Petition Closed

Stop Beef Export from India, Put heavy duties on meat production.

This petition had 362 supporters


To: 


Anand Sharma, Union Minister for Commerce and Industry

Stop beef Industry and beef export with immediate effect. 

We need to stop beef export from India with immediate effect, we also need to put heavy duties on meat production so that meat production can be discouraged because of following reason:

1. It is against the ethos of Non-violence which are the soul of Idea of India. We will be huge disappointment to the philosophy of Mahatma Gandhi who practiced non-violence even in the hardest of life condition and was instrumental to Freedom struggle.

 

2. Cows are revered as mother by majority Hindu community due to their religious belief so cow slaughter is major cause of pain and anguish in Hindu community which might cause social unrest if continue. Apart from being a challenge to Identity of India Meat industry has been proven to create numerous hazardous impact. 

 

3. Meat industry especially beef industry causes various environmental hazards and scientifically documented to create socio-economic destruction on the longer run. Few of them are listed below:

 

a. Grazing and Land Use: In comparison with grazing, intensive livestock production requires large quantities of harvested feed. The growing of cereals for feed in turn requires substantial areas of land. However, where grain is fed, less feed is required for meat production. This is due not only to the higher concentration of metabolizable energy in grain than in roughages, but also to the higher ratio of net energy of gain to net energy of maintenance where metabolizable energy intake is higher.[i] A pound of beef (live weight) requires about seven pounds of feed, compared to more than three pound for a pound of pork and less than two pounds for a pound of chicken.[ii]However, assumptions about feed quality are implicit in such generalizations. For example, production of a pound of beef cattle live weight may require between 4 and 5 pounds of feed high in protein and metabolizable energy content, or more than 20 pounds of feed of much lower quality. Land quality decline is sometimes associated with overgrazing. Rangeland health classification reflects soil and site stability, hydrologic function and biotic integrity.[iii] By the end of 2002, the US Bureau of Land Management had evaluated rangeland health on 7,437 grazing allotments (i.e. 35 percent of its grazing allotments or 36 percent of the land area contained in its grazing allotments) and found that 16 percent of these failed to meet rangeland health standards due to existing grazing practices or levels of grazing use. This led the BLM to infer that a similar percentage would be obtained when such evaluations were completed.[iv] Soil erosion associated with overgrazing is an important issue in many dry regions of the world.[v] However, on US farmland, much less soil erosion is associated with pastureland used for livestock grazing than with land used for production of crops. Sheet and rill erosion is within estimated soil loss tolerance on 95.1 percent, and wind erosion is within estimated soil loss tolerance on 99.4 percent of US pastureland inventoried by the US Natural Resources Conservation Service.[vi]

b. Fresh water Usage: Virtual water use for livestock production includes water used in producing feed.

Estimated virtual water requirements
for various crops (m³ water/ton crop)[vii]

 In contrast, in some low-rainfall areas, some livestock production is more sustainable than food crop production, from a water use standpoint, despite higher virtual water use per kg of food produced. This is because unirrigated land in many water-short areas may support grassland ecosystems in perpetuity, and thus may be able to support well-managed, extensive production of grazing cattle or sheep with a sustainable level of water use, even where large-scale production of more water-demanding food crops would be unsustainable in the long run due to inadequate surface water supplies and inadequate groundwater recharge to sustain a high level of withdrawn water use for irrigation.

c.  Energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions: At a global scale, the FAO has recently estimated that livestock (including poultry) accounts for about 14.5 percent of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions estimated as 100-year CO2 equivalents.[viii] (A previous, widely cited FAO report had estimated 18 percent.[ix] Because this emission percentage includes contributions associated with livestock used for production of draft power, eggs, wool and dairy products, the percentage attributable to meat production alone is significantly lower. The indirect effects contributing to this percentage include emissions associated with production of feed consumed by livestock and carbon dioxide emission from deforestation in Central and South America, attributed to livestock production. Mitigation options for reducing methane emission from ruminant enteric fermentation include genetic selection, immunization, rumen defaunation, diet modification and grazing management, among others.[x] The principal mitigation strategies identified for reduction of agricultural nitrous oxide emission are avoiding over-application of nitrogen fertilizers and adopting suitable manure management practices.[xi] Mitigation strategies for reducing carbon dioxide emissions in the livestock sector include adopting more efficient production practices to reduce agricultural pressure for deforestation (notably in Latin America), reducing fossil fuel consumption, and increasing carbon sequestration in soils.[xii]


Considering all these socio-economical and environmental issues, Mr. Anand Sharma you need to take measures to discourage meat production in India and especially beef export. 

If the Government acts in time to ban the beef export in India it will definitely discourage the meat production in India and will ultimately relieve Indian society from above listed problems which are man-made and policy governed.

 
The whole country is watching your actions. We have less than a week! 

Looking forward to your early action, 

Thanking you,

Sincerely, 
[Your name]

 

 



[i] National Research Council. 2000. Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle. National Academy Press.

[ii] Adler, Jerry; Lawler, Andrew (June 2012). "How the Chicken Conquered the World"Smithsonian. Retrieved May 27, 2012.

[iii] National Research Council. 1994. Rangeland Health. New Methods to Classify, Inventory and Monitor Rangelands. Nat. Acad. Press. 182 pp.

[iv]US BLM. 2004. Proposed Revisions to Grazing Regulations for the Public Lands. FES 04-39

[v] Steinfeld, H. et al. 2006. Livestock's Long Shadow: Environmental Issues and Options. Livestock, Environment and Development, FAO, Rome. 391 pp.

[vi] NRCS. 2009. Summary report 2007 national resources inventory. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service. 123 pp.

[vii] http://www.waterfootprint.org/Reports/Report12.pdf

[viii] Gerber, P. J., H. Steinfeld, B. Henderson, A. Mottet, C. Opio, J. Dijkman, A. Falcucci and G. Tempio. 2013. Tackling climate change through livestock - a global assessmaent of emissions and mitigation opportunities. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome. 115 pp.

[ix] Steinfeld, H. et al. 2006. Livestock's Long Shadow: Environmental Issues and Options. Livestock, Environment and Development, FAO, Rome. 391 pp.

[x] Boadi, D. et al. 2004. Mitigation strategies to reduce enteric methane emissions from dairy cows: Update review. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 84: 319-335; Martin, C. et al. 2010. Methane mitigation in ruminants: from microbe to the farm scale. Animal 4 : pp 351-365; Eckard, R. J. et al. 2010. Options for the abatement of methane and nitrous oxide from ruminant production: A review. Livestock Science 130: 47-56.

[xi] Dalal, R.C. et al. 2003. Nitrous oxide emission from Australian agricultural lands and mitigation options: a review. Australian Journal of Soil Research 41(2) 165 – 195; Klein, C. A. M. and S. F. Ledgard. 2005. Nitrous oxide emissions from New Zealand agriculture – key sources and mitigation strategies. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 72: 77-85.

[xii] Gerber, P. J., H. Steinfeld, B. Henderson, A. Mottet, C. Opio, J. Dijkman, A. Falcucci and G. Tempio. 2013. Tackling climate change through livestock - a global assessmaent of emissions and mitigation opportunities. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome. 115 pp.



Today: Dinesh is counting on you

Dinesh Nath needs your help with “Anand Sharma Minister of Commerce and Industry: Stop Beef Export from India, Put heavy duties on meat production.”. Join Dinesh and 361 supporters today.