Animal Rights Petitions

Monday, February 22

Farmers preferring to rear livestock for meat

Help stopping the price rise in fodder... Cattle leading to death.....

NEW DELHI: India's almost-indelible perch atop global milk-producing nations is showing the first signs of cracks with farmers increasingly
preferring to rear livestock for meat, lured by lucrative prices and a friendly government policy.

The country’s average milk yield of 917 kg per annum is now ranked a lowly 35th among 44 select countries, though India continues to be the world’s largest milk producer, a position it has clung to for many years. Still, there are clear signs of worry as farmers in north India, the country’s top milk-producing region, are up against squeezed margins after a 90 per cent rise in fodder prices between 2006 and 2009. The sharp increase in fodder prices is driving farmers to send animals to abattoirs.

In contrast, the value of meat exports has doubled in four years to Rs 5,000 crore in 2008-09 , according to industry estimates. India shipped around 20,000 animals in 2008-09. Indeed, the two segments present a picture of contrasting fortunes.

According to state-run Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority, the per-kg realisation of meat (meat extracted for processing) rose 57 per cent to Rs 115 in 2008-09 from a year ago. Meat realisation for a buffalo weighing around 500 kg is about 275 kg.

Farmers selling milk, in comparison, have gained little due to the surge in fodder prices, though the wholesale price index for milk has shot up by 14 per cent from a year ago. The change in farmers’ practices is palpable.

A recent report of the advisory committee on animal husbandry and dairying said there were chances of a drop in the annual growth target of milk production to five per cent from the 6-7 per cent projected in the current Five Year Plan (2007-12).

National Dairy Development Board chairperson Amrita Patel said if milk production persistently flagged, imports would become the order of the day. The culprit, says the Indian Dairy Association (IDA), the apex body comprising members from cooperatives, MNCs, corporates & PSUs, among others, is a government policy lopsided towards meat exporters.

Farm animals producing 10 litres of milk a day require at least 675 kg of crude protein a year. But raw cattle feed exports have more than doubled between 2006 and 2009, mounting pressure on fodder prices. Fodder ingredients sufficient to feed 3,300,826 animals, which could have translated into 10 per cent of India’s annual milk production, were also exported.

"The abnormal rise in the cost of feed and maintenance has made it highly uneconomical for farmers to keep a dry buffalo (which ceases to produce milk). So when a buffalo becomes dry, it is sent to a slaughterhouse," said a New Delhi-based dairy sector executive. "This has become the trend in all peri-urban areas."

Buffalo meat exports between April 2008 and January 2009 leapt 45% from a year ago, boosted by government incentives such as Vishesh Krishi Aur Gram Udyog Yojana and duty entitlement passbook scheme, which give refunds and duty exemptions to exporters.

The Centre’s meat export incentives in 2008-09 alone were an estimated Rs 484 crore. Ironically, the BJP’s stringent opposition to animal slaughter forced the Planning Commission in 2002 to backpedal proposals such as withdrawal of the beef export ban and a hike in meat and leather exports.

The incentives have not gone down well with the dairy sector, which allege that the government’s skewed policy is likely to accentuate a severe milk shortage. The IDA says these incentives mean more and more high producer animals are heading to slaughterhouses.

Source: ET

Thursday, November 13

[Animal Rights Petitions] Stop EU subsidies to livestock industry

In the last fifty years, in Europe and elsewhere in the developed countries, there has been an exponential growth in the consumption of animal products (meat, fish, eggs, milk and dairy products). These foods are consumed at each meal in every household; quite unlike 50 years ago, when these were rare food items. Today these items cost extremely little, with respect to production costs, often even less than vegetable products, which inevitably require far less raw materials, energy and labor.

This is because farmers and fishermen receive direct and indirect funding both from the state and the European Union; in effect, what we do not pay for at the cash register we pay for in taxes. It is also paid for by those who choose not to buy animal products.

This is all the more serious as the consequences of the high consumption of meat, food and other animal products are greater on the environment, on human health and on the development of poorer countries. It would be justifiable and positive if individual states and the European Community supported and promoted only the consumption of foods that are healthy and have little environmental impact. Instead they do so with foods whose production has a devastating impact... and this is neither acceptable nor justifiable. It is up to us citizens to put an end to this situation and press for a more farsighted, sensible and sustainable policy in this matter, which will protect the environment and human health rather than harm them as it does now.

What we propose is to reverse this self-destructive trend, resulting in the following steps.

1. Put an end to every kind of subsidy for breeding, fishing, crop cultivations intended for farmed animals feed;

2. Charge for the purchase of farmed animals feed;

3. Ensure that the animal products the final consumer buys show their real price, not distorted by subsidies and other facilities granted to the producers and that also includes the environmental cost for the enormous negative impact of breeding (internalization of costs).

4. Put an end to campaigns for the promotion of animal products consumption financed by public money;

5. To support, with subsidies and information campaigns, the consumption of healthy plant-based food, to be less expensive for the final consumer, an easily obtainable result after the withdrawal of the enourmous costs of subsidies to farming and fishing.

We propose in the meantime a petition in support of Point 1 of this series of proposals.

The petition has the purpose to both bring forward this issue with the European Parliament and to raise the matter in various areas, because not enough attention is ever put to how damaging the practice of farming is and how therefore unacceptable it is to finance it with public funding.

Visit the Animal Blogs:

Saturday, November 1

What Breed is it?

Street dogs roaming in and around the city is a common scene in India. These are abandoned and can be found being beaten and teased away from one place to the other. Every one has a problem with them.
We have a lot of Animal Lovers around but they just want to take care of some good breed of an animal. Specially the dog...

The first and the common question which anyone asks upon being asked for adopting a dog is "What breed is it..?"

And this, then generally happens with the status conscious guys who don't want to adopt an unknown breed or otherwise with some who are generally scared of the diseases being carried by the animal(Even when it's already sterilized!!!).
The second reason may seem to be a bit valid but what about the first case??
This query seems to be inhumane and reflects the social weirdness and the fake face of the individual... I mean...what the hell is animal love to do with the breed...It very well relates the nature of the individual who makes relationships according to his social status, financial standings etc. Willing to pay thousands of bucks for a "breed" dog; they can't adopt a cute looking Indian street stray pup!! Wired..
Those beggars and the poor in the slums are better and actually have love and affection for these poor animals.. They share their food with them, take care of them, provide them shelter...They should actually be appreciated.

Our appeal to those who don't care about the stature of the dog and simply love them is that "Please adopt an Indian Dog".
Adopting them would do good to us :
1.)You would get a loving, caring and obedient friend(Which is hard to find otherwise :) ).
2.)It'll clear up the streets,and the city would look good; with no strays around.
3.)They would not be chased and would not bite people.
4.)Their population would be controlled, and would not be brutally killed.

If one out of four Indians Adopts an Indian Stray Dog, all the street dogs would be gone.


People for Animals

Wednesday, October 29

Do Online Petitions Work!!

Does Signing a Petition helps the targetted in any form?
There has always been a confusion that do the petitions we sign actually help the targetted benificiary or not.
A petition, be it online or written can be used in the parliament to pass a bill if it reaches a particular number; so signing petitions is not a waste at all. That is, the more the people sign the petition the more popular it becomes and thus can make a difference to the targetted by compelling the related authorities to take an action.But for this, someone must take a hard copy of the entire petition and approach a local political party or file legally for a BILL.
Petitions are also used as solid evidence in courts and can help in chnaging the judgement or influence it atleast.
Many a petitions have already worked wonders..
So keep signing petitions and forward it to all you know to make it more popular and thus a successful petition!!
There is a simple way to find petitions by yourself.
Use google's CSE for petitions, search by keywords like 'Animal Cruelty In China'

Also, you may find some concerned and fast running petitions at

People for Animals

Tuesday, October 28

Animal Abuse and the Olympics

We recently finished up with our petition on the animal abuse in China and the one specially related to the Olympic Cleaning up...
Thanks for the supporters..

For the ones who wish to read more on this act.. Here's an excerpt...

...Chinese restaurants carry at least 20 different dog dishes, with “fried long dog tails” being the latest craze among upscale Beijing yuppies. The market is so substantial that—similar to Burger King in America—there’s an outfit in China called Dog Meat King whose specialty is self-explanatory.

Researchers have published gruesome photographs of dead dogs being hung from hooks in meat lockers, while others showed butchers slitting dogs’ throats to drain the blood. Usually, Chinese diners prefer to eat puppies between the ages of 6-12 months because they are most tender. Over 300,000 dogs are slaughtered nationwide, many of them processed into a garish type of stew.

Some restaurants submerge live dogs in boiling water and pull their skin from the carcass in one swift motion. Other chefs will gut a dog from throat to stomach; then hold the “prize” aloft by the tail in front of their clients before cooking it. Many of those slaughtered are actually family pets (with collars still intact) that are stolen by poachers and transported in trucks without food or water.

After being pulled from their cages, videotaped footage shows them being brutalized with knives and clubs, or having their heads smashed on the ground to stun them. Ted Kerasole of Salon magazine describes the helpless dogs being gutted, strung aloft by wires, then skinned alive—a torturous process that takes up to seven minutes.

In China, dog meat is considered a delicacy that purportedly increases one’s sexual prowess and “warms their blood.” Another two million dogs and cats are murdered each year to supplement the international fur trade. Yes, felines are also eaten in China, as well as monkey brains and bird eyes......

View Full Article

Comment Here or mail me at

People for Animals


free counters