindest thing for the pets. Think of the noise, the broken glass everywhere, the food rationing, being bomed out and rehomed. That is just mentioning a few things. It was not a good time for city pets.
having read xsticher and mamy's comments, I'm not going to click on the link. I know it will upset me.
Question Author
Some good points, xstitcher; however, I have always considered my pets to be part of the family and should be treated as such. On the other hand, I didn't live during that dark period of history so can't really condemn.
Points taken xstitcher, however even though I am a postwar baby - I know my Mother and Grandmother both kept pets all their lives. Whilst not inner city our town was bombed and likely pets perished but rather take the chance against that, than destroy in case.
A book I was reading many years ago (fiction based on fact) brought up this subject. I really hadn't thought of it before then and it broke my heart reading it as I also had a lovely dog at the time of reading. You would have to let your common sense overrule your heart. Awful!!!
Question Author
It appears that many people were concerned with the shortage of food. I would gladly have shared any food I had with my pet. After all, as I said, it's part of the family.
Just shows that the government has not moved on.
Still issuing heartless advice.
My Mum said that her family used to take the cat and dog down to the Anderson shelter with them every night so not everyone got rid of their pets. It must have been terribly upsetting for those that chose to get rid of them.
At the outbreak of WW2 my Dad was called to the colours and Mum and I went to live with Gran. We left behind a cat. The animal was assured of care by a neighbour and we left money to buy milk and food. Unfortunately Tiddles never saw the milk and food and went feral though he remained near his garden shed
home. He actually survived the bombing and food scarcity but when we returned in 1942 he was never a tame cat again. Perhaps it would have been kinder to destoy him.
-- answer removed --
This was mentioned on the TV the other night in a WW2 programme. I didn't know about it until then. The concept was that if people were killed or had to move away, there would be thousands of lost pets wandering about. It was only a suggestion but many people couldn't bear the thought of that, and putting the pet down seemed the kindest way. I guess with rationing, feeding pets would have become difficult too. Very sad.
Russians and Germans by the end of the war were eating pets, zoo animals etc, which I imagine would have been even more unpleasant.

1 to 13 of 13rss feed

Do you know the answer?

How Sad.

Answer Question >>