Aquaculture Case Neg

Notes

1AC Flawz
Inherency: Ramsden evidence is all about how its super frustrating to get permits
but the plan text doesnt really resolve that.
Food: ADS evidence never says aquacultures, DeNoon is 8 years old, and Simmons
doesnt say fish are the brink which means the impact is inevitable
Economy: $9 Billion is not enough to cause economic collapse, lets be real. The
Johns evidence is about National Interest 30 years ago, and we dont need more
jobs.
Biodiversity: the biggest killer here is the alternative cause of climate change,
which means the impact is inevitable, plus through that Climate Change turn in
during the block and destroy it.
Solvency: Never specifies the plan, or what the legislation, plus aquaculture is
really bad and it doesnt matter if the USfg is key because there is a rad card in the
front line about how a global commission is all about saving the ocean, and not
about aquacultures at all, its that Global Bulletin ev

1NC

Inherency
Offshore aquaculture fosters negative economic benefits,
threatens status quo fisheries and decreases the ex-vessel
price for commercial harvesters.
Food & Water Watch 07 (Food & Water Watch is a nonprofit consumer
organization that works to ensure clean water and safe food. They challenge the
corporate control and abuse of our food and water resources by empowering people
to take action and by transforming the public consciousness about what we eat and
drink. Through research, public and policymaker education, media, and lobbying, we
advocate policies that guarantee safe, wholesome food produced in a humane and
sustainable manner and public, rather than private, control of water resources
including oceans, rivers, and groundwater, Charity Watch rates Food & Water Watch
an "A" grade, Offshore Aquaculture: Bad for the Gulf,
https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/common-resources/fish/fish-farming/gulf-ofmexico/offshore-aquaculture/, AO)
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has been promoting
offshore aquaculture growing fish in nets or cages between three and
200 miles from shore as the best way to increase U.S. seafood output.
Now, NOAA wants to establish this large-scale fish farming off the U.S. Gulf of Mexico coast. Since January 2007, the
Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, one of eight regional councils Congress established to help manage
U.S. fisheries, has been developing a plan to streamline the permitting and regulation of open water aquaculture.

Unfortunately, the Gulf Council draft Generic Offshore Aquaculture

Amendment fails to really consider, among other matters, the possible
negative economic consequences of ocean fish farming, also known as open ocean or
offshore aquaculture. The plan itself concedes that the increased supply
of aquaculture fish from the Gulf may tend to decrease the ex-vessel price
commercial harvesters receive for their catch if the increased supply does
not come on the market slowly, or if new markets for products are not
created, or if the demand for seafood does not increase. 1 Yet, there is little further
discussion of this issue. Based on experience elsewhere, the practice of offshore
aquaculture, combined with the influx of farmed fish imports, could
threaten the economic wellbeing of the Gulf active fishing industries. In 2006, the
commercial fisheries there landed more than half a billion dollars worth of seafood.2 And from 2004 to 2005, Gulf
recreational fishing pumped $5.6 billion, including expenditures on such items as hotels, food, and ice, into the

Rather than pressing forward with this plan, the U.S.

government would best serve the public interest by delaying any move
toward offshore aquaculture in the Gulf of Mexico until completion of
comprehensive, peer-reviewed economic and environmental studies
showing that it will not harm the economy or environment of the region.
regional economy.3

Food
Climate change, natural disasters, anthropogenic activities like
aquaculture, and lack of natural defense reduce capacity for
food security and increased damage to infrastructure, empirics
prove.
Dulvy et al 10 (Nicholas K. Dulvy and John D. Reynolds, Simon Fraser
University, Burnaby, Canada Graham M. Pilling, John K. Pinnegar and Joe Scutt
Phillips The Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science, Suffolk ,
UK Edward H. Allison and Marie-Caroline Badjeck The WorldFish Center, Penang,
Malaysia, PDF, THE ECONOMICS OF ADAPTING FISHERIES TO CLIMATE CHANGE,
OECD, Chapter 1: Fisheries management and governance challenges in a climate
change, Accessed via JSTOR, AO)
Sea level rise resulting from thermal expansion of the oceans and melting
ice caps and glaciers may inundate almost 1 million km2 of coastal land ,
dependent upon the climate projection (Liu, 2000). This may destroy coastal habitats by inundating them faster

Sea level
rise may reduce intertidal habitats, while the increased water column
depth will also alter hydrodynamic coastal processes, affecting shoreline
configuration and sedimentation patterns. This may be particularly severe in countries such
as Bangladesh, Guyana, and low-lying coral islands in the Pacific and Indian Oceans (Dickson, 1989). The
effects of sea level rise may be exacerbated by other anthropogenic
activities, such as coastal development and mangrove forest clearance. These
activities, which are done to support high export value shrimp farming in
Asia, are reducing coastal defences, biodiversity and food security
than the ability of accretion and plant colonisation to create wetland habitats (Daniels et al., 1993).

options of vulnerable countries and people

(Adger, 2000; Danielson et al., 2005). As a

result, new approaches to the design of aquaculture farms that utilise the protection provided by mangroves have

Sea level rise will interact with other climatic

changes including changes in storm surge heights, resulting from
increasingly strong winds and low pressure events, and increased
frequency and severity of storms, flooding and hurricanes or cyclones.
These events are likely to result in tragically increased loss of life among
fishermen, lost fishing days, damage to the fishing gears and boats of
coastal communities, and increased damage to infrastructure (Adger et al.,
2005b). For instance, during Hurricane Gilbert in 1988, Jamaican fisherfolk
lost 90% of their fish traps resulting in a huge loss of revenue and high
cost of repairs, as well as resulting in the inability to resume fishing
activities promptly after the disturbance (Aiken et al., 1992).
been developed to reduce these impacts.

Economy
Economic losses from disease outbreaks are devastating, no
overall gain.
Leung and Bates 13 (Tommy and Amanda, Centre for Behavioural and

Physiological Ecology, Zoology, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, 2351,

Australia ; 2Institute of Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, PO Box
49, Taroona, TAS, 7001, Australia, PDF, Journal of Applied Ecology, Accessed via
JSTOR, p. 215-222, AO)
The role of disease in limiting the aquaculture-based production of fish
and shellfish has not been considered in empirical calculations of regional
vulnerability to climate change (Handisyde et al. 2009). An important implication
of our findings is that the aquaculture industry will need to focus on
building the capacity to minimize and recover from pathogen-induced
loss, an issue of greatest priority in tropical regions. There are different management
approaches to minimizing vulnerabilities in aquaculture, such as investing in environmental monitoring

any management
framework should also take into account economic losses from disease
outbreak (Karim et al. 2012). While aquaculture is considered a viable means to
promote food security and improve socio-economic status of developing
countries (Godfray et al. 2010), lower latitudinal regions have also been identified
as being most vulnerable to the effects of climate change (Dulvy et al. 2011).
infrastructure and steering towards sustainable production (Bush et al. 2010). Even so,

Environmental change is expected to reduce available agricultural land and crop yield at lower latitudinal regions
(Schmidhuber & Tubiello 2007) in additional to the productivity of capture fisheries (Cheung et al. 2010).

Combined with the regions heavy dependency on fish protein (Allison et al.
2009; Dulvy et al. 2011) and the fact that 90% of the worlds aquaculture
production comes from developing countries (FAO 2012), our data present a
strong case for considering the potential impacts of disease outbreaks in
strategies to build infrastructure for food security in developing nations
as a global priority. Our results also suggest further directions for management consideration. For

instance, juvenile stages displayed higher levels of disease-induced mortality than adults (Table 1a). This may be
because the immune system of juveniles is not as fully developed compared with mature individuals. Additionally,
juvenile stages have fewer resources to draw from to mount an effective response to infection without
compromising other functions necessary for survival; thus, strategies to minimize mortality at juvenile stages will
be important. We also found a general trend of higher mortality and shorter outbreak duration in invertebrates
compared to finfish (Table 1). As invertebrates account for 35% of the worlds total aquaculture production by

research
contributing to building disease resilience in shrimp and shellfish culture
will be of primary importance to protecting food and socio-economic
security.
volume (FAO 2012), mostly from low latitudinal regions (particularly crustaceans) (FAO 2010),

Jobs high now

Mutikani 7/3 (Lucia, Journalists, Reuters, U.S. job growth surges,
unemployment rate near six-year low,
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/07/03/us-usa-economyidUSKBN0F80AW20140703, AO)
(Reuters) - U.S. employment growth jumped in June and the jobless rate
closed in on a six-year low, decisive evidence the economy was growing
briskly heading into the second half of the year. Nonfarm payrolls
increased by 288,000 jobs last month and the unemployment rate fell to

6.1 percent from 6.3 percent in May, the Labor Department said on Thursday. Data
for April and May were revised to show a total of 29,000 more jobs created than
previously reported. In addition, the ranks of the long-term unemployed
shrank and the share of Americans with a job hit its highest level since
August 2009. Job gains were widespread across sectors and there were
few signs of inflationary wage pressures. "It's a strong report, there is no
question about it. The labor market is improving at a seemingly stronger
rate than before, the slack is being absorbed, we are chipping away," said
Josh Feinman, chief global economist at Deutsche Asset & Wealth Management in
New York. Employment has now grown by more than 200,000 jobs in each
of the last five months, a stretch not seen since the technology boom in
the late 1990s. That added to signs a plunge in economic output in the first
quarter was a weather-driven anomaly. Job growth averaged 231,000 per
month in the first half of the year, the best start since 2006. U.S. stocks rose
on the data, with the Dow Jones industrial average .DJI closing above the 17,000
threshold for the first time. Prices for U.S. Treasuries fell and the U.S. dollar
advanced against a basket of currencies, as traders bet on an earlier interest rate
hike from the Federal Reserve. Rate futures moved to show a 58 percent probability
of an increase in June 2015, up from 51 percent. JPMorgan moved up its forecast for
a rate hike to the third quarter of next year from the fourth quarter, while Goldman
Sachs acknowledged it could come sooner than its call for the first quarter of 2016.
"With additional, similar reports in the coming months, we believe the timing of the
Fed policy turning point could be moved from late in 2015 to earlier in the year,"
said Doug Handler, chief U.S. economist at IHS Global Insight in Lexington,
Massachusetts.

Biodiversity
Alt Cause: Lionfish destroy coral reefs, 1AC cant solve.
Linendoll 13 (Katie, TV personality and tech contributor to Today Show and
CNN, CNN, Lionfish infestation in Atlantic Ocean a growing epidemic,
http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/18/tech/innovation/lionfish-infestation-atlanticlinendoll/, AO)

(CNN) -- The clear waters around Bermuda are as picturesque as you can imagine, and the brilliantly colored fish
swimming around are like something from a crayon box. But a serious problem lurks behind the beautiful facade:

Lionfish are not native to the Atlantic Ocean. The venomous, fast
reproducing fish are aggressive eaters and will consume anything and
everything, gorging so much they are actually getting liver disease. With
no known predators -- except human beings -- they can wipe out 90% of a
reef. "The lionfish invasion is probably the worst environmental disaster
the Atlantic will ever face," said Graham Maddocks, president and founder of Ocean Support
the lionfish.

Foundation, which works with the government and research agencies to help reduce the lionfish population in

While the problem is only beginning to escalate, many in the

marine preservation field are already concerned for the marine life that
surrounds the lionfish. Ecologist James Morris with the National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science said
Bermuda.

that while this may not be the worst epidemic the Atlantic Ocean has faced, it does have the makings of a disaster.

the lionfish has brought a "big change in biodiversity," and it is what

he called "the most abundant top-level predator on some coral reefs (in
the Atlantic)." Florida's lionfish invasion Lionfish destroying lobster industry Lionfish were first
recorded decades ago and their population has grown quickly. They
produce 30,000 to 40,000 eggs every few days and are sexually mature by
1 year old. Today, you can find them throughout the Amazon, the Bahamas, the Caribbean and in the waters
along North Carolina. Invasive species: Eat them before they eat everything As a non-indigenous
species, lionfish are especially dangerous to the ecosystem because fish in
the Atlantic lack a native instinct to stay away from them.
He said

Oceans in trouble now, aquaculture only furthers devastation.

Sanyal 6/26 (Debopom, Journalist at The Eastern Tribune, Oceans to collapse as
overfishing and pollution increase,
http://www.theeasterntribune.com/story/6251/collapse-of-ocean-nearing-asoverfishing-and-pollution-increases/#sthash.11ZRE24G.wuLZqGad.dpuf, AO)
NEW YORK: Oceans were facing the biggest threat in the world and requires
immediate action. According to the reports of the Global Ocean Commission (GOC), the Ocean
needs to be saved from the overfishing and pollution. However, the
committee also mentioned that the action required should be immediate
and should be implemented within five years. The committee said that Oceans are
in heave of danger due to the high seas fishing and pollution. The
committee that is comprised of many politicians said the energy
exploration in the high seas is also a dangerous practice and can cause
collapse of the ocean. United States, European Union, China and Japan and other six countries are

responsible for unregulated and illegal fishing in the high seas. The high seas is the area which is outside the area
of National Coastal Zone, and according to the GOC, it covers almost half of the globe. If reports are to be believed
then every year, some 10 million fishes are caught, worth around $16 million. David Miliband, former British
Foreign Secretary said, The

oceans are a failed state. A previously virgin area has

been turned into a plundered part of the planet. He also co-chairs the GOC. President
Barack Obama recently had taken some sincere steps to create the largest water sanctuary of the world. Jose Maria

Figueres, who also co-chairs the commission, said, The

Ocean provides 50 percent of our

oxygen and fixes 25 percent of global carbon emissions. Our food chain
begins in that 70 percent of the planet. Sensing the importance of the issue, the committee
is going to take all the measures so that the collapse of the Ocean can be restricted.

Solvency
Aquaculture furthers the destruction of the status quo global
commons, The Global Ocean Commission says no.
World Bulletin 6/24 (Leading news outlet, Report warns worlds oceans at

point of collapse, http://www.worldbulletin.net/news/139468/report-warns-worldsoceans-at-point-of-collapse, AO)

A new report by a group of former world leaders, including ex-prime minister Paul Martin, says fixing our
oceans will require unpopular, expensive changes. 64 per cent of the
ocean surface isnt under the control and protection of a national
government and The Global Ocean Commission has put forward a report on
the declining health of the planets high seas. The commission is a combination
of public and private sector figures, including former heads of state and ministers as well as business people,

supported by scientific and economic advisors working on ways to reverse

the degradation of the ocean and address the failures of high seas
governance. Former world leaders and ministers from countries around
the globe say that it is time to impose governance on the unclaimed high
seas because human activity has put the worlds oceans on a dangerous
trajectory of decline. The Global Ocean Commission that is made up of 18 prominent former politicians
and heads of major international organizations, is going to release a report Tuesday following 18 months of
investigation that calls for a five-year rescue package for the 64 per cent of the worlds oceans that lie outside
national jurisdiction. Former Prime Minister Paul Martin who represented Canada on the commission was asked to
be part of the initiative by commission co-chair Trevor Manuel, the former finance minister of South Africa. Mr.

it will not be easy to convince countries to

take steps that will cause short-term economic pain, but those steps are
necessary in the long term to protect regional stability, food security and
the integrity of the oceans which the report calls the kidney of the
planet. Inevitably, when you are dealing with the global commons, Mr.
Martin said, the right thing to do becomes in the economic interests of
everybody. In the report, a copy of which was obtained by The Globe and Mail, the
commissioners say overfishing, pollution, habitat destruction, acidification
and other human activities are pushing the ocean system to the point of
collapse which end up not meeting the needs of human beings that rely on
the oceans for clean air, climate stability, rain and fresh water, transport,
energy, food and livelihoods. There must also be accountability for the progress of ocean
remediation in the form of an oversight board made up of scientists and others, he said. Because, if you
dont measure it, if you dont keep score, it will fade from the public mind ,
Martin said in an interview on Monday that

Mr. Martin said. And Canada, he said, has a major role to play. There is one country that has the longest coastline
in the world and has a large responsibility for the health of the Arctic Ocean in particular, Mr. Martin said. If we
dont act on the oceans, then all of the riches that exist within the 200-mile limit are going to get frittered away.

Yes, there will be a cost to protecting the oceans, he said. But as with so
many of these things, the cost is infinitesimally small compared to what
the alternative is.

2NC Extensions

Inherency-2NC
1. Extend 1NC #1, our Food and Water Watch evidence
specifically warrants that the influx of farmed fish hurt status
quo fisheries ability to make a profit.

Food-2NC
1. 1AC cant solve food security, their Tripp evidence
specifically indicates that not just overfishing, but climate
change as well will contribute to global food insecurity, impact
becomes inevitable.
2. Extend 1NC #1, Dulvy warrants an occurrence in Asia, where
aquacultures independently negatively impacted biodiversity
as well as food safety options.
3. And, Aquacultures are often ravished by disease, high
mortality rates, means lower production rates, 1AC cant solve.
Leung and Bates 13 (Tommy and Amanda, Centre for Behavioural and
Physiological Ecology, Zoology, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, 2351,
Australia ; 2Institute of Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, PO Box
49, Taroona, TAS, 7001, Australia, PDF, Journal of Applied Ecology, Accessed via
JSTOR, p. 215-222, AO)
In spite of the expected issues with disease in aquaculture settings, the
underlying global patterns in disease outbreaks have not been identified.
However, in natural systems, the number of parasite or pathogen species
infecting each host species tends to be higher at the lower latitudes (Rohde &
Heap 1998; Guernier, Hochberg & Guegan 2004; Nunn et al. 2005), as well as reaching higher infection intensity

Infectious disease related

mortalities are also more likely to occur at lower latitudes where
relatively warmer climate promotes higher pathogen proliferation and
transmission rates (Robar, Burness & Murray 2010). Thus, the ecological literature
certainly suggests that similar patterns may be present in aquacultural
systems, but this has not been investigated perhaps due to the assumption that such patterns will be
mitigated by disease control measures. Establishing whether macroecological patterns
of infectious disease are present in farmed settings can contribute
valuable insights into the environmental drivers of diseases and
appropriate management procedures for outbreaks. For example, ecological
theories have facilitated the development and implementation of control
measures for human infectious diseases and public health policies (Smith et
(Calvete 2003; Benejam et al. 2009) and prevalence (Merino et al. 2008).

al. 2005).

Economy-2NC
1. Extend 1NC #1, Leung and Bates indicates that most
economic studies dont take fish disease mortality in to
account, this means no profit.
2. Extend 1NC #2, Mutikani specifically warrants that in the
status quo unemployment rates are at an all time low, 1AC
isnt needed.
3. Aquaculture doesnt increase jobs, empirics prove.
Food & Water Watch 07 (Food & Water Watch is a nonprofit consumer
organization that works to ensure clean water and safe food. They challenge the
corporate control and abuse of our food and water resources by empowering people
to take action and by transforming the public consciousness about what we eat and
drink. Through research, public and policymaker education, media, and lobbying, we
advocate policies that guarantee safe, wholesome food produced in a humane and
sustainable manner and public, rather than private, control of water resources
including oceans, rivers, and groundwater, Charity Watch rates Food & Water Watch
an "A" grade, Offshore Aquaculture: Bad for the Gulf,
https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/common-resources/fish/fish-farming/gulf-ofmexico/offshore-aquaculture/, AO)
Proponents of aquaculture often claim that it will lead to more jobs.
However, history and the facts do not necessarily support such
assertions. A 2003 study found that a 200 percent increase in salmon
production from fish farming in British Columbia would create few new
jobs. In the 1990s industry in the province tripled but added no new
jobs.24 Meanwhile, the salmon farming industry in Scotland and Norway
dramatically expanded production, but employment decreased due to
increased mechanization.25 Aquaculture Fish Biz Consolidates Does offshore
aquaculture benefit local communities? Although it is too soon to say,
some of the trends appear ominous. It does help a few foreign companies,
at least judging from the salmon farming industry. In 2001, 30 companies accounted for two-thirds of the

But that number has slowly dwindled to half a dozen or

so multinational companies, most of which are based in Europe .27 Unlike
world salmon and trout.26

salmon fishing enterprises, most of which consist of boats and permits owned by individuals who sell their catch to
processors or, in some cases, to niche markets the large salmon aquaculture enterprises consist of vertically
integrated feed, hatchery, grow-out (where the smolts are raised to maturity), distribution, and value-added

Economist Gunnar Knapp concluded that, unlike many

kinds of fishing, offshore aquaculture is not likely to develop as a small,
family-owned businesses. It would be a larger-scale, corporate activity. 29
Conclusion and Recommendations Gulf commercial and recreational fishing
communities support thousands of jobs and haul in billions of dollars in
revenue for the region. Offshore aquaculture is fraught with uncertainty
for that continued economic vibrancy. Given this, the U.S. government
should not promote offshore aquaculture that could threaten coastal
communities and the marine environment in the Gulf of Mexico, and
further research is needed on the issue before moving forward.
processing companies.28

Biodiversity-2NC
1. Extend 1NC #1, Linendoll 13 is extremely specific, 1AC has
no way of dealing with lionfish, their destruction of the coral
reef outweighs any potential benefit of the plan.
2. Extend 1NC #2, Oceans are in trouble now, add in the fact
that freshwater and marine aquaculture areas are pollution hot
spots, and its try or dive for the ocean. Sanyal is specific,
biggest impact in the debate.
Cao et al 07 (Ling, Weimin Wang1**, Yi Yang 2, Chengtai Yang 1, Zonghui
Yuan3, Shanbo Xiong4 and James Diana, College of Fisheries, Key Lab of Agricultural
Animal Genetics, Breeding and Reproduction of Ministry of Education, Huazhong
Agricultural University, Wuhan, Hubei 430070, China 2 Aquaculture and Aquatic
Resources Management, School of Environment, Resources and Development, Asian
Institute of Technology, P.O. Box 4, Klong Luang, Pathum Thani, 12120, Thailand 3
National Reference Laboratory of Veterinary Drug Residues, Huazhong Agricultural
University, Wuhan 4 College of Food and Science Technology, Huazhong Agricultural
University, Wuhan, Hubei 430070, China 5 School of Natural Resources and
Environment, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA, Environmental Impact of
Aquaculture and Countermeasures to Aquaculture Pollution in China,
http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/381/art
%253A10.1065%252Fespr2007.05.426.pdf?
auth66=1405373265_4ff90b3029d1aef6e7259f36b97d7521&ext=.pdf, Aquaculture
Pollution in China, PDF, AO)
Aimed at settling the increasingly aggravated environmental problems raised by aquaculture waste, the Chinese
government should adopt a series of regulations and controls. Aquaculture systems which incorporate waste
treatment and effluent reuse facilities are rapidly being developed because they have the advantage of minimal
water input and wastewater discharge while allowing full control of the cultural environment (Midlen & Redding
1998, Van Rijn 1996). The forms of aquaculture waste treatment systems may vary, but they can generally be
classified into three categories: physical treatment, chemical and biological methods. Many studies have been
conducted to examine the aquaculture waste treatment efficiency of different treatment system (Cheng et al.

the disadvantages of each treatment are also

obvious, such as excessive sludge production, unstable performance, and
nitrate accumulation. Thus, research on new methods for aquaculture
wastewater treatment is under way. The purpose of this review was to
study the current status of aquaculture in China, analyze the compromise
of aquaculture waste and evaluate common waste treatment methods
applied in aquaculture in China. Freshwater aquaculture is a major part of the Chinese fishery
2002, Xiao et al. 2006). However,

industry. It takes place in ponds, lakes, rivers, reservoirs and rice paddy fields, which are wide spread in almost
the whole of China.

Both main freshwater and marine aquaculture areas which

are also considered as pollution hot spots

are indicated in Fig. 1. The growing trend of

aquaculture in China is shown in Fig. 2. Pond culture is the most important method among freshwater
aquaculture. The pond yield accounted for over 71% of the total inland aquaculture in 2003. Most pond culture
activities are found along the Yangtze River basin Delta and the Pearl River Delta covering 7 provinces: Jiangshu,
Guangdong, Hubei, Hunan, Anhui, Jiangxi and Shangdong provinces (see Fig. 1). Reservoir, lake, river and channel
fish farming contributes most to the remaining fresh aquatic production, by makinguse of cages and nets in openwaters. Rice paddy fish and crab farming has developed into an important and growing commercial activity for

More than
70 main freshwater aquatic species are farmed in China. Most of them are
fish (about 60 species). The most common farmed species are grass carp,
rural residents in mountainous areas where open water resources are not available or limited.

silver and bighead carp, common carp and crucian carp. Another
important category is crustaceans, 1.1 million tons in 2003.

Solvency-2NC
1. Extend 1NC #1, World Bulletin evidence is specific to The
Global Ocean Commission being against things like
aquaculture. The GOC is a group of world leaders, including
former heads of state and ministers, their most recent report
details the urgency of saving the ocean from any further
damage, the kidney of the planet. Needs help now, the 1AC will
only cause global backlash and environmental devastation.
2. Aquacultures are an increasing threat to wild stocks,
considerable concern for local ecosystems.
Leung and Bates 13 (Tommy and Amanda, Centre for Behavioural and
Physiological Ecology, Zoology, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, 2351,
Australia ; 2Institute of Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, PO Box
49, Taroona, TAS, 7001, Australia, PDF, Journal of Applied Ecology, Accessed via
JSTOR, p. 215-222, AO)
Aquaculture in tropical regions has the potential for greater economic loss
in comparison with temperate regions due to climate changemediated
disease mortality in the light of current forecasts of decreasing water
quality and supply and increasing frequency of extreme weather events
(Handisyde et al. 2009). Moreover, environmental deterioration may be more severe in
tropical nations and interact with climate change outcomes, which are
predicted to increase the frequency and risk of disease (Harvell et al. 2002), as
well as altering the distribution and severity of disease outbreaks (Rohr et al.
2011). It will be important to monitor such emerging trends to implement
adaptive management strategies as climatic and nutrient deposition
patterns may act synergistically to result in even greater frequency of
disease-induced stock mortalities in aquaculture. There are also important ecological
ramifications associated with our findings that should be considered in future risk assessments. Aquaculture
operations may be an increasing threat to wild stocks, a problem that may
be global in scope and particularly so in tropical nations if disease is not
considered in the implementation of open aquaculture facilities. Certain
rearing methods, such as cage systems in marine or freshwater systems, can facilitate
pathogen exchange between farmed and wild populations (Johansen et al. 2011),
leading to pathogen spillover (Krkosek et al. 2006) or spillback (Kelly et al. 2009). As well as
reducing the profitability and sustainability of farming (Salama & Murray 2011;

Jansen et al. 2012), pathogen exchange can result in epizootics that threaten a range of wild species, a
phenomenon that has been well documented from terrestrial systems (Gottdenker et al. 2005; Colla et al. 2006).
Aquacultural settings also have the potential to select for the evolution of more virulent pathogens (Pulkkinen et al.
2010; Mennerat et al. 2012). The introduction of such pathogens into the surrounding environment via introduced
aquaculture species can consequently have devastating impacts on wild fish populations and pose a significant
threat to local biodiversity, especially to those species that may be facing a range of threats or occur at low
population numbers (e.g. Gozlan et al. 2005). Coupled with our findings that more severe outbreaks occur at lower

the exchange and

potential amplification of disease between farmed and nature populations
a considerable concern not only for aquaculture sustainability but also its
impact on local aquatic fauna and ecosystems. The risk of acquiring or introducing
latitudinal regions where biodiversity reaches a maximum (Gaston 2000) makes

virulent pathogen to biologically diverse locations should be taken into consideration when selecting sites for

aquaculture, thus making biosecurity a key consideration for aquaculture sustainability (Pruder 2004; Lightner
2005; Bush et al. 2010).

Case Args

Food
Crowded conditions and warm temperatures insure disease
outbreaks, 1AC cant solve.
Leung and Bates 13 (Tommy and Amanda, Centre for Behavioural and

Physiological Ecology, Zoology, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, 2351,

Australia ; 2Institute of Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, PO Box
49, Taroona, TAS, 7001, Australia, PDF, Journal of Applied Ecology, Accessed via
JSTOR, p. 215-222, AO)
Overall, our findings indicate that the increase in aquaculture disease
impacts towards the tropics is likely to be driven (at least in part) by
environmental factors. In natural systems, infectious diseaserelated mortality is also more likely to
occur at lower latitudes where relatively warmer climate promotes higher pathogen proliferation and transmission

this trend similarly applies to

aquaculture populations. When combined with the crowded conditions of
aquaculture facilities and warmer temperatures, this provides ideal
conditions for outbreaks (Krkosek 2010; Mennerat et al. 2010; Salama & Murray 2011) that can
lead to more severe mortality and rapid progression of diseases.
Additionally in the last 50 years, lower latitudinal regions have also seen
the greatest increase in nitrogen deposition (McKenzie & Townsend 2007). Higher
nutrient loading is associated with increased risk of infectious diseases,
for instance, nitrogenous compounds present in run-off can challenge host
immune responses and promote pathogen replication rate (Martin et al. 2010).
Thus, future research should seek to identify the environmental parameters
and management system parameters at lower latitudes, which contribute
to the pattern of higher mortality and rapid disease progression
associated with epizootics.
rate (Robar, Burness and Murray 2010). Here, we demonstrate that

Economy
Increasing domestic production doesnt reduce reliance on
imports.
Food & Water Watch 07 (Food & Water Watch is a nonprofit consumer

organization that works to ensure clean water and safe food. They challenge the
corporate control and abuse of our food and water resources by empowering people
to take action and by transforming the public consciousness about what we eat and
drink. Through research, public and policymaker education, media, and lobbying, we
advocate policies that guarantee safe, wholesome food produced in a humane and
sustainable manner and public, rather than private, control of water resources
including oceans, rivers, and groundwater, Charity Watch rates Food & Water Watch
an "A" grade, Offshore Aquaculture: Bad for the Gulf,
https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/common-resources/fish/fish-farming/gulf-ofmexico/offshore-aquaculture/, AO)
Federal government and other proponents of offshore aquaculture claim
that developing such an industry here in the United States will narrow our
country $9.2 billion seafood trade deficit without further depleting our wild fish stocks. However,
increasing U.S. fish production will not necessarily reduce our reliance on
imports. In fact, we actually export some 70 percent of domestic production,
driving up our own demand for imported fish.4 NOAA is pushing this Gulf
plan as a model for other regions because attempts to pass national
legislation to widely develop commercial open ocean aquaculture have
failed in recent years.Too Many Environmental Questions About Offshore Aquaculture in the Gulf
Offshore aquaculture could hold negative consequences for commercial
and recreational fishing in the Gulf of Mexico. For example, fish waste,
uneaten fish feed, and any antibiotics that may be used to maintain the
health of fish crowded into the pens or chemicals to try to keep organisms
from growing on the nets and cages can pollute the seafloor and
surrounding ocean ecosystem. offshore aquaculture (hose)Little is known about the assimilative
capacity of the marine environment for these pollutants, concludes a new report commissioned by the Woods Hole
Oceanographic Institution. Pollution from a greatly expanded industry could have significant effects locally and
regionally. 5

Greater supplies depress fish prices, supply surpasses demand

too fast.
Food & Water Watch 07 (Food & Water Watch is a nonprofit consumer

organization that works to ensure clean water and safe food. They challenge the
corporate control and abuse of our food and water resources by empowering people
to take action and by transforming the public consciousness about what we eat and
drink. Through research, public and policymaker education, media, and lobbying, we
advocate policies that guarantee safe, wholesome food produced in a humane and
sustainable manner and public, rather than private, control of water resources
including oceans, rivers, and groundwater, Charity Watch rates Food & Water Watch
an "A" grade, Offshore Aquaculture: Bad for the Gulf,
https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/common-resources/fish/fish-farming/gulf-ofmexico/offshore-aquaculture/, AO)

Price Matters Unsurprisingly, many fishermen do pay heed to how various factors, including aquaculture, might

David Letson, a University of Miami economics

professor, noted that the potentially greater supply of fish from
aquaculture in the Gulf could depress fish prices in the longer term. However,
he did stress that other factors might lessen or eliminate any price decline.14 Meanwhile, past
experience from aquaculture in other places with other fish could portend
potential problems in the Gulf. In 2006, offshore cod farming in Norway
got a thumbs-down from a professor at the Norwegian College of Fisheries
Science. Terje Vassdal pointed out that it could decrease the price of wild
cod, which could be a national economical catastrophe for the country. 15
Similarly, a 2005 University of British Columbia study concluded that a
decrease in the price of sablefish will ultimately follow an increase in
sablefish supply to market from aquaculture. This decrease will be at the
expense of both sablefish farmers and fishers in Canada but beneficial to
sablefish consumers, which in this case are mainly Japanese. Thus,
benefits are exported while costs are entirely absorbed within Canada. 16
For two decades prior to that, commercial fishermen in British Columbia
had seen the prices they received for salmon decrease by two thirds, in
large part be-cause of aquaculture increasing the salmon supply
worldwide.17 The story was similar next door in Alaska in the late 1990s and into the 21st century when
very rapid growth in farmed salmon production outstripped the growth in
demand, glutted farmed salmon markets and severely depressed prices
for farmed (and wild) salmon, according to Gunnar Knapp, an economist at the University of
affect the prices they receive for fish.

Alaska at Anchorage. His research found that the large supply of farmed fish contributed to a drastic drop in the

Researcher Michael Weber found that the

lower prices commercial fishermen received contributed to such financial
instability in fishing fleets along the Pacific coast of the United States that
many fishermen simply went out of business, with dramatically negative
effects on the economies of rural coastal communities.19
ex-vessel value of the Alaska salmon harvest.18

Biodiversity
Farmed fish hurt domestic populations, escapes cause increase
competition.
Food & Water Watch 07 (Food & Water Watch is a nonprofit consumer

organization that works to ensure clean water and safe food. They challenge the
corporate control and abuse of our food and water resources by empowering people
to take action and by transforming the public consciousness about what we eat and
drink. Through research, public and policymaker education, media, and lobbying, we
advocate policies that guarantee safe, wholesome food produced in a humane and
sustainable manner and public, rather than private, control of water resources
including oceans, rivers, and groundwater, Charity Watch rates Food & Water Watch
an "A" grade, Offshore Aquaculture: Bad for the Gulf,
https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/common-resources/fish/fish-farming/gulf-ofmexico/offshore-aquaculture/, AO)
Parasites and disease can spread from fish farms to wild species. In British
Columbia, the Pacific Fisheries Resource Conservation Council found that fish farms increased the
number of parasitic sea lice and likely caused the collapse of pink salmon
in the Brought Archipelago in 2002. 6 Farmed fish, which come from a
genetically limited breeding stock,7,8,9,10 can escape to the open water.
There they could mate with native species, spawning genetically inferior
wild fish that could be more susceptible to disease. In addition, escaped
farmed fish also can compete with wild species11 for increasingly scarce
food resources. Both of those factors could lead to fewer and possibly
less desirable wild fish for commercial and recreational fishermen to
catch. Although it may not yet be the case in the Gulf, offshore aquaculture in other parts
of the world might be contributing to the unsustainable harvest of smaller
wild fish used to feed farmed finfish. What is more, their wild counterparts are in jeopardy
because they are losing the food they need to survive.12 In some cases, it can take two to six
pounds of wild fish to produce one pound of farmed fish. 13

Aquacultures have negative effects on the surrounding

environment, including driving away commercial species.
Wiber, Young, and Wilson 12 (Melanie, Sheena, and Lisette, Contributors
to the University of New Brunswick Department of Anthropology, Springer Science
and Business Media, LLC, Impact of Aquaculture on Commercial Fisheries:
Fishermens Local Ecological Knowledge, PDF, Accessed via JSTOR, AO)
The marine ecosystem has undergone significant degradation for the past
several centuries, and fishermen were aware of declines or collapse in
commercial fish stocks and environmental degradation that predated the
introduction of aquaculture (see Bavington 2010; Lotze and Milewski 2004). Nevertheless, there
was consensus among all fishermen interviewed that further
environmental degradation follows on the introduction of aquaculture (see
also Black 2010; Cubitt et al. 2010; Felt 2010; Milewski 2001). Indicators of such degradation include: foul
odours of sewage or rotten fish near aquaculture sites, discoloured
plumes of water flowing from aquaculture cages, changes in species
commonly found in the area, and transformation of ocean bottom

around cages. In all five focus groups, fishermen reported observing sequential changes in those species
found near aquaculture sites. In the first year of stocking a salmon cage, commercial
species are still found close to the cages; in the second year, commercial
species begin to fall off and crab and starfish increase; in the third year,
starfish dominate and commercial species become scarce. Fishermen in all five
focus groups reported that aquaculture changes the bottom. Good bottom is hard bottom or gravel areas
that are preferred habitat for commercial species such as lobster, scallop and sea urchin. In the Deer Island and

aquaculture bottom becomes mildewed

or mouldy whitish in colour and largely a dead zone as nothing else
is found there. There was some variation in observations about how quickly dead zones recover; a few
Campobello focus groups, fishermen reported that

fishermen theorized that a one-year fallow is sufficient, others suggested that this depended on various factors
such as length of cage site operation and frequency of fallow. Cubitt et al. (2010: 149) report varied recovery
times for aquaculture bottom, ranging from one to over seven years. Felt (2010: 180) notes that Newfoundland
fishermen refute recovery time claims made by the aquaculture industry in that province.

Aquaculture wastewater contributes to pollution.

Cao et al 07 (Ling, Weimin Wang1**, Yi Yang 2, Chengtai Yang 1, Zonghui

Yuan3, Shanbo Xiong4 and James Diana, College of Fisheries, Key Lab of Agricultural
Animal Genetics, Breeding and Reproduction of Ministry of Education, Huazhong
Agricultural University, Wuhan, Hubei 430070, China 2 Aquaculture and Aquatic
Resources Management, School of Environment, Resources and Development, Asian
Institute of Technology, P.O. Box 4, Klong Luang, Pathum Thani, 12120, Thailand 3
National Reference Laboratory of Veterinary Drug Residues, Huazhong Agricultural
University, Wuhan 4 College of Food and Science Technology, Huazhong Agricultural
University, Wuhan, Hubei 430070, China 5 School of Natural Resources and
Environment, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA, Environmental Impact of
Aquaculture and Countermeasures to Aquaculture Pollution in China,
http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/381/art
%253A10.1065%252Fespr2007.05.426.pdf?
auth66=1405373265_4ff90b3029d1aef6e7259f36b97d7521&ext=.pdf, Aquaculture
Pollution in China, PDF, AO)
Pollution caused by aquaculture wastewater If continuously discharged wastewater
without treatment, which contains high concentration of nitrogen and
phosphorus nutrients, may result in a remarkably chronic elevation of
the total organic matter contents, especially in badly managed or poorly
located sites. Consequently, a series of negative ecological impacts may occur:
(1) serious oxygen deficit caused by the decomposing of organic
substances. (2) eutrophication or algae bloom caused by the
accumulation of organic nutrients like nitrogen and phosphorus, which
promotes a high biomass in the superficial water. Apart from increased phytoplankton
production, eutrophication can cause many other effects which may be more sensitive and relevant indicators
such as changes in: energy and nutrient fluxes, pelagic and benthic biomass and community structure, fish
stocks, sedimentation, nutrient cycling, and oxygen depletion (Gregory & Zabel 1990, Fang et al. 2004). (3) Water

Diseases may break out. Aside from this,

inadequate handling of wastewater has serious consequences for human
health, the environment and economic development (Enelld & Lof 1983). It
contaminates water supply, increasing the risk of infectious disease and
deteriorating groundwater and other local ecosystems, for instance after
flooding.
deterioration will bring about low productivity (4)

Solvency

*Spec Arg?* Aquaculture activity is only helpful if its certain

species, plan causes just as much devastation as progress.
Naylor et Al 2k (Rosamond L. Naylor, Rebecca J. Goldburg, Jurgenne H.

Primavera, Nils Kautsky, Malcolm C. M. Beveridge, Jason Clay, Carl Folke, Jane
Lubchenco, Harold Mooney & Max Troel, professor of environmental Earth system
science at Stanford, Nature, Issue 405, p. 1017-1019,
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v405/n6790/full/4051017a0.html, AO)
The worldwide decline of ocean fisheries stocks has provided impetus for
rapid growth in fish and shellfish farming, or aquaculture. Between 1987 and 1997,
global production of farmed fish and shellfish (collectively called 'fish') more than doubled in weight and value, as

Fish produced from farming activities currently

accounts for over one-quarter of all fish directly consumed by humans. As
the human population continues to expand beyond 6 billion, its reliance on
farmed fish production as an important source of protein will also
increase. Growth in aquaculture production is a mixed blessing, however, for
the sustainability of ocean fisheries. For some types of aquaculture activity,
including shrimp and salmon farming, potential damage to ocean and
coastal resources through habitat destruction, waste disposal, exotic
species and pathogen invasions, and large fish meal and fish oil
requirements may further deplete wild fisheries stocks2. For other
aquaculture species, such as carp and molluscs, which are herbivorous or
filter feeders, the net contribution to global fish supplies and food security
is great3. The diversity of production systems leads to an underlying
paradox: aquaculture is a possible solution, but also a contributing factor,
to the collapse of fisheries stocks worldwide. Here we examine marine and freshwater fish
did its contribution to world fish supplies1.

farming activities around the world and ask: does aquaculture enhanceor diminishthe available fish supply? This
is an important scientific and policy issue, and one that also addresses the common perception that aquaculture is
an 'add on' to current ocean fish productivity. Many people believe that aquaculture production will compensate for
the shortfall in ocean harvests as ocean fisheries deteriorate, or that fish farming will restore wild populations by
relieving pressure on capture fisheries. We conclude that the compensation argument is correct for some
aquaculture practices but unfounded for others. We do not find evidence that supports the restoration argument.

Our analysis focuses on aquaculture trends in the past 1015 yearsa

period of heightened ecological and economic integration between
capture fisheries and aquaculture activities. We limit our discussion to finfish, bivalves and

crustaceans, which collectively make up three-quarters of global aquaculture production by weight, and exclude
seaweed production1. Ocean fisheries and aquaculture now share or compete for many coastal ecosystem services,
including the provision of habitat and nursery areas, feed and seed (larvae) supplies, and assimilation of waste
products. Aquaculture and ocean fisheries are further linked economically through competition in world markets for
the sale of their products, and biologically through exotic species invasions and pathogen transmission. Each of
these connections is examined below. As aquaculture production continues to increase and intensify, both its
reliance and its impact on ocean fisheries are likely to expand even further. The balance between farmed and wildcaught fish, as well as the total supply of fish available for human consumption, will depend on future aquaculture
practices. In the final section, we explore technological, management and policy options for sustaining aquaculture

farming can contribute to global (net) fish supplies only if

current trends in fish meal and fish oil use for aquaculture are reversed
production. We argue that

and policies are enforced to protect coastal areas from environmental

degradation.

NOAAs policy concedes to environmental, economic, and social

challenges to aquacultures without a solution.
Wright 11 (Lauren, journalist for the international nonprofit consumer advocacy
group Food and Water Watch, Food and Water Watch, Federal Government
Announces National Aquaculture Policy,
http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/pressreleases/federal-government-announcesnational-aquaculture-policy/, AO)
Washington, DC Just hours after World Oceans Day ended and during National Oceans Month, the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA the federal agency tasked with protecting our oceans)

and
the U.S. Department of Commerce announced that they are moving
forward with a national policy that would pave the way for dirty, crowded
factory fish farming to flourish in U.S. waters. Industrial ocean fish
farming is a filthy way to produce fish, and contrary to NOAAs claims, it is
not a sustainable means to supplement the U.S. seafood supply, protect
ocean resources, or promote a healthy economy in the United States. To
add insult to injury, NOAA announced today that it would begin
implementing its plan to allow the set up of the first factory fish farms in
the Gulf of Mexico. The Gulf has already been battered by the oil industry
the last thing we need is enormous ocean fish farms that can and do
spread disease, allow for millions of fish to escape, kill off wild
populations, jeopardize the tourism industry, and further destroy the
livelihood of local fishermen. NOAA previously said that it would not move forward on its very
controversial factory fish farming plan for the Gulf until this aquaculture policy was finalized. Regrettably, the
policy, which was finalized today, failed to rein in the Gulf fish farming plan , which,
according to a Food & Water Watch analysis, could allow more than 8 .6 million farmed fish
to escape unreported annually. Furthermore, the policy touts factory fish
farming as a means to increase the domestic seafood supply, while
conveniently failing to mention that 70 percent of the seafood caught or
farmed in the U.S. is already exported . Given this trend, the U.S would likely export the
majority of factory farmed fish while keeping the pollution. Establishing a $5 billion fish farming industry in the
United States, which NOAA has previously indicated is its aim, could generate an amount of fish waste equal to the
untreated sewage of about 17.1 million people over twice the population of New York City. And waste isnt the
only thing leaking from fish farms: the open water salmon farms in the North Atlantic result in 2 million fish escapes

NOAAs policy,
Environmental challenges posed by aquaculturemay include nutrient
and chemical wastes, water use demands, aquatic animal diseases and
invasive species, potential competitive and genetic effects on wild
species, effects on endangered or protected species, effects on protected
and sensitive marine areas, effects on habitat for other species, and the
use of forage fish for aquaculture feeds. NOAAs policy also states that,
Economic and social challenges may include market competition affecting
the viability of domestic aquaculture and/or the prices U.S. fishermen
receive for their wild seafood products; competition with other uses of the
marine environment; degraded habitats and ecosystem services; and
impacts to diverse cultural traditions and values.
each year, weakening wild fish stocks and spreading disease. According to

Plan cant resolve any of the challenges of aquaculture.

NOAA 11 (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, federal agency

focused on the condition of the oceans and the atmosphere, MARINE

AQUACULTURE POLICY,
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/aquaculture/docs/policy/noaa_aquaculture_policy_2011.p
df, AO)
As interest in commercial aquaculture production and wild species restoration in the marine environment has
increased, so too has debate about the potential economic, environmental, and social effects of aquaculture and
the need for better public understanding with respect to these issues. Benefits of sustainable aquaculture may
include species and habitat restoration and conservation; nutrient removal; provision of safe, local seafood that
contributes to food security and human health and nutrition; increased production of low trophic-level seafood;
and synergies with fishing (e.g., using fish processing trimmings in aquaculture feeds). Sustainable aquaculture
can also contribute economic and social benefits by creating jobs in local communities and helping to maintain the
Environmental challenges posed by
aquaculture, depending upon the type, scope, and location of
aquaculture activity, may include nutrient and chemical wastes, water use
demands, aquatic animal diseases and invasive species, potential
competitive and genetic effects on wild species, effects on endangered or
protected species, effects on protected and sensitive marine areas,
effects on habitat for other species, and the use of forage fish for
aquaculture feeds. Economic and social challenges may include market
competition affecting the viability of domestic aquaculture and/or the
prices U.S. fishermen receive for their wild seafood products; competition
with other uses of the marine environment; degraded habitats and
ecosystem services; and impacts to diverse cultural traditions and
values.

cultural identity of working waterfronts.

Climate Change Turn

Freshwater and marine aquaculture areas are pollution hot
spots.
Cao et al 07 (Ling, Weimin Wang1**, Yi Yang 2, Chengtai Yang 1, Zonghui

Yuan3, Shanbo Xiong4 and James Diana, College of Fisheries, Key Lab of Agricultural
Animal Genetics, Breeding and Reproduction of Ministry of Education, Huazhong
Agricultural University, Wuhan, Hubei 430070, China 2 Aquaculture and Aquatic
Resources Management, School of Environment, Resources and Development, Asian
Institute of Technology, P.O. Box 4, Klong Luang, Pathum Thani, 12120, Thailand 3
National Reference Laboratory of Veterinary Drug Residues, Huazhong Agricultural
University, Wuhan 4 College of Food and Science Technology, Huazhong Agricultural
University, Wuhan, Hubei 430070, China 5 School of Natural Resources and
Environment, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA, Environmental Impact of
Aquaculture and Countermeasures to Aquaculture Pollution in China,
http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/381/art
%253A10.1065%252Fespr2007.05.426.pdf?
auth66=1405373265_4ff90b3029d1aef6e7259f36b97d7521&ext=.pdf, Aquaculture
Pollution in China, PDF, AO)
Aimed at settling the increasingly aggravated environmental problems raised by aquaculture waste, the Chinese
government should adopt a series of regulations and controls. Aquaculture systems which incorporate waste
treatment and effluent reuse facilities are rapidly being developed because they have the advantage of minimal
water input and wastewater discharge while allowing full control of the cultural environment (Midlen & Redding
1998, Van Rijn 1996). The forms of aquaculture waste treatment systems may vary, but they can generally be
classified into three categories: physical treatment, chemical and biological methods. Many studies have been
conducted to examine the aquaculture waste treatment efficiency of different treatment system (Cheng et al.

the disadvantages of each treatment are also

obvious, such as excessive sludge production, unstable performance, and
nitrate accumulation. Thus, research on new methods for aquaculture
wastewater treatment is under way. The purpose of this review was to
study the current status of aquaculture in China, analyze the compromise
of aquaculture waste and evaluate common waste treatment methods
applied in aquaculture in China. Freshwater aquaculture is a major part of the Chinese fishery
2002, Xiao et al. 2006). However,

industry. It takes place in ponds, lakes, rivers, reservoirs and rice paddy fields, which are wide spread in almost
the whole of China.

Both main freshwater and marine aquaculture areas which

are also considered as pollution hot spots

are indicated in Fig. 1. The growing trend of

aquaculture in China is shown in Fig. 2. Pond culture is the most important method among freshwater
aquaculture. The pond yield accounted for over 71% of the total inland aquaculture in 2003. Most pond culture
activities are found along the Yangtze River basin Delta and the Pearl River Delta covering 7 provinces: Jiangshu,
Guangdong, Hubei, Hunan, Anhui, Jiangxi and Shangdong provinces (see Fig. 1). Reservoir, lake, river and channel
fish farming contributes most to the remaining fresh aquatic production, by makinguse of cages and nets in openwaters. Rice paddy fish and crab farming has developed into an important and growing commercial activity for

More than
70 main freshwater aquatic species are farmed in China. Most of them are
fish (about 60 species). The most common farmed species are grass carp,
silver and bighead carp, common carp and crucian carp. Another
important category is crustaceans, 1.1 million tons in 2003.
rural residents in mountainous areas where open water resources are not available or limited.

1AC cant solve climate change, biodiversity impact inevitable,

thats their 1AC Donahue 11 evidence.

Potential Off Case Ideas

Aquaculture Spec
*Brief explanation: The Naylor evidence says that some
aquaculture is really bad, like salmon or shrimp, but other
forms like carp and mollusks, can have a positive effect and
contribute to the global fish supply and help solve food
security. Since the 1AC isnt specific at all, in fact they just say
new regulations then reap all the benefits, its bologna. Just
an idea, or at least good to look through to know the
difference and press them in 1AC CX.*
1. Aquaculture activity is only helpful if its certain species,
plan causes just as much devastation as progress.
Naylor et Al 2k (Rosamond L. Naylor, Rebecca J. Goldburg, Jurgenne H.

Primavera, Nils Kautsky, Malcolm C. M. Beveridge, Jason Clay, Carl Folke, Jane
Lubchenco, Harold Mooney & Max Troel, professor of environmental Earth system
science at Stanford, Nature, Issue 405, p. 1017-1019,
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v405/n6790/full/4051017a0.html, AO)
The worldwide decline of ocean fisheries stocks has provided impetus for
rapid growth in fish and shellfish farming, or aquaculture. Between 1987 and 1997,
global production of farmed fish and shellfish (collectively called 'fish') more than doubled in weight and value, as

Fish produced from farming activities currently

accounts for over one-quarter of all fish directly consumed by humans. As
the human population continues to expand beyond 6 billion, its reliance on
farmed fish production as an important source of protein will also
increase. Growth in aquaculture production is a mixed blessing, however, for
the sustainability of ocean fisheries. For some types of aquaculture activity,
including shrimp and salmon farming, potential damage to ocean and
coastal resources through habitat destruction, waste disposal, exotic
species and pathogen invasions, and large fish meal and fish oil
requirements may further deplete wild fisheries stocks2. For other
aquaculture species, such as carp and molluscs, which are herbivorous or
filter feeders, the net contribution to global fish supplies and food security
is great3. The diversity of production systems leads to an underlying
paradox: aquaculture is a possible solution, but also a contributing factor,
to the collapse of fisheries stocks worldwide. Here we examine marine and freshwater fish
did its contribution to world fish supplies1.

farming activities around the world and ask: does aquaculture enhanceor diminishthe available fish supply? This
is an important scientific and policy issue, and one that also addresses the common perception that aquaculture is
an 'add on' to current ocean fish productivity. Many people believe that aquaculture production will compensate for
the shortfall in ocean harvests as ocean fisheries deteriorate, or that fish farming will restore wild populations by
relieving pressure on capture fisheries. We conclude that the compensation argument is correct for some
aquaculture practices but unfounded for others. We do not find evidence that supports the restoration argument.

Our analysis focuses on aquaculture trends in the past 1015 yearsa

period of heightened ecological and economic integration between
capture fisheries and aquaculture activities. We limit our discussion to finfish, bivalves and

crustaceans, which collectively make up three-quarters of global aquaculture production by weight, and exclude
seaweed production1. Ocean fisheries and aquaculture now share or compete for many coastal ecosystem services,
including the provision of habitat and nursery areas, feed and seed (larvae) supplies, and assimilation of waste
products. Aquaculture and ocean fisheries are further linked economically through competition in world markets for
the sale of their products, and biologically through exotic species invasions and pathogen transmission. Each of

these connections is examined below. As aquaculture production continues to increase and intensify, both its
reliance and its impact on ocean fisheries are likely to expand even further. The balance between farmed and wildcaught fish, as well as the total supply of fish available for human consumption, will depend on future aquaculture
practices. In the final section, we explore technological, management and policy options for sustaining aquaculture

farming can contribute to global (net) fish supplies only if

current trends in fish meal and fish oil use for aquaculture are reversed
and policies are enforced to protect coastal areas from environmental
degradation.
production. We argue that

2. Violation: Plan text doesnt mandate what aquacultures are

created
3. Impacts:
A) Bad for TSE: General plans make it impossible to know the
specifics of major topic areas.
B) Fairness: 2AC can shift what their plan does, skews 1NC strategy.

4. Voter for fairness and education.

T-Development
*Just an idea*
1. Interpretation: Development is includes the concrete result
of a process.
Oxford English Dictionary No Date (development, n.,
http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/51434?redirectedFrom=development#eid, AO)

development, n. View as: Outline |Full entryQuotations: Show all |Hide all Pronunciation: /dvlpmnt/ Forms:
Also 1718 develope-. Etymology: < develop v. + -ment suffix, after French dveloppement, in 15th cent. desv-. I.

The process or fact of developing; the concrete result of this process .

Thesaurus 1. A gradual unfolding, a bringing into fuller view; a fuller disclosure or working out of the details of
anything, as a plan, a scheme, the plot of a novel. Also quasi-concr. that in which the fuller unfolding is embodied or
realized.

2. Violation: The 1AC never mandates the creation or

development of aquacultures.
3. Standards:
A) F/X Topicality: The 1AC must take multiple steps to solve any
impacts, uniquely bad for debate.
B) Limits: Unlimits affirmative ground, if you only have to change a
regulation in regards to the topic, it makes it impossible to be neg.
C) Education: Forces negative teams in to reading generics without
specific links.

4. Voter for fairness and education.

Ban Exports CP
1. PLAN: The United States federal government should cease
all exporting of domestic commercial fish and close all
aquacultures that are currently producing.
2. Competitive and solves 100% of the case, insures domestic
food security and doesnt hurt the environment.
3. SQUO U.S. exports roughly 70% of our domestic production,
counter plan solves reliance on imports.
Food & Water Watch 07 (Food & Water Watch is a nonprofit consumer
organization that works to ensure clean water and safe food. They challenge the
corporate control and abuse of our food and water resources by empowering people
to take action and by transforming the public consciousness about what we eat and
drink. Through research, public and policymaker education, media, and lobbying, we
advocate policies that guarantee safe, wholesome food produced in a humane and
sustainable manner and public, rather than private, control of water resources
including oceans, rivers, and groundwater, Charity Watch rates Food & Water Watch
an "A" grade, Offshore Aquaculture: Bad for the Gulf,
https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/common-resources/fish/fish-farming/gulf-ofmexico/offshore-aquaculture/, AO)
Federal government and other proponents of offshore aquaculture claim
that developing such an industry here in the United States will narrow our
country $9.2 billion seafood trade deficit without further depleting our wild fish stocks. However,
increasing U.S. fish production will not necessarily reduce our reliance on
imports. In fact, we actually export some 70 percent of domestic production,
driving up our own demand for imported fish.4 NOAA is pushing this Gulf
plan as a model for other regions because attempts to pass national
legislation to widely develop commercial open ocean aquaculture have
failed in recent years.Too Many Environmental Questions About Offshore Aquaculture in the Gulf
Offshore aquaculture could hold negative consequences for commercial
and recreational fishing in the Gulf of Mexico. For example, fish waste,
uneaten fish feed, and any antibiotics that may be used to maintain the
health of fish crowded into the pens or chemicals to try to keep organisms
from growing on the nets and cages can pollute the seafloor and
surrounding ocean ecosystem. offshore aquaculture (hose)Little is known about the assimilative

capacity of the marine environment for these pollutants, concludes a new report commissioned by the Woods Hole
Oceanographic Institution. Pollution from a greatly expanded industry could have significant effects locally and
regionally. 5

Salmon/Shrimp PIC
1. Plan: The United States Federal Government should enact
new legislation that explicitly creates a national regulatory
framework for offshore aquaculture except shrimp and salmon.
2. Solves 100% of the 1AC and is competitive; salmon and
shrimp farming dont contribute to food security or the global
fish supply, leads to biodiversity destruction.
Naylor et Al 2k (Rosamond L. Naylor, Rebecca J. Goldburg, Jurgenne H.

Primavera, Nils Kautsky, Malcolm C. M. Beveridge, Jason Clay, Carl Folke, Jane
Lubchenco, Harold Mooney & Max Troel, professor of environmental Earth system
science at Stanford, Nature, Issue 405, p. 1017-1019,
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v405/n6790/full/4051017a0.html, AO)
The worldwide decline of ocean fisheries stocks has provided impetus for
rapid growth in fish and shellfish farming, or aquaculture. Between 1987 and 1997,
global production of farmed fish and shellfish (collectively called 'fish') more than doubled in weight and value, as

Fish produced from farming activities currently

accounts for over one-quarter of all fish directly consumed by humans. As
the human population continues to expand beyond 6 billion, its reliance on
farmed fish production as an important source of protein will also
increase. Growth in aquaculture production is a mixed blessing, however, for
the sustainability of ocean fisheries. For some types of aquaculture activity,
including shrimp and salmon farming, potential damage to ocean and
did its contribution to world fish supplies1.

coastal resources through habitat destruction, waste disposal, exotic

species and pathogen invasions, and large fish meal and fish oil
requirements may further deplete wild fisheries stocks 2. For other
aquaculture species, such as carp and molluscs, which are herbivorous or
filter feeders, the net contribution to global fish supplies and food
security is great 3. The diversity of production systems leads to an
underlying paradox: aquaculture is a possible solution, but also a
contributing factor, to the collapse of fisheries stocks worldwide. Here we

examine marine and freshwater fish farming activities around the world and ask: does aquaculture enhanceor
diminishthe available fish supply? This is an important scientific and policy issue, and one that also addresses the
common perception that aquaculture is an 'add on' to current ocean fish productivity. Many people believe that
aquaculture production will compensate for the shortfall in ocean harvests as ocean fisheries deteriorate, or that
fish farming will restore wild populations by relieving pressure on capture fisheries. We conclude that the
compensation argument is correct for some aquaculture practices but unfounded for others. We do not find
evidence that supports the restoration argument. Our

analysis focuses on aquaculture

trends in the past 1015 yearsa period of heightened ecological and
economic integration between capture fisheries and aquaculture
activities. We limit our discussion to finfish, bivalves and crustaceans, which collectively make up three-

quarters of global aquaculture production by weight, and exclude seaweed production1. Ocean fisheries and
aquaculture now share or compete for many coastal ecosystem services, including the provision of habitat and
nursery areas, feed and seed (larvae) supplies, and assimilation of waste products. Aquaculture and ocean fisheries
are further linked economically through competition in world markets for the sale of their products, and biologically
through exotic species invasions and pathogen transmission. Each of these connections is examined below. As
aquaculture production continues to increase and intensify, both its reliance and its impact on ocean fisheries are
likely to expand even further. The balance between farmed and wild-caught fish, as well as the total supply of fish
available for human consumption, will depend on future aquaculture practices. In the final section, we explore

technological, management and policy options for sustaining aquaculture production. We argue that farming can
contribute to global (net) fish supplies only if current trends in fish meal and fish oil use for aquaculture are
reversed and policies are enforced to protect coastal areas from environmental degradation.