CDL Core Files 2014/2015

Aquaculture Case
NEG
NEG

Index

Aquaculture Negative
Aquaculture Negative

1NC Frontline: Inherency [1/1]..............................................................................................32

1NC Frontline: Harms Environment [1/1]..........................................................................33
1NC Frontline: Harms Economy [1/3]................................................................................34
1NC Frontline: Harms Economy [2/3]...............................................................................35
1NC Frontline: Harms Economy [2/3]...............................................................................36
1NC Frontline: Solvency [1/1]................................................................................................37
2NC / 1NR Extension: Inherency [1/1]..................................................................................38
2NC / 1NR Extension: Harms Environment #1 [1/1].........................................................39
2NC / 1NR Extension: Harms Environment #2 [1/1]........................................................40
2NC / 1NR Extension: Harms Economy #1 [1/1]................................................................41
2NC / 1NR Extension: Harms Economy #2 [1/1]...............................................................42
2NC / 1NR Extension: Harms Economy #3 [1/1]...............................................................43
2NC / 1NR Extension: Solvency [1/1]....................................................................................44

CDL Core Files 2014/2015

Aquaculture Case
NEG

1NC Frontlines

1NC Frontline: Inherency [1/1]

1. There affirmatives not inherent Obama has significantly expanded sustainable
aquaculture.
Luening 2013
[Erich. Obamas First Term Aquaculture Successes 1/2/13 http://marthasvineyard.patch.com/groups/erichluenings-blog/p/bp--obamas-first-term-aquaculture-successes]

With the Obama Inauguration for a second term in January, a look at the aquaculture policy successes of the
first four years of the administration shows significant momentum in establishing new policies for the industry
among other positive developments. Under the first Barack Obama presidency the first National Aquaculture
Policy (NAP) was adopted, along with the coordination of aquaculture and other marine stakeholders under the
presidents National Ocean Councils (NOC) Draft Implementation Plan, indicating a serious effort to push the
domestic seafood farming sector forward, say aquaculture policy makers and industry members. Aquaculture
professionals say there has been a change in how aquaculture is perceived at least on the policy level over the
last four years. I can see that starting to happen slowly now, said Sebastian Belle of Maine Aquaculture
Association, at the December Northeastern Aquaculture Conference and Expo. NAP was the most significant
and most headlined aquaculture development under Obamas first term, Dr. Michael Rubino, the Director of
Aquaculture at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOAA, told Aquaculture North America
but there were other accomplishments made on-the-ground that were important as well. There was a fair
number of the sort of nots in bolts things that happened too, he said. Certainly when Jane Lubchenco was
appointed as NOAA director they asked us to look at everything we are doing, stakeholders and all, on
aquaculture. The NOAA went around the country and got input at several public meetings as well. The
federal government hadnt done that in 10 years, and we got a broad economic view. NOAA policy was
addressed on the kind of things we do as far as marine stewardship and engagement, Rubino said. Going back
40 years, there have been several commissions, all the way up to the establishment of the National Oceans
Council in 2004, and others in between. They all have had aquaculture components, all saying the same thing.
Aquaculture has to be done sustainably, with trade policy and good science behind it. Its fair to say that the
adoption of the NAP came out of all of those commissions over the years enhanced by the efforts under
Lubchenco to get NOAA officials out to different regions of the country to add their voices and interests to the
dialogue around framing the new policy. In the summer of 2011, the United States National Aquaculture Policy
was announced, making headlines as the first of its kind in a country that has 95,471 statute miles of tidal
shoreline and 200 nautical miles from those coasts out to sea as part of the Exclusive Economic Zone,
according to NOAA. The new aquaculture policy and its components, which reflect the public comments
received after draft policies were released on February 9, focus on: encouraging and fostering sustainable
aquaculture that increases the value of domestic aquaculture production and creates American business, jobs,
and trade opportunities; making timely management decisions based on the best scientific information
available; advancing sustainable aquaculture science; ensuring aquaculture decisions protect wild species
and healthy coastal and ocean ecosystems; developing sustainable aquaculture compatible with other uses;
working with partners domestically and internationally; and, promoting a level playing field for U.S.
aquaculture businesses engaged in international trade, working to remove foreign trade barriers, and enforcing
our rights under U.S. trade agreements.

2. Inherency is a voting issue because its a stock issue that the affirmative must
meet, and because if the status quo includes the plan then the negative is unable to
argue in favor of no change.

CDL Core Files 2014/2015

Aquaculture Case
NEG

1NC Frontlines

1NC Frontline: Harms Environment [1/1]

1. Aquaculture cannot be reformed to help the environment it just makes the
problem worse
Naylor 2006
[Rosamond. Fellow at the Center for Environmental Science and Policy. Environmental Safeguards for Open-Ocean
Aquaculture 2006 http://issues.org/22-3/naylor/ ]

Opening far-offshore waters to aquaculture could lead to substantial commercial benefits, but it also
poses significant ecological risks to the oceana place many U.S. citizens consider to be our last frontier.
Some of the species now farmed in open-ocean cages, such as bluefin tuna, Atlantic cod, and Atlantic
halibut, are becoming increasingly depleted in the wild. Proponents of offshore aquaculture often claim
that the expansion of farming into federal waters far from shore will help protect or even revive wild
populations. However, there are serious ecological risks associated with farming fish in marine waters
that could make this claim untenable. The ecological effects of marine aquaculture have been well
documented, particularly for near-shore systems, and are summarized in the 2005 volumes of the Annual
Review of Environment and Resources, Frontiers in Ecology (February), and BioScience (May). They
include the escape of farmed fish from ocean cages, which can have detrimental effects on wild fish
populations through competition and interbreeding; the spread of parasites and diseases between wild
and farmed fish; nutrient and chemical effluent discharge from farms, which pollutes the marine
environment; and the use of wild pelagic fish for feeds, which can diminish or deplete the low end of the
marine food web in certain locations. Because offshore aquaculture is still largely in the experimental
phase, its ecological effects have not been widely documented, yet the potential risks are clear. The most
obvious ecological risk of offshore aquaculture results from its use of wild fish in feeds, because most of
the species being raised in open-ocean systems are carnivorous. If offshore aquaculture continues to focus
on the production of species that require substantial quantities of wild fish for feeda likely scenario
because many carnivorous fish command high market pricesthe food web effects on ecosystems that are
vastly separated in space could be significant.

2. Marine ecosystems are naturally resilient

Kennedy 2002

[Victor. PhD in Environmental Science. Coastal and Marine Ecosystems and Global Climate Change Pew Center on
Global Climate Change, Available Online: http://www.c2es.org/docUploads/marine_ecosystems.pdf]

There is evidence that marine organisms and ecosystems are resilient to environmental change. Steele
(1991) hypothesized that the biological components of marine systems are tightly coupled to physical
factors, allowing them to respond quickly to rapid environmental change and thus rendering them
ecologically adaptable. Some species also have wide genetic variability throughout their range, which may
allow for adaptation to climate change.

CDL Core Files 2014/2015

Aquaculture Case
NEG

1NC Frontlines

1NC Frontline: Harms Economy [1/3]

1. Aquaculture is economically-sustainable in the status quo
Plumer 2014
[Bradley. How the US Stopped its Fisheries from Collapsing 5/8/14 http://www.vox.com/2014/5/8/5669120/howthe-us-stopped-its-fisheries-from-collapsing]

We hear a lot of grim stories about overfishing and the decline of fisheries around the world. Bluefin tuna
is vanishing. Chilean sea bass is dwindling. Pretty soon, it sometimes seems like, all that'll be left is the
jellyfish. So it's worth highlighting a country that has actually done a lot to curtail overfishing and rebuild
its fisheries in the past decade the United States. Back in the 1980s and 20090s, many fisheries in the
US were in serious trouble. Fish populations were dropping sharply. Some of New England's best-known
groundfish stocks including flounder, cod, and haddock had collapsed, costing the region's coastal
communities hundreds of millions of dollars. But the picture has improved considerably in the last
decade, thanks in part to stricter fishing regulations. Last week, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) released its annual fisheries update for 2013 and the news was encouraging.
Yes, progress has been uneven. About one-fifth of assessed stocks are still overfished. But on the whole,
US fisheries are steadily recovering.

2. Reject their Corbin evidence. Seafood imports make up a very small part of the
economy and are self-evidently less important than things like the deficit, housing
prices and the unemployment rate. Their author is the President of Aquaculture
Planning and Advocacy LLC he has a clear incentive to inflate the importance of
aquaculture.

CDL Core Files 2014/2015

Aquaculture Case
NEG

1NC Frontlines

1NC Frontline: Harms Economy [2/3]

3. The United States is not key to the global economy other nations matter more
Keane 2014
[Tom Keane writes regularly for the Globe. He was a Boston city councilor from 1994 to 1999. World economy no
longer hangs on the US. 4/13/14. http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/04/12/world-economy-longerhangs/GRC0rfo0QP2YT5q4qpFw8L/story.html ]

When the United States sneezes, the world catches a cold. And when America recovers, the planet has a
spring in its step. Or so it used to be. For decades, that metaphor had seemed an accurate description of
the global economy. The old USSR may have once shared superpower status with the United States, but
that was a function of nuclear weapons, a well-armed military, and a bombastic attitude. When it came to
economic matters, however, there had been at least since World War IIs end only one true
superpower. If that superpower was doing well, its success lifted the rest of the world. If it hit a recession,
the world would suffer. That shouldnt surprise. The United States had by far the biggest slice of the global
pie. If Americans werent buying, then no one else was selling. In 2008, the United States did more than
sneeze. As the Great Recession unfolded and financial markets threatened collapse, it appeared to some
that a near-fatal illness had struck the country. And sure enough, the rest of the world had it tough, too.
Global economic growth fell. Some countries notably China continued to perform well, but most
everyone else was hit hard. Now, however, it appears that America is getting back on its feet, its economy
about to surge. Granted, weve heard this story before. The recession officially ended in June 2009,
according the National Bureau of Economic Research. But growth since then has been anemic, with
stubbornly high unemployment, tepid job creation, and largely flat incomes. But really! 2014
promises to be different. The March jobs report, for example, showed 192,000 new positions created. The
US economy seems to be emerging from its winter doldrums, shaking off government shutdowns,
sequestration, and tax hikes. Economists from all over the spectrum increasingly agree that this year
should be a good year. So now that the United States appears poised to bounce back, does the world
bounce back as well? The International Monetary Fund says yes it expects the US revival to translate
to global revival. The funds World Economic Outlook, just released this month, figures worldwide
economic activity will grow in 2014 by 3.6 percent (up from 2013s 3.0 percent) and in 2015 by 3.9
percent. Much of the impetus for that, the IMF says, is coming from advanced economies namely,
the United States. So the metaphor still holds. We matter. We really do matter. But perhaps not as much
as we once did. The US economy is big, but relatively speaking, not as big as it once was. Thirty years
ago, America accounted for one-quarter of world output. Today its down to one-fifth. Thats a meaningful
change. Back then we were rich, and everyone else was much less so. Now those countries especially
China have gotten better off. (In fact, China, with a 15 percent share of global output, is now the second
biggest economy in the world.)

CDL Core Files 2014/2015

Aquaculture Case
NEG

1NC Frontlines

1NC Frontline: Harms Economy [2/3]

4. Economic decline doesnt result in conflict
Brandt and Ulfelder 2011
[Patrick T. Brandt, Ph.D. in Political Science from Indiana University, is an Assistant Professor of Political Science in
the School of Social Science at the University of Texas at Dallas. **Jay Ulfelder, Ph.D. in political science from
Stanford University, is an American political scientist whose research interests include democratization, civil unrest,
and violent conflict, April, 2011, Economic Growth and Political Instability, Social Science Research Network]

These statements anticipating political fallout from the global economic crisis of 20082010 reflect a
widely held view that economic growth has rapid and profound effects on countries political stability.
When economies grow at a healthy clip, citizens are presumed to be too busy and too content to engage in
protest or rebellion, and governments are thought to be flush with revenues they can use to enhance their
own stability by producing public goods or rewarding cronies, depending on the type of regime they
inhabit. When growth slows, however, citizens and cronies alike are presumed to grow frustrated with
their governments, and the leaders at the receiving end of that frustration are thought to lack the financial
resources to respond effectively. The expected result is an increase in the risks of social unrest, civil war,
coup attempts, and regime breakdown. Although it is pervasive, the assumption that countries economic
growth rates strongly affect their political stability has not been subjected to a great deal of careful
empirical analysis, and evidence from social science research to date does not unambiguously support it.
Theoretical models of civil wars, coups detat, and transitions to and from democracy often specify slow
economic growth as an important cause or catalyst of those events, but empirical studies on the effects of
economic growth on these phenomena have produced mixed results. Meanwhile, the effects of economic
growth on the occurrence or incidence of social unrest seem to have hardly been studied in recent years,
as empirical analysis of contentious collective action has concentrated on political opportunity structures
and dynamics of protest and repression. This paper helps fill that gap by rigorously re-examining the
effects of short-term variations in economic growth on the occurrence of several forms of political
instability in countries worldwide over the past few decades. In this paper, we do not seek to develop and
test new theories of political instability. Instead, we aim to subject a hypothesis common to many prior
theories of political instability to more careful empirical scrutiny. The goal is to provide a detailed
empirical characterization of the relationship between economic growth and political instability in a broad
sense. In effect, we describe the conventional wisdom as seen in the data. We do so with statistical models
that use smoothing splines and multiple lags to allow for nonlinear and dynamic effects from economic
growth on political stability. We also do so with an instrumented measure of growth that explicitly
accounts for endogeneity in the relationship between political instability and economic growth. To our
knowledge, ours is the first statistical study of this relationship to simultaneously address the possibility
of nonlinearity and problems of endogeneity. As such, we believe this paper offers what is probably the
most rigorous general evaluation of this argument to date. As the results show, some of our findings are
surprising. Consistent with conventional assumptions, we find that social unrest and civil violence are
more likely to occur and democratic regimes are more susceptible to coup attempts around periods of
slow economic growth. At the same time, our analysis shows no significant relationship between variation
in growth and the risk of civil-war onset, and results from our analysis of regime changes contradict the
widely accepted claim that economic crises cause transitions from autocracy to democracy. While we
would hardly pretend to have the last word on any of these relationships, our findings do suggest that the
relationship between economic growth and political stability is neither as uniform nor as strong as the
conventional wisdom(s) presume(s). We think these findings also help explain why the global recession of
20082010 has failed thus far to produce the wave of coups and regime failures that some observers had
anticipated, in spite of the expected and apparent uptick in social unrest associated with the crisis.

CDL Core Files 2014/2015

Aquaculture Case
NEG

1NC Frontlines

1NC Frontline: Solvency [1/1]

1. There are too many barriers to sustainable aquaculture the plan doesnt
overcome these hurdles
Klinger and Naylor 2012
[Dane and Rosamond. PhD Student and Professor, respectively, at Stanfords Program for Environmental Science.
Searching for Solutions in Aquaculture: Charting a Sustainable Course 2012
http://woods.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/files/searching%20for%20solutions%20in%20aquaculture.pdf]

Nonetheless, offshore aquaculture systems also present significant social, economic, and ecological
challenges. Land-based aquaculture is typically located on private land, but marine aquaculture is often
located in public coastal waters, creating use conflicts and equity issues with other public and private
users, including the privatization of historical commons (129131). The analyses of profitability of
offshore aquaculture under present conditions are mixed (127, 132135). Offshore operations are capital
intensive and have high production costs, which must be recouped in productivity or price increases if
operations are to be economically viable (120, 122, 126). Investment is currently stymied by regulatory
and operational uncertainties, including permitting, structural engineering, remote feeding tools,
mortality retrieval systems, and communications and monitoring systems that allow operations to
function offshore (120, 121, 131).

CDL Core Files 2014/2015

Affirmative
Topicality
AFF
AFF

2AC Topicality Frontline: Coral Reefs

2NC / 1NR Extension: Inherency [1/1]

1. The plan is not inherent the United States has sufficient aquaculture
regulations in the status quo. Obama has adopted the National Aquaculture Plan,
which is focused on the environmental impact and sustainable practices related to
aquaculture. Thats our 1NC Luening evidence.
2. The plans not a necessary change from the status quo the United States is a
global leader in sustainable aquaculture practices
Conathan and Kroh 2012
[Michael and Kiley. Director of Ocean Policy and Associate Director for Ocean Communications at the Center for
American Progress. The Foundations of a Blue Economy; CAP Launches New Project Promoting Sustainable Ocean
Industries, 6/27/12 http://americanprogress.org/issues/green/report/2012/06/27/11794/the-foundations-of-ablue-economy/]

Aquaculture, or fish farming, is increasingly playing a greater role in putting fish on our plates. Fully half
the fish imported in 2010 was a farmed product. Given the escalating dietary needs of a booming world
population, aquaculture will have to be a part of the future of fish. Yet aquaculture, which can be carried
out either in the ocean or at land-based fresh or salt water facilities, comes with its own set of
environmental concerns, including high concentrations of waste, the need to catch wild fish to feed
farmed fish, and potential for corruption of wild populations gene pools. But in this sector, too, the
United States has far more stringent environmental and human health regulations than virtually any of
our trade partners.

CDL Core Files 2014/2015

Affirmative
Topicality
AFF
AFF

2AC Topicality Frontline: Coral Reefs

2NC / 1NR Extension: Harms Environment #1 [1/1]

( ) Expansion of marine aquaculture has significant ecological risks
Naylor 2006
[Rosamond. Fellow at the Center for Environmental Science and Policy. Environmental Safeguards for Open-Ocean
Aquaculture 2006 http://issues.org/22-3/naylor/ ]

An essential question in the debate thus remains: What is the vision of the Department of Commerce in
developing offshore aquaculture? If the vision is to expand offshore production to a scale sufficient to
eliminate the $8 billion seafood deficit, the ecological risks will be extremely high.

( ) Scaling up aquaculture will magnify environmental harms

Strasser 2014

[Annie. Senior Editor of ThinkProgress. The New, Innovative and More Efficient Way of Feeding People 4/21/14
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/04/21/3422486/big-ag-takes-to-the-ocean/]

There are complications and concerns with scaling up aquaculture, however. In some ways, its just like
agriculture: Big Ag may supply us with affordable food, but that can be done by cutting corners or taking a
serious toll on the environment. The same could be true for whats happening in fish farming now, and
some of the same big players are even involved in the industry. Christy Walton, the billionaire of WalMart
fame, is deeply involved in the aquaculture game, pouring money into a group called Cuna Del Mar, where
her son works, that invests in aquaculture projects around the globe. Peter Drucker, a famous
management consultant credited with helping to invent the modern corporation, once said, Aquaculture,
not the Internet, represents the most promising investment opportunity of the 21st century.

( ) The link only goes one way the plan does cause environmental damage, but
cannot help the ocean because no one will model it anyway
Plumer 2014
[Bradley. How the US Stopped its Fisheries from Collapsing 5/8/14 http://www.vox.com/2014/5/8/5669120/howthe-us-stopped-its-fisheries-from-collapsing]

By contrast, more than 80 percent of the world's fish are caught in the rest of the world, in places like Asia
and Africa where rules are often less strict. The data here is fairly patchy, but the paper notes that many
of these nations are less likely to follow the UN's Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, and there's
evidence that "serious depletions" may be occurring there: [Graph Omitted] 1-s2.0s0025326x13003044-gr2 Correlation of compliance with the FAO (UN) Code of Conduct for Responsible
Fisheries (on a scale of zero to ten) with the UN Human Development Index for 53 countries, representing
95% of the world fish catch. "It all depends where you look," Pitcher told me in an interview last year.
"There are a few places where fisheries are doing better: The US, Australia, Canada, Norway. But those are
relatively rare. In most places, the evidence suggests that things are getting worse." In theory, other
countries could try to adopt similar measures: catch limits, better planning, rules against illegal fishing.
One problem? Doing proper fish assessments is expensive and difficult the United States doesn't even
do it for all its stocks yet. And, for now, those practices haven't yet spread everywhere.

CDL Core Files 2014/2015

Affirmative
Topicality
AFF
AFF

2AC Topicality Frontline: Coral Reefs

2NC / 1NR Extension: Harms Environment #2 [1/1]

Their fear of environmental damage is overblown policymakers have been
concerned about damaging the environment for decades, but we havent seen an
impact.
Kaleita 2007
[Amy Kaleita is an Environmental Studies Fellow and Assistant Professor of agricultural and biosystems engineering
at Iowa State University. She holds a PhD in agricultural engineering from the University of Illinois. "Hysteria's
History: Environmental Alarmism in Context," Pacific Research Institute,
http://www.pacificresearch.org/docLib/20070920_Hysteria_History.pdf]

Apocalyptic stories about the irreparable, catastrophic damage that humans are doing to the natural
environment have been around for a long time. These hysterics often have some basis in reality, but are
blown up to illogical and ridiculous proportions. Part of the reason theyre so appealing is that they have
the ring of plausibility along with the intrigue of a horror flick. In many cases, the alarmists identify a
legitimate issue, take the possible consequences to an extreme, and advocate action on the basis of these
extreme projections. In 1972, the editor of the journal Nature pointed out the problem with the typical
alarmist approach: [Alarmists] most common error is to suppose that the worst will always happen.82
But of course, if the worst always happened, the human race would have died out long ago. When
alarmism has a basis in reality, the challenge becomes to take appropriate action based on that reality, not
on the hysteria. The aftermath of Silent Spring offers examples of both sorts of policy reactions: a reasoned response

to a legitimate problem and a knee-jerk response to the hysteria. On the positive side, Silent Spring brought an end
to the general belief that all synthetic chemicals in use for purposes ranging from insect control to household cleaning
were uniformly wonderful, and it ushered in an age of increased caution on their appropriate use. In the second
chapter of her famous book, Carson wrote, It is not my contention that chemical insecticides must never be used. I
do contend that we have allowed these chemicals to be used with little or no advance investigation of their effect on
soil, water, wildlife, and man himself. Indeed, Carson seemed to advocate reasoned response to rigorous scientific
investigation, and in fact this did become the modern approach to environmental chemical licensure and monitoring.
An hour-long CBS documentary on pesticides was aired during the height of the furor over Silent Spring. In the
documentary, Dr. Page Nicholson, a water-pollution expert with the Public Health Service, wasnt able to answer how
long pesticides persist in water once they enter it, or the extent to which pesticides contaminate groundwater
supplies. Today, this sort of information is gathered through routine testing of chemicals for use in the environment.
Ironically, rigorous investigation was not used in the decision to ban DDT, primarily due to the hysteria Silent Spring
generated. In this example, the hysteria took on a life of its own, even trumping the authors original intent. There
was, as we have seen, a more sinister and tragic response to the hysteria generated by Silent Spring. Certain
developing countries, under significant pressure from the United States, abandoned the use of DDT. This decision
resulted in millions of deaths from malaria and other insect-borne diseases. In the absence of pressure to abandon the
use of DDT, these lives would have been spared. It would certainly have been possible to design policies requiring
caution and safe practices in the use of supplemental chemicals in the environment, without pronouncing a death
sentence on millions of people. A major challenge in developing appropriate responses to legitimate problems is that
alarmism catches peoples attention and draws them in. Alarmism is given more weight than it deserves, as policy
makers attempt to appease their constituency and the media. It polarizes the debaters into groups of believers and
skeptics, so that reasoned, fact-based compromise is difficult to achieve. Neither of these aspects of alarmism is
healthy for the development of appropriate policy. Further, alarmist responses to valid problems risk foreclosing
potentially useful responses based on ingenuity and progress. There are many examples from the energy sector where,
in the presence of economic, efficiency, or societal demands, the marketplace has responded by developing better
alternatives. That is not to say that we should blissfully squander our energy resources; on the contrary, we should be
careful to utilize them wisely. But energy-resource hysteria should not lead us to circumvent scientific advancement
by cherry-picking and favoring one particular replacement technology at the expense of other promising technologies.

Environmental alarmism should be taken for what it isa natural tendency of some portion of the
public to latch onto the worst, and most unlikely, potential outcome . Alarmism should not be used as the
basis for policy. Where a real problem exists, solutions should be based on reality, not hysteria.

CDL Core Files 2014/2015

Affirmative
Topicality
AFF
AFF

2AC Topicality Frontline: Coral Reefs

2NC / 1NR Extension: Harms Economy #1 [1/1]

Fisheries are recovering in the status quo the plan is not key to solve the
domestic seafood industry
Hilborn 2010
[Ray. Prof of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences at University of Washington. Apocalypse Forestalled: Why all the Worlds
Fisheries Arent Collapsing 2010 http://www.atsea.org/doc/Hilborn%202010%20Science%20Chronicles%20201011-1.pdf]

If you have paid any attention to the conservation literature or science journalism over the last five years,
you likely have gotten the impression that our oceans are so poorly managed that they soon will be empty
of fish unless governments order drastic curtailment of current fishing practices, including the
establishment of huge no-take zones across great swaths of the oceans. To be fair, there are some places
where such severe declines may be true. A more balanced diagnosis, however, tells a different story one
that still requires changes in some fishing practices, but that is far from alarmist. But this balanced
diagnosis is being almost wholly ignored in favor of an apocalyptic rhetoric that obscures the true issues
fisheries face as well as the correct cures for those problems.

CDL Core Files 2014/2015

Affirmative
Topicality
AFF
AFF

2AC Topicality Frontline: Coral Reefs

2NC / 1NR Extension: Harms Economy #2 [1/1]

The United States is not key to the global economy China matters much more.
Rushton 2014
[Katharine. Economics for the Telegraph. China overtakes US to become worlds biggest goods trading nation The
Telegraph (UK), 1/10/14. Available via Lexis-Nexis]

America has finally lost its crown to China as the worlds biggest goods trading nation. China imported
and exported goods valued at $4.16 trillion (2.5 trillion) last year, marking a 7.6pc rise on 2012,
according to new figures. America will not release the equivalent numbers until February but it is highly
unlikely to stay ahead of China. During the first 11 months of 2013, it traded $3.57 trillion of goods. The
US remains the biggest overall trading nation in the world, thanks to heavy exports of services, but
Fridays data demonstrate a shift in the balance of economic might between the two superpowers. Zheng
Yuesheng, chief statistician of Chinas customs administration, said: This is a landmark milestone for our
nations foreign trade development. Kamel Mellahi, professor of strategic management at Warwick
Business School, who focuses on emerging markets, said that China is set to maintain its new lead. Its
always been a matter of time until China surpasses the US ... and there are good reasons to believe that
China is likely to retain this pole position for the foreseeable future. The trade figures look very healthy
and the factors underpinning them are structurally sustainable. It is hard to see them being reversed
significantly, at least in the short to medium term.

CDL Core Files 2014/2015

Affirmative
Topicality
AFF
AFF

2AC Topicality Frontline: Coral Reefs

2NC / 1NR Extension: Harms Economy #3 [1/1]

Economic contractions do not result in war the statistical evidence strongly
concludes negative
Drezner 2012
[Daniel is a professor in the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts. The Irony of Global Economic
Governance: The System Worked, October 2012, http://www.globaleconomicgovernance.org/wpcontent/uploads/IR-Colloquium-MT12-Week-5_The-Irony-of-Global-Economic-Governance.pdf]

The final outcome addresses a dog that hasnt barked: the effect of the Great Recession on cross-border
conflict and violence. During the initial stages of the crisis, multiple analysts asserted that the financial
crisis would lead states to increase their use of force as a tool for staying in power.37 Whether through
greater internal repression, diversionary wars, arms races, or a ratcheting up of great power conflict, there
were genuine concerns that the global economic downturn would lead to an increase in conflict. Violence
in the Middle East, border disputes in the South China Sea, and even the disruptions of the Occupy
movement fuel impressions of surge in global public disorder. The aggregate data suggests otherwise,
however. The Institute for Economics and Peace has constructed a Global Peace Index annually since
2007. A key conclusion they draw from the 2012 report is that The average level of peacefulness in 2012
is approximately the same as it was in 2007.38 Interstate violence in particular has declined since the
start of the financial crisis as have military expenditures in most sampled countries. Other studies
confirm that the Great Recession has not triggered any increase in violent conflict; the secular decline in
violence that started with the end of the Cold War has not been reversed.39 Rogers Brubaker concludes,
the crisis has not to date generated the surge in protectionist nationalism or ethnic exclusion that might
have been expected.40 None of these data suggest that the global economy is operating swimmingly.
Growth remains unbalanced and fragile, and has clearly slowed in 2012. Transnational capital flows
remain depressed compared to pre-crisis levels, primarily due to a drying up of cross-border interbank
lending in Europe. Currency volatility remains an ongoing concern. Compared to the aftermath of other
postwar recessions, growth in output, investment, and employment in the developed world have all lagged
behind. But the Great Recession is not like other postwar recessions in either scope or kind; expecting a
standard V-shaped recovery was unreasonable. One financial analyst characterized the post-2008 global
economy as in a state of contained depression.41 The key word is contained, however. Given the
severity, reach and depth of the 2008 financial crisis, the proper comparison is with Great Depression.
And by that standard, the outcome variables look impressive. As Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff
concluded in This Time is Different: that its macroeconomic outcome has been only the most severe
global recession since World War II and not even worse must be regarded as fortunate.42

CDL Core Files 2014/2015

Affirmative
Topicality
AFF
AFF

2AC Topicality Frontline: Coral Reefs

2NC / 1NR Extension: Solvency [1/1]

The agency consolidation for aquaculture mandated by the plan fails
Daniels and Browdy 2002

[Dr William, President of the U.S. Aquaculture Society. And Craig, President of World Aquaculture Society.
September 2002
http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/oceancommission/meetings/june13_14_02/answers/daniels_answers.pdf]

2) Is there a need to consolidate Federal responsibility for aquaculture under one agency and, if so, what
would be benefits?
At present, there are many varied aquaculture related activities, programs, authorities and jurisdictions
spread throughout numerous agencies in several government departments (primarily Agriculture,
Interior, and Commerce). There are many good programs included which can do much to contribute to
responsible development of marine aquaculture in the United States. Aquaculture is a diverse activity
involving many different parts of the federal government and as such consolidation under one agency
would likely not be in the best interest of the industry or the American people. Currently, by statute,
aquaculture coordination occurs in a unique body: the Joint Subcommittee on Aquaculture (JSA) chaired
by the Secretary of Agriculture. The JSA includes vice-chairs from Commerce and Interior and an
executive secretary. The JSA has effective national working groups and task forces addressing important
aquaculture issues. The JSA should be supported and strengthened with full-time staff to support national
aquaculture priorities. Central coordination could be significantly improved by designating a lead
individual or office in each department to coordinate the broad and diverse activities in this sector within
each department and to act as a liaison through the JSA between departments. This would improve
effectiveness and coordination while reducing redundancy to better coordinate national aquaculture
policy development and implementation. Again, thank you for allowing us to provide input into the
decision-making process. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.