STÁTNÍ TAJEMNÍK U ŘÍŠSKÉHO PROTEKTORA V ČECHÁCH A NA MORAVĚ, PRAHA, inv. 1777, sig. 109-5/5 Page 28 · 28 of 133
THE SECRETARY TO THE RUSSIAN PROTECTOR IN THINGS AND IN MORAVA, PRAGUE, inv. 1777, sig. 109-5/5
English Translation
L3a. The maintenance of import is also necessary for the reason that, as in the empire, the increase in meat ration in normal consumption by 50 g per day and week can be avoided without too much interference in the substance. This increase in ration would increase on the demand side of approx. For a longer period than 6 supply periods, the ration increase at Pleisch has not yet been planned in the Reich. It is also obvious that the additional demand of approx. 8.oo t due to the rationing increase means another strong entry into the stocks. It is estimated that the further intervention at the current low slaughter weight would represent about 50,000 cattle. e)_Fett 7 In the meeting on 6.8.l942, the protectorate had been given the supply of 16,000 tonnes of fat in Aussicnt. The letter of the Reichsmarschall no longer contains any information about this delivery, on the contrary, it requires that the fat balance of the protectorate should be balanced in such a way that the aid of the empire can be waived. This demand of the Imperial Marsschall cannot be carried out for reasons of nourishing and political reasons. The requirements of the protectorate for the period from 1.9.42 to 3l.8.43 for butter, raw pig fat and margarine total 7l.597 tonnes. This demand is accompanied by a domestic production including initial stocks of only 39,972 tonnes, so that there is a need for 3l.625 tonnes. As in previous years, subsidies from the Reich did not cover 3l.600 tonnes, so from the 41st period of care (26.10.42) in the case of adults, young people from l4 years of age were cut sharply in the protectorate. At present, a quantity of 655 g of fat per supply period is spent on these persons, the reduction would have to be 572 g per supply season, so that only a quantity remaining of l83 g. This means a reduction of 87.3% compared to today's claim. It is quite natural that a reduction to this great extent can be neither food nor political responsibility. To inform you, I would point out that according to your previous instructions, the Germans living in the Protectorate and the armaments workers in the strict sense (300,000) must be included in the calculation of ration reductions which has been applied above.