IMPACTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE USE OF ANIMALS FOR FOOD • AIR POLLUTION DANGER IN OCEANS • DESERTIFICATION FRESHWATER SCARCITY

• • SUSTA INABILITY MATRIX ENERGY CONSUMPTION SOCIETY OF NEW PARADIGMS • • POSSIBLE SOLUTI ONS Introduction It is estimated that, worldwide, every second, an area of rainfores t the size of a football field is cleared to produce beef burgers equivalent to 257 If you come now to the planet Earth from another galaxy, would probably be aston ished by the proliferation of terms such as "environmental catastrophe", "global warming", "biodiversity loss", "climate change" and many others that are floodi ng the news and permeate discussions in communities as diverse as nursery school s, neighborhood associations, committees, business management and international government agencies and all levels. "Why," you say, "there until recently, the e nvironmental disputes restringiamse protect pandas, avoid water waste and recycl e cans of beer. Where did - and with such voracity - this crisis heralded, so br oad and unprecedented? "Well it did not appear at all: it is a result of repetit ion, over decades, consumption habits predatory collective and individual, but b lessed by the logic market and a culture of hyper deny that, systematically, its connection with the chaos brought. Among these detrimental habits ingrained in modern society, is the indiscriminate consumption of meat *. Yes, believe it or not, the current maintenance, "live inventory" of 30 billion birds, fish and doz ens of species of mammals has a tremendous and unprecedented pressure on all eco systems. Just remember that each of the animals - as well as each of the nearly seven billion human animals - demand their piece of land, water, food and energy (mainly fossil), waste dump on their land and generates direct and indirect emi ssions of pollutants in soil, air and water. There's like closing your eyes to t he fact that each burger, nugget, sausage and tuna can cause an impact and an en vironmental cost which approximate the adventure of man on Earth's ecological ba nkruptcy. In this guide we seek to enumerate, among the economic activities that involve raising animals for slaughter and subsequent human consumption, the mai n factors that cause degradation ambiental.A simple identification of these fact ors by itself already promotes the understanding of the need for a profound chan ge in the way as individuals and society perceive and relate to the environment. It indicates the urgent need to rethink - and reinvent! - The paradigms of glob al consumption, as the only viable alternative to avoid major disasters that are announced with much force. We hope that this information is helpful in your cho ice of how to contribute to building a new, healthy and productive way to intera ct with people, animals and the planet. Land, water and air You know how much a pound of flesh? It may be a pound of any meat. Does it even know? To be sure, you must first understand the question. The total cost of a th ing is not just the value of money being spent to obtain it. This is only the "n ominal price" or "economic cost". Things may have significant economic, cultural , social, aesthetic, environmental, moral ... and meat production generates seve ral types of costs - unfortunately, almost unknown to most people. Besides that you pay directly at the counter market and that corresponds to the economic cost of meat, there are other factors involved that would render the final product p rice. Among them, the environmental cost of meat, which is one of the biggest en vironmental problems on Earth. A series of calculations and studies establishing the relationship between the consumption of meat on the planet's health, as exe mplified in the table below. In Brazil, on average, a kilogram of beef is responsible for: • 10 acres of fore st cleared • consumption of 15,000 liters of fresh water • emission of carbon di oxide directly into the atmosphere • emission of methane in the atmosphere dump • boron, phosphorus, mercury, bromine, lead, arsenic, chlorine and other toxic c hemicals from fertilizers and pesticides that seep into the soil and reach groun dwater • disposal of effluents such as blood, urine, fat, offal, feces, and othe

r bones, which eventually coming to the rivers and oceans after contaminating so il and groundwater aquifers • energy consumption • fossil fuel consumption • dum p in the environment of antibiotics, hormones, analgesics, bactericides, insecti cides, fungicides,€vaccines and other drugs via urine, feces, blood and guts, wh ich inevitably affect the groundwater • release of nitrous oxide, about 300 time s more damaging to the atmosphere than CO2 • heavy burden on public coffers with health treatments arising from contamination generated by livestock • governmen t spending on infrastructure and sanitation needed to balance the damage caused by livestock • the cost of tax incentives and subsidies for state and federal go vernments in the livestock industry All this is present in every kilogram of beef, steak, sirloin and other cuts, co nsumed by the millions daily menu and barbecue Sunday best. And none of this is computed at the butcher counter. * In this guide, whenever we speak of "meat" without specifying the type, it is the flesh of any animal. 02 03 Land, water and air It is important to note that these figures for production of 1 kg of beef are no t alarmist estimates; are alarming findings of scientific studies and official d ata. The keeping of pigs, goats, buffaloes and ovelinos (or other large mammals) generates similar numbers. That is, the industrial production of meat is one of the major sources of pollution of the environment: it requires huge areas, cons umes vast amounts of natural resources and energy, significantly burdening the p ublic purse, and generate billions of tons of toxic waste solids, liquids and ga ses, which contaminate soil, water, air, plants, animals and people. Brazilian l aw is strict in relation to industrial pollution. But there is no supervision fo r the livestock sector: the application of environmental laws make it practicall y impossible activity. If the Brazilian government withdrew incentives and subsi dies, requiring full and levied taxes to internalize the costs of energy, the us e of natural resources and environmental damage, every pound of beef would cost a small fortune! Freshwater: source of life or income? In the U.S., livestock is responsible for the use of half of all water consumed in the country for all purposes 05 In the beginning was the agribusiness. Then, the business has diversified and th ere was a hydro, "water business". I mean, water is only a means, because even i f the business is profit. Profits up with water use in industry, public sanitati on and environment, with mineral and bottled version, especially with intensive irrigation and livestock. Brazil is the largest global power in volume of fresh water: 12% of the entire global inventory is in our rivers and underground reser voirs. However, about 70% of that stuff goes to agriculture - particularly irrig ation. Irrigation of vegetable crops for human consumption, right? Negative: wel l over half of all that is grown in Brazil is intended for industrial production of livestock feed, here and abroad. Ie, becomes fodder for cattle, pigs, poultr y and even fish, which then will stop people in the dish. To make matters worse, nobody pays for all this water consumption or pollution that the sewage of meat production - blood, fat, viscera, vomit and feces, more hormones, antibiotics, insecticides, fertilizers and pesticides - cause for tanks and aquifers. (Review data from page 3.) You and the water To avoid waste, the tips are as always: turn off the tap when brushing teeth or

shaving, do not wash the pavement, repairing leaks in home and soon be in the ba th. But as conscientious consumers, we can go much further. Vegetarianism is the most efficient way to save água.Veja because: Raising animals for consumption Among all industries, the massive creation of animals for human consumption is w hat makes the most inefficient use of water resources. Let's take as an example, the shrimp (shrimp farming in captivity). This activity consumes more fresh wat er than irrigation agriculture: are 50 to 60 thousand gallons of water per pound of shrimp produced. The construction of ponds, mainly in the northeastern coast , degrades and undermines the nascent mangroves. Causes changes in the fauna and flora, worsens the quality of drinking water, pollute coastal waters with tons of excrement and even expelled from the traditional fishermen of the mangroves, without giving them an alternative. If nothing else, this economic activity is a lmost entirely export oriented and only benefits a business elite, which gets it s profits at the expense of traditional communities and the health of coastal bi ome. Cause and consequence A fact that reveals the inconsistency emblematic of the industrial production of meat in 1960€a great tsunami hit the coast of Bangladesh.Apesar material damage , there was no single human loss. However, several thousand people died when a t sunami of similar magnitude rocked the very same area in 1991. Why the differenc e? Meanwhile, the vast mangrove swamps, which provided natural protection to the region were devastated to give rise to numerous farms shrimp (shrimp farming in captivity). 04 Freshwater: source of life or income? The Report to the UNESCO World Water Forum, 2004, revealed how much clean water is used, on average, just to quench the thirst of each animal: chicken goat ox = 0.1 liters / day = 8 liters / day = 35 liters / day turkey = 0.2 liters / day p ig `= 15 liters / day dairy cow = 40 gallons / day • A farm with 5000 cattle pro duces the same amount of excrement of a town with 50,000 inhabitants. • A cow pr oduces per day, about 40 kg of manure. And each pig, between 5 and 9 kg of urine and feces daily. • In some municipalities of Santa Catarina the pig is responsi ble for more than 65% of emissions. And the power of polluting pig manure is abo ut 50 times greater than that of human sewage. • In some regions of southern Bra zil, the contamination of natural sources of water for fecal coliform bacteria r eaches 85%. If we take into account the water needed for hygiene, consumption of a dairy cow , for example, rises from 40 liters to 90 liters per day. Remember, the slums of poor countries have access, on average, only 20 liters of water per day. Slaughter process The breeding of animals for food also consume plenty of water during the slaught ering procedures: bleeding, scalding, plucking, waxing, shaving, evisceration, w ashing, etc.. Who has made a small cut on his finger - and knows the work that p rovides clean the blood - can imagine how much water is wasted to wash the blood of an ox carcass. According to Cetesb, slaughterhouses Paulistas use on average 12 liters of water to process the carcass of a chicken and 2,500 liters for a b ovine. Meanwhile, Sabesp says that consumption of 120 liters per capita is more than enough for all daily needs. * Gallons of water used to produce 1kg of food: Irrigation Whereas around 70% of the world's freshwater is intended for agriculture and tha t more than half of global agricultural production goes to feed animals - especi

ally the herds and flocks Americans and Europeans - it appears that the precious liquid turns ration. In Brazil, soybeans took over the grasslands of the Midwes t and now migrate north in search of water: Tocantins, Mato Grosso, Rondônia, Pa rá .. Today, export grain and meat means, ultimately, to export water - graça.As sim how to produce grain and meat in the territory of others is to save water at home. In Brazil, cattle ranching uses and contaminates in your supply chain, more wate r than the cities. While you need fewer than 500 gallons of water to obtain 1 kg of soybeans to produce 1 kg of beef spend up to 15,000 liters of water. In this calculation enter the water that animals drink throughout life, to the irrigati on of pastures and that is expended in the processing of carcasses in slaughterh ouses. Tomato Potato Wheat 39 42 48 Milk Eggs Beans 195 222 932 Chicken Pig Ox 1397 2794 8931 * On average, California. Source: EarthSave Foundation Waste The huge amount of manure produced by animals bred for consumption is often rele ased without treatment in land and water. This leads to eutrophication of rivers and lakes, in which case the excess of organic matter favors the proliferation of algae and microorganisms, which are now competing with fish and other aquatic beings by oxygen from the water. Not counting the hipercontaminação by fecal co liforms, disease vectors (such as salmonella and hepatitis), hormones and antibi óticos.Todo this toxic material seeps into surface waters and underground, pollu ting groundwater, contaminating rivers and seas and endangering the aquatic life and humana.Alguns data illustrate the problem: 06 Rare water More than 2 billion people face water shortages and by 2025 that number should j ump to 4 billion, according to a 2002 UN report. It seems inconsistent to speak of the shortage on a planet that has more than 70% of its surface covered with w ater. But only a tiny fraction of that total is drinking: 97.5% Earth's water is salty - is on the seas and oceans 2.493% is fresh water trapped in glaciers or underground regions inaccessible 0.007% is fresh water available at the surface and present in atmosphere Worldwide, about 70% of the fresh water abstracted fro m rivers,€lakes and underground deposits are intended for agricultural activity. The remaining 30% are used in other human activities such as household consumpt ion, industrial activity, energy generation etc.. 07 In the U.S. alone, the production of animal excrement is 1.4 billion tons per ye ar, or 104,000 kilograms per second In Brazil, 45% of freshwater is consumed in livestock. And 45 million people lac k access to safe water Use, pollution and soil degradation are 75 million hectares grown into pasture,

only in the Amazon, are a 50% higher than the entire agricultural area of Brazil In Brazil, the environmental impact of livestock on the ground is outstanding, a s most of the cattle is created by the extensive system: each head of cattle hav e at least one hectare (10,000 m2) of pasture to fatten. Our livestock have been calculated at 200 million head of livestock and occupies more than 250 million hectares, nearly a third of the country! This occupation is committed rampant so il our land in many ways. Manure fertilizer had not seen? A cow produces about 40 kg of dry manure per day, each pig, 5-9 kg of feces. For the producer does not transform these wastes into compost? Simple: basically, l ack of commercial interest. In a large farm, the proper management of waste woul d involve storage, handling, transportation and distribution fields. The farmer does not consider investing in this system since its implementation would increa se the workload and costs without bringing commensurate increase in production and profit. In general, farmers prefer to use chemical fertilizers, less bulky and easier application. Already, organic agriculture, when you use manure, avoid manure raised on diet, hormones, antibiotics and pesticides in general, which a re elements that contaminate the soil. 1 - are devastated forests and savannas and grasslands to form large monoculture s of grain, eventually destined to become feed. In Brazil, according to the Instituto CEPA, needs a bull from one to four hectar es of land and produces on average 210 kg of meat in the period of four to five years. At the same time and same amount of land, it produces on average: 8 tons of beans 23 ton 35 ton wheat carrot 19 ton 32 ton rice soy 44 ton 22 ton potato apple 34 tons of corn 56 ton tomato Not to mention that you can get two or even three harvests a year these plants c ombined, greatly enhancing these quantities. 4 - Cattle trampling compacts the soil and all the time. It hinders the absorpti on of water and facilitates the drag of surface material by wind and water, resulting in erosion processes. Floods, landslides and proliferation of weeds and shrubs a re invading livestock courtesies extended to the natural heritage of Brazil. Acc ording to WWF-Brazil, for every pound of meat produced in the Brazilian Cerrado, lose 60-10 pounds of soil erosion. 2 - When the original plants are removed and the animals living in that space are driven by lack of food, the consequence is the loss of biodiversity (l oss of species of a given habitat). The removal of vegetation for pasture format ion also disrupts the balance of the natural cycle of nutrients: beneath the lus h tropical forest, for example, there is usually a thin layer of leaf litter, wh ich is the reserve of soil nutrients. Without the cover no more this resource an d soil, usually poor and sandy, is exposed to erosion and weathering. 5 - are produced each year in the U.S. alone, more than 1.4 trillion pounds dung. Are 104 tons of manure per second which, in most cases can not be employed in agriculture and is not directed to treatment plants. In the environment, the se droppings eutrophic water and soil. To illustrate the scale of the problem, j ust remember that the 5 million pigs and Santa Catarina pollute the water and th e ground state with emission of waste and toxic effluents equivalent to 45 milli on people! With the difference that the sewer people often treated ... Global Warming - In an area whose vegetation has been removed and has undergone action of overgrazing, the average temperature tends to increase about 4 ° C. 08 The pattern of land occupation - based system for industrial production of meat

- borders on the absurd: the pastures are already a third of all non-flooded lan d on the planet, occupying an area equivalent to twice the entire area used by m an for growing food. 09 It can feed 40 people with grains typically used to generate only 225 g of beef 3 - The destruction of forests or grasslands yields green pastures for a short t ime. Without interventions such as fertilizing and liming, grazing weakens and t he producer tends to leave the area. In rare instances, coverage resumes its ori ginal place. In general, the impairment of the soil is such that the opposite is true: begin irreversible processes of desertificação.Testemunha this is the vas tness of deserts like the Sahara in northern Africa, and Patagonia in South Amer ica - both the work of secular activity and intense grazing of goats and sheep, respectively. Air Pollution Animal agriculture accounts for 18% and 25% of global emissions of CO2 and methane, respectively An alarming report from the FAO, published in 2006 indicates that the "supply of live animals" kept for human consumption have more responsibility for climate c hange than all the automobiles in the world combined! In total, no fewer than 18 % of all greenhouse emissions that cause global warming are only generated by th e meat industry. This account includes, in addition to methane emissions caused by the digestive system of animals, the CO2 emissions generated by burning prior to formation of pastures, energy - almost always based on burning fossil fuels - used in the manufacture of agricultural inputs, the energy expended in the pro duction of feed and water pumping, the energy that goes in the procedures for sl aughter and processing of carcasses, the fuel used in transportation of live ani mals and processed meat products, the fuel used in tractors and agricultural mac hinery, the energy used in fishing boats to keep inventories frozen for weeks at sea, the energy for maintenance of chilled supplies in retail outlets and, ulti mately, the power used in homes to keep the meat refrigerated until the time of consumption. The report also points out that, in food processing plants, all pro cedures ranging from planting to consumption are much more economical in terms o f emissions. The meticulous work of FAO has made clear, among other things, that the massive creation of animals for human consumption is the center of almost e very environmental catastrophe: the destruction of forests, desertification, fre shwater shortages, pollution of air and water, rain acid and soil erosion. Wasting energy • According to studies, the production of meat consumes 10-20 times more energy per ton than the processed vegetable production. • The increase of grain commodi ties requires intensive use of power for plowing, reaping, harvesting, pumping w ater, transporting and producing and applying fertilizers and pesticides. Then, it takes energy to strip off, grinding, grinding, reduce humidity and roast the beans. Finally, more energy is used to transform the grain into feed and transpo rt the feed to the livestock. • The poultry and pigs in massive sheds with no wi ndows for ventilation and natural lighting, requires much energy to control temp erature and lighting. • Slaughterhouses also use huge amounts of energy to pump water, food machinery and processing carcasses. • Transport of animals by paths sometimes longuíssimos between farms and slaughterhouses and meat, requires mill ions of gallons of fossil fuel. • The fishing industry uses energy to build, tra nsport and maintain fleets of huge fishing boats. Each boat uses fuel to reach t he high seas and keep thousands of tons of frozen fish for weeks - even months! - Before returning to port. • Meat products tend to spend more energy on process ing, packaging, storage, transportation and refrigeration than plant products. I n comparison, many vegetables as fruits, vegetables, tubers, grains and legumes require little or no processing, refrigeration, expending much less energy in it s production chain.

• Only two billion cattle emit the planet, thanks to the volatilization of their belching and flatulence, 12% of the methane released into the atmosphere global ly. Methane, which is behind the carbon dioxide as the main factor of degradatio n of the ozone layer, the less time remains in the atmosphere than CO2, but is a t least 20 times more potent as a generator of greenhouse gases and global warmi ng. 10 • Manure from pigs are also responsible for large emissions of methane and a hun dred more hazardous compounds in the biosphere. • Liquid waste from livestock em it 64% of global ammonia released into the atmosphere, is responsible in large m easure by acid rain. • Only in the Brazilian Amazon€fires generate more than 300 tons of CO2 - about two thirds of total emissions in the country! 11 In the U.S., half of all energy used in agriculture is spent only on livestock Revelation marine cia, have been explored in detail "thanks" to the technological innovations of t he fishing industry. They are fish that inhabit the deep oceans, over a thousand meters below the surface, and about which little is known, unless there is immi nent danger of extinction. Fish eye-like orange roughy - a species that lives up to 150 years under natural conditions! - Common in abyssal regions of Australia and New Zealand are drawn by the millions by networks of depth and reach consum ers around the world with high price. How is little one can eat a few bites of a beautiful animal 80 or 100 years ... 3 - The aquaculture farms of more than devastate the marine environment and biomes are the coastal salmon and shrimp. However, those who consume salmon or s hrimp? How to produce 1kg of salmon requires 6.2 kg of fish to feed these fish f arms expensive process thousands of tons a day of little commercial value fish s uch as sardines. Meanwhile, the populations of these fish, which are an importan t link in the marine food chain, are declining with frightening speed. More than a third of current fishing catches turns food ration for captive animals, and t he ratio will only grow with the formation of new farms. Danger deep Life in the oceans is a close call. For centuries, man caught tons of fish and o ther seafood, and replenishing the stocks would be naturally. Since the 1950s, t he scene changed picture by using new techniques and "efficient." Commercial fis hing is increased and technology has resulted in "overfishing" - over-fishing, i n English - and is devastating the oceans at a pace that promises total collapse in less than four decades. Remember, as always, predatory human activity in the oceans causes damage that affects all people, but only "benefit" privileged few endinheirados.Veja why: If drastic measures are not taken urgently, soon there will be no more sardines in the ocean . Per table, no more tuna, grouper, mullet , anchovies and other big fish of the sea, which depend on the smaller chain ali mentar.Além sardines, industrial fishing eliminates any predatory marine fauna t hat is "the silly" in the vicinity. In contrast, the sushi and sashimi are guara nteed every day ... But not by much tempo.Talvez not have to use willpower to cu t the fish on the menu. Most likely no more fish to be bought! The so-called "st ocks" are dying: a population 90% of large fish has declined sharply over the pa st 20 years. Entities who are fighting for protection of oceans estimate that to reverse this situation, the current fishing activity must be reduced by at leas t 60%. What can be done by ordinary people, and do not eat fish? Pressure govern ments to implement moratoriums on fishing and marine protected areas to create f ull and help disseminate information that most know. 1 - The main consumer markets of Japan and the fish are United States. To get an idea in Japan, a single copy of bluefin comes to cost o

ver 100 thousand dollars! And the last remnants of this magnificent species is t raded daily in their hundreds in the country. 12 If consumption does not decrease, the population of virtually all fish and seafo od will collapse around 2048 13 By 2006, 29% of species of fish and seafood collapsed. That is, the catch has de clined over 90% Imagine that we intended to catch all the cows from a farm and, therefore, equip ássemos a series of cargo helicopters with huge networks and steel chains strung across its length, the very heavy cylinders of reinforced concrete. As the heli copters were advancing on the farm, and cows, they would drag the horses, chicke ns, ducks, the orchard, the garden, the barn, the farmhouse, the dog, the dog's home, the barn, the farmer, the farmer's wife, employees, children, the priest w ho passed by, and everything else that was within reach of the cylinders. Then j ust pick up the cows in the midst of all debris and discard the rest anyway in t he forest that first appeared. There would only clear the streams, stretching th e networks and go to the next farm. Within days, we caught a couple of thousand cows and left behind thousands of acres devastated, without the slightest chance of recovery.€This is exactly how it works to industrial shrimp fishing, by far the most predatory fishing activity that human beings have invented. Shrimp yiel ds only 2% of the total fish annually, accounting for 35% of total waste. This a nd other forms of industrial fishing are responsible for so called "dump", now e stimated at 27 million tons of fish and other marine organisms, considered "the type or wrong size." 2 - marine species, less than 30 years, were known even by sciRevelation marine Currently, illegal fishing represents 35% of world total Aquaculture The aquatic farms have become popular with the decline of "stocks" of wild fish of good value comercial.A principle, believed that it would be a viable, profita ble and sustainable minimally. But as in any industrial system of meat productio n, there are several environmental issues that should be considered more rigorou sly. The huge population of fish and shrimp crowded into limited space requires the use of large amounts of pesticides, fungicides and bactericides. Besides, ob viously, impair the quality of meat to be consumed by humans, all these chemical s worsen a situation that, by itself, would be alarming aquatic animals in capti vity throw millions of tons of excrement annually in the oceans. The result is p ollution of waters adjacent to fences, degradation of coastal ecosystems and the spread of disease among marine and terrestrial species, including humans. Anoth er serious problem, according to the Federation of Salmon-Atlantic, is that thou sands of fleeing fish tanks and join the native schools. In addition to infect t hem with diseases of captivity, the intersection of these fish is a disaster bec ause it gives rise to generations unfit to survive and breed in the wild, exacer bating the decline of entire populations. The trails also provide the crossing o f native and exotic varieties to endanger the delicate balance of marine genetic . Finally, guess where these farms are built? On the coast, of course. To arm th e tanks and enclosures, has already eliminated half the mangroves on Earth, and at least one third of Brazilians. Incredibly, the rate of destruction of Deep Impact Aquaculture, with its huge ecological impact, draws attention, but not the only factor degrading marine environments. There is much more atrocity hidden under t he blue immensity: • In shrimp, the nets thrown back with some shrimps and hundr eds of fish, turtles, corals, octopus, birds, sharks and other species. Dead or dying, are dropped into the sea shortly after the separation of shrimp that matt

er. For every pound of shrimp, "left over" up to 20 pounds of dead organisms. • About a thousand sea mammals are caught and killed every day, "accidentally" by bottom trawling: dolphin, dolphins, porpoises, seals and even whales. It is esti mated that each year up to 150,000 turtles are victimized by the same traps subm arine supposedly made for shrimp. • In Asia, due to the fame of fins as a delica cy aphrodisiac, are killed annually about 100 million sharks of different specie s, many almost extinct. • One of the factors that cause most concern to environm entalists is that the age and size of fish sold in the market have declined dram atically. The immediacy of lightweight industrial fishing activity has taken fro m the sea more and more animals that have not reached sexual maturity and theref ore had no chance to reproduce. Where the industry is expected to come the next generation of fish? mangroves is already greater than tropical forests. The mangrove is an ecosystem as fragile as important for biodiversity and safety against floods and storms. The lack of natural barriers of mangroves that covered originally, much of South east Asia and Indonesia is a major cause of the huge number of deaths and losses during the tsunami of 2004 (more on the mangroves on pg. 16). The explosive to the trawler Magnificent coral reefs that took millennia to grow are blown up in seconds. The bluefin, fish and lots of fast, able to swim thousands of miles in their annual migration, are easily located with the use of helicopters and airplanes. Shoals of sardines with millions of individuals have no escape from the location super -advanced satellite tracking and boats equipped with emitters of ultrasound, whi ch captures in a few minutes. Cutting edge technology and ultra modern boats hij ack the bulk ocean life at the plate of voracious consumers. 14 The methods of commercial fishing are brutal odd: although prohibited, is still playing dynamite into the sea and then reap thousands of fish floating dead, eve n though it too is buried with extensive coral reefs and hundreds of other ancie nt living things . Another technique, also banned and practiced clandestinely, i s to spray water coral reefs with sodium cyanide. The fish that dwell in the cre vices of corals are stunned by the lack of oxygen and saw easy prey for the hunt ers of alien species in aquariums, only luxury item. A few days later, the reefs affected by cyanide die, taking with them dozens of plant and animal species that depended on it. Recently, another technique was ba nned and criminalized monstrous: throw a huge net, trapped by the heavy cylinder ends, and drag all that is between 750 and 1,500 meters profundidade.Técnica ma cabre, the deep fishing trawler was vetoed after wreck ecosystems integers that contain millions of unique creatures and hundreds of species are often unknown t o science. The agreement that prevents this type of fishing, by while only in the South Pacific, was signed in Chile, in early May 2007, for mor e than 20 countries. The success has come after many years of struggle of the Co alition for Conservation of Waterdeep (CCAP), an entity representing the scienti fic community and fish from several countries. However, the traditional trawler, among which include shrimp fishing, is still allowed and is widespread, with vi rtually no restrictions. The question is whether government authorities take mea sures to eradicate this practice in time to save the precious marine diversity. 15 Biomes X beef industry between 2002 and 2005, 70 000 km2 were deforested in the Amazon. The cerrado, which contains one third of Brazil's biodiversity, now ther e are 20%. And less than 7% of the Atlantic forest stands Tens of millions of hectares of native vegetation are burned annually in Brazil. Contrary to popular belief, timber, roads and chaotic urbanization play a secon dary role in this destruction. The livestock industry has always been the main c

haracter in the history of the occupation of Brazil. Since Cabral landed here, t he hoofs of oxen, financed by its creators were responsible, at different times, the destruction of the Caatinga, the near extinction of the Mata Atlantica, the Cerrado and the devastation today, doggedly pursuing the goal of ending with Am azon. Two decades ago, the cattle gained a powerful ally in this mission destruc tive: monoculture of soybeans, used to feed in developed countries, herds of ani mals whose legs no longer have to destroy weeds. The accelerated removal of the original vegetation completely transformed the environment and makes it unsuitab le for most native species, which ultimately eliminate them. The few animals tha t can adapt are eventually killed by farmers. Moreover, various zoonoses such as rabies, toxoplasmosis, and spotted fever, transmitted from livestock to wild an imals, often resulting in the elimination of the latter. Industrial production o f meat affects all our ecosystem and, to the biodiversity, which is the variety of living organisms from all sources. And ours is the richest in the world: betw een 15% and 20% of the 1.5 million species cataloged are here.see a summary of t he damage caused across biomes: Savannah - The grasslands were considered unproductive areas of the agricultural point of view. There were only minor crops and livestock. With the new agricult ural technologies, however, the savannahs were taken by large land-crop, account ing for 40% of national grain production. There are corn, beans and others, but soybeans - which becomes fodder for the livestock European and American - prevai ls: the region accounts for 41% of national production. To complete the damage, 42% of Brazilian cattle herd folder on these lands. Since the '70s, the cerrado, which is the second largest biome in the country, lost 50% of its native vegeta tion and saw committed springs, rivers and streams. If this vegetation disappear , just the springs in the region, "the big water tank in Brazil." A river like S an Francisco there is 80% of its water source. It is in the central highlands th at feed watersheds that flow into the four cardinal points. But the devastation is so fast that environmentalists ensure that only a full moratorium on expansio n of agriculture can save what remains of the cerrado. Caatinga - Cattle no more threat that biome rich in biodiversity, both crop and livestock (mainly insects), simply because there is more economica lly viable. But in the late 16th century,€when cattle was brought from the coast inland, so as not to compete with sugarcane and cotton planted in the coastal z one, is that the tendency to dryness of the savanna began to intensify. The land that was feasible before, today is almost a desert. Coastal Zone - This biome includes the coastal marshes and mangroves latter areas, nursery, refuge and feeding of a diverse marine fauna. With unique vegetation and adaptable to high levels of salinity, mangroves are being devast ated by shrimp farming. In the northeast, instead of these rich ecosystems for h undreds of tanks to carcinocultura and already there is a decrease in biodiversi ty, which directly affect the economy and food security of many indigenous and t raditional communities of fishermen. As the Brazilian coast is cut by countless rivers and lagoons, the impact of industrial production of meat can also be meas ured by pollution, siltation and eutrophication of fresh water sources throughou t the coastal region. Pantanal - This vast flood plain, the whole intersected by waterways, a biome is vital for a multitude of waterfowl, migratory species, large mammals and reptil es of all kinds and still boasts one of the richest wildlife reserves of world. However, burned, felled trees and siltation of rivers threaten your life. Again, the reason is the seat of new pastures for livestock. Tourism, which seemed lik e a good economic alternative to cattle raising, is actually a danger more: trag ically, fishing and hunting sports already exceed the limits of sustainability o f that ecosystem. 16

17 Biomes X beef industry Atlantic Forest - From the original forest that covered the entire Brazilian coa st, today remains less than 7%. The richest biodiversity in Brazilian biome per km2 was, throughout history, savaged by the exploitation of Brazil wood, sugar c ane, coffee, and when there was still something to be saved by the opening of pa stures, particularly for dairy . It is the most striking and visible example - l iving in the biome over 80% of Brazilians - the aggressive development of our mo del. Pampa - vast fields, riparian forests, slope forests, wetlands and woods. A lthough characterized by extensive plains apparently homogeneous, the region has rich flora and fauna - a myriad of insects feed on wide variety of birds. The b iome is still suffering the consequences of the mistake in the '60s, when the st ate government brought seeds of a type of African grass without prior testing. D isseminated among the farmers, part of the seed hide an intruder: the grass anno ni. Later research showed the low value of the African grass as food for cattle and in 1978, was banned the sale of those sementes.Tarde others: annnoni is now a plague that infects a significant portion of the pampas. Another threat to the biome is the uncontrolled expansion of soybean, which has been promoting the st rides the conversion of natural grasslands in areas of monoculture, with intensi ve use of pesticides and use of transgenic varieties. Amazon - The Amazon holds the greatest biological diversity of the world, drains 20% of all freshwater on the planet and is more of a biome in the crossha irs of ruthless cattle. The damage began in the '70s, when the developmental pro ject of the military regime was selling the idea that the Amazon was "a land wit hout men for men without land". One result is that in less than 40 years, the he rd Amazon rose from 1.5 million to 60 million head - a third of the Brazilian he rd. Today there are, in the Amazon, three times more cattle than people. And 70% of the meat produced there is consumed in the rich Southeast. Barbecue Amazon f orest: this is what people do when they eat such "green cow" Brazilian. Besides the loss of biodiversity, harmful interference in the water cycle and the threat to the lives of vulnerable populations, the clearing of three million hectares of forest per year playing 300 million tons of carbon into the atmosphere, or tw o thirds of total emissions in the country. And so Brazil is among the five bigg est polluters in the ranking of global warming! Socio-environmental The priority that Brazil chose to give to agribusiness is, to say the least, dis cutível.A unsustainability of this model, which destroys our ecosystem, the proj ect contradicts the eradication of hunger of the Brazilians, because as we all k now, is primarily focused on agribusiness export. Soybeans that devastates the C errado and the Amazon invades not seen food for people, is exported and processe d into feed for cattle, chickens, pigs and fish raised in captivity. Meanwhile, hunger and malnutrition afflict nearly half the world population.€Agribusiness h igh-tech export oriented, with its advanced techniques of cultivation, is a prod uctive option absolutely ruthless in a country with extremely high rates of unem ployment. In the Amazon, a large farm pattern directly employs one employee for every 700 head of cattle in an area of 1,000 hectares. Nonsense, compared to mor e than 100 employees of a cooperative of family farms or to the 250 employees of an agro-forest system of permaculture, operating in an area equivalent. This pr oves the social cost of meat. Just check the index of human development on the i sland of Marajo, for example, to note that intensive farming is only source of i ncome for the farmer. There the farmer was ostracized and expelled from the land to make way for cattle and machinery and only those who profited from it were t he colonels of cattle. The same is seen in all regions taken by pecuária.A land is invariably in the hands of few landowners and employs the minimum of the labo r force. The activity also requires constant government subsidies, won-based lob byists and, especially, a bench rancher - practically a lifetime - in the legisl ature. The socio-environmental damage meat production goes further when we count the thousands of people degraded by the presence of slaughterhouses in the vici

nity, resulting in the condemnation of entire communities to a degrading and inh uman occupation. Ranchers, butchers, "handlers" and many other categories there is a whole contingent professional involved in deplorable the meat industry, com posed of a class of people savaged and demoralized, forced by (the) economic pre ssure to divest himself of humanity and sensitivity. While the country surrendered to the lack of scruples of colonialism and environ mental advances the lucrative agricultural frontier, indigenous people continue to be brutally expelled from their lands, riverine helplessly watch the deterior ation of their livelihood, small farmers are being slaughtered by the landowners and work slave is used with increasing frequency. Moreover, according to a stud y conducted by the NGO Reporter Brazil, cattle ranching is the Brazilian champio n of slavery, because it employs at least 62% of the labor-slave labor used in t he country today. 19 18 End Hunger? The math is simple: half the world's agriculture is geared to produce animal fee d. And the meat of slaughtered animals is available for less than 15% of humans. The global meat consumption is restricted to few countries. United States, Euro pean Union, China and Brazil concentrated global consumption of about 60% of bee f, more than 70% of chicken meat and over 80% of pork. The rest of the countries , ie most of the global population, practice a kind of semi-vegetarianism compul sory. Lobbyists say the meat that the increase in livestock production could mak e the meat available to all. But do not confess to feed a population of 6.5 bill ion carnivore, it would take two more planets like Earth only for grazing and gr ain / feed. So if meat consumption were suddenly abolished, the harvests of grai ns and vegetables, for animals before, would be passed on to people, solving the problem of world hunger? Well, the causes of hunger are many vegetarian and can not - nor want - to ensure that food will reach the hungry, because it touches on political and economic issues that concern the desirability of the system of resource distribution in relation to interests of large corporations, oligarchs secular imperialist aspirations of some governments etc.. Moreover, vegetarianis m has a clear contribution to make in terms of productivity. Any project whose g oal is to combat hunger and implementation of a sustainable production system, w here land use is optimized to meet the needs of as many people as possible, must , necessarily, considering the emphasis on vegetarianismo.Veja by What: Sustainability and new paradigms In our culture, nature is seen as a large factory, as part of the whole producti on. It turns out that parts of this machine are breaking and there is no replace ment. Our model of civilization has advanced tremendously in the virtual world, but did not change the fundamentals of the energy revolution. Evolved in technic al and almost nothing on the ethical level. Just see all the terrible consequenc es of using the matrix based on the burning of fossil fuels. Polluted water, soi l and air, are committed to biodiversity, accumulated garbage, depleted forests and seas.€We follow a pattern of land use invented in the Neolithic period and w hose viability was questionable since 500 years ago when we were about half a bi llion people living on the planet. Since then, the population grew 13 times and the system remains the same - use soil to exhaustion, we abandoned the scorched earth and, without hesitation, began operating a new space. Moral: if we continu e with casts from the perspective of the capitalist market, is a strong chance o f the planet to collapse irreversibly in two or three decades. For the first tim e human society as a whole, realizes the predicament in which they got, and was forced to rethink - and reinvent! - The unsustainable pattern of consumption tha t capitalism imposes large firms massively. If, indeed, fall to the ridiculous s tatement by the consumption of this alienation, humanity will gain. There will b e possibility to change also, by extension, the dirty game of concentration of i

ncome and social exclusion. And to strengthen our positive relationship with oth er living beings and the planet. 50% of cereals and 35% in world fisheries catch feed animals in the countries of the northern hemisphere Conclusion It must be clear that this guide is not intended to imply that consumption of me at is the only or even the principal cause of environmental ills that mankind ha s caused to the planet. But it certainly is a major, and we want to emphasize he re is that this factor is concerned, solely at the discretion of each um.Talvez you can not live outside a big city, or spend more to eat organic foods, nor hav e alternative to get to work on public transport. But the decision to include me at in your daily menu is within reach and, ultimately, is up to you. • Most of the grain grown worldwide is used to feed livestock. Even after these animals were to feed all the people - and this is not the case - does not justif y such a waste: it takes about 11-17 calories of grain protein to create a singl e calorie of beef protein (the fish meat, chicken or pork offers no great variat ion in these values). • As a vegetarian diet eliminates a middleman - or more the food chain, it is fair to say that the grain is used more efficiently when c onsumed directly by humans. 20 • To get an idea of the size of waste, an example: a pet cat American consumes, on average, more grains per day, indirectly, than a human eats daily in Asia, Af rica or Latin America. • A negligible fraction - 0.3% - from 465 million tons of grain used for animal feed would be enough to save the six million malnourished children under five who die every year. A portion of 2.5% of this total would b e enough to eradicate hunger in Brazil. With 50%, gives to end world hunger. 21 What you can do today to fight by land, air, water and preservation of biomes is linked to the fate of humanity Its position and adopt attitudes that perpetuates the different levels of action : micro (individual), meso (local) and macro (global). SOURCES OF RESEARCH: In the personal: changing patterns of consumo.A carnivorous diet, especially in large scale, has proven insustentável.Ao eliminate the consumption of meat you d ecrease at the same time, waste water, vegetable proteins, deforestation, desert ification The extinction of species, habitat destruction and even entire biomes. In fall, it helps to reduce the herd and its emission of methane - potent green house agent. Taken alone, the gesture has no individual results measurable objec tive, but when it is a stance adopted by many people, objectively affects the co nditions of the planet. At local level: we can attend events and collective move ments, a presence at public demonstrations and petitions, denouncing environmental insu lts etc.Assim will be one more voice to swell the stream of those who want chang e. In Brazil: Cetesb; IBGE; Akatu Institute, Instituto Cepa; Instituto Nina Rosa In stitute Peabiru; Institute for Amazonian Research (INPA), Socio-Environmental In stitute, Brazil NGO Reporter, Report to the UNESCO World Water Forum; Sabesp; WW F Brazil. Abroad: Conservation International, David Suzuki Foundation, Environme ntal Justice Foundation, FAO / UN - Food and Agriculture Organization of the Uni ted Nations, the Federation of Salmon-Atlantic, Greenpeace, Oxfam International; Report Our Food Our World - The Realities of an Animal-Based Diet€Save the Eart

h Foundation, Worldwatch Institute. Documentary: Deep Trouble, BBC. Books: Anima l Friend: Reflections on interdisciplinary education and the environment, ethics , diet, health, paradigms, the Paula Brügger; Ecology: Taking Care of Life and t he Integrity of Creation, the CESEP; Basics of Vegetarianism, Marly Winckler. Ar ticle: Have you ever eaten the Amazon today?, João Meirelles Filho. On a global level: we collaborate to join environmental groups and organizations that promote vegetarianism, to elect to the spheres of government representativ es who are committed to the conservation of ecosystems; to fight for the protect ion of environmental reserves that already exist and creating new areas . But no t everything that is capable of changing the rules of the game. The meat produce r does not pay the water it uses, nor the abundant effluent (water containing ch emical and organic debris) it generates. The price of meat to the final consumer are not counted those costs, nor the environmental damage caused by livestock. These costs, and many others have enumerated these pages, are subsidized by the government. In other words, we taxpayers pay for the livestock sector enjoy lucr os.Assim, before anything else, so that the meat industry to stop growing, it ha s to stop being a good deal! For this, the environmental costs preciasam be take n into account - and the consumer must be aware of their market power. "Everyone shares responsibility for the present and future well-being of the hum an family and all living beings." Earth Charter ORGANIZATION: Brazilian Vegetarian Society (SVB) www.svb.org.br Environment Department Since there is no profit and the source is mentioned, not only allowed to encour age the dissemination and reproduction in any medium, excerpts or whole of this publication without prior authorization. 22 w w w. v s b. r g. b r F l i e - s and. P l a s p e s a s s o. Pe l o s a n i m a i s. Pe l p l a n e t a.