Verbatim 4.6

Aquaculture Case Neg Notes1AC FlawzInherency: 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 inevitableEconomy: $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 1NCInherencyOffshore 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-of-mexico/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 regional economy.3 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.

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 than the ability of accretion and plant colonisation to create wetland habitats (Daniels et al., 1993). 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 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 been developed to reduce these impacts. 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).

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 infrastructure and steering towards sustainable production (Bush et al. 2010). Even so, 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). 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 volume (FAO 2012), mostly from low latitudinal regions (particularly crustaceans) (FAO 2010), research contributing to building disease resilience in shrimp and shellfish culture will be of primary importance to protecting food and socio-economic security.

Jobs high nowMutikani 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-economy-idUSKBN0F80AW20140703, 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-atlantic-linendoll/, 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: the lionfish. 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 Foundation, which works with the government and research agencies to help reduce the lionfish population in Bermuda. 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 that while this may not be the worst epidemic the Atlantic Ocean has faced, it does have the makings of a disaster. He said 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.

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-as-overfishing-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.

SolvencyAquaculture 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-worlds-oceans-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. Martin said in an interview on Monday that 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, 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 ExtensionsInherency-2NC1. 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-2NC1. 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 (Calvete 2003; Benejam et al. 2009) and prevalence (Merino et al. 2008). 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 al. 2005).Economy-2NC1. 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-of-mexico/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 world salmon and trout.26 But that number has slowly dwindled to half a dozen or so multinational companies, most of which are based in Europe.27 Unlike 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 processing companies.28 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.

Biodiversity-2NC1. 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. 2002, Xiao et al. 2006). However, 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 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 open-waters. Rice paddy fish and crab farming has developed into an important and growing commercial activity for rural residents in mountainous areas where open water resources are not available or limited. 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.

Solvency-2NC1. 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 latitudinal regions where biodiversity reaches a maximum (Gaston 2000) makes 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 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 rate (Robar, Burness and Murray 2010). Here, we demonstrate that 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. EconomyIncreasing 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-of-mexico/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-of-mexico/offshore-aquaculture/, AO)Price Matters Unsurprisingly, many fishermen do pay heed to how various factors, including aquaculture, might affect the prices they receive for fish. 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 Alaska at Anchorage. His research found that the large supply of farmed fish contributed to a drastic drop in the ex-vessel value of the Alaska salmon harvest.18 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

BiodiversityFarmed 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-of-mexico/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.13Aquacultures 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 Campobello focus groups, fishermen reported that 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 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 deterioration will bring about low productivity (4) 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.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 did its contribution to world fish supplies1. 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 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.

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-announces-national-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 each year, weakening wild fish stocks and spreading disease. According to 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.

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.pdf, 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 cultural identity of working waterfronts. 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.Climate Change TurnFreshwater 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. 2002, Xiao et al. 2006). However, 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 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 open-waters. Rice paddy fish and crab farming has developed into an important and growing commercial activity for rural residents in mountainous areas where open water resources are not available or limited. 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.

1AC cant solve climate change, biodiversity impact inevitable, thats their 1AC Donahue 11 evidence.

Potential Off Case IdeasAquaculture 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 did its contribution to world fish supplies1. 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 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.2. Violation: Plan text doesnt mandate what aquacultures are created3. 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 CP1. 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-of-mexico/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 PIC1. 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 did its contribution to world fish supplies1. 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 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.