AffirmativeDMHS AnLi

Contention One is Inherency—Ocean DronesAutonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) development is inevitable, but Congress has to act promptly to authorize, appropriate and coordinate a comprehensive national program for it to work—that spurs P3s which streamline production and overcome previous barriers FIND 14 – Federal information and news dispatch (FIND, “House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Hearing”, federal press release,http://insurancenewsnet.com/oarticle/2014/02/07/house-transportation-and-infrastructure-subcommittee-on-coast-guard-and-maritime-a-457472.html#.U6xpufmICQo, HW)The AUV's evolution is taking place at an amazing rate of change. At the recent Coast Guard NAVSAC meeting in Norfolk, VA, the NAVSAC panel received briefings from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI) about the surface and sub-surface autonomous vessels already in use by NOAA and the private sector. The ocean already has thousands of autonomous WaveGlider & SHARC's upon it or below the water's surface. These autonomous systems will become the Light

Ships (ATONs) of our future, replacing or certainly reducing the number of LNB's the Coast Guard maintains. These new ATONs are equipped with hydrographic surveying tools (depth measuring devices) and have the capability to stay positioned over a fixed position, avoid a hazard like a coastal rock or to re-position itself over a moving object like the ever changing river bottom on major inland waterways. The future ATON built upon AUV tech nology will recognize changing water levels, currents and atmospheric conditions and provide near real time positioning and measurement data and be a more dynamic and responsive system of ATONs. This calls attention to the importance of the services provided by NOAA's National Ocean Service (NOS), tri-service office, comprised of the Office of Coast Survey (OCS), National

Geodetic Survey (NGS) and Center for Operational Oceanographic Products and Services (CO- OPS). The demand for authoritative hydrographic survey data cannot be fully met by the current level of funding for NOAA's navigation, observations and positioning programs. The NOS services related navigation, observations and positioning are crucial to the future development and deployment of the AUVs and future ATON systems. Such NOS programs as GRAV-D and Coastal LIDAR that provide baseline foundation data are critically important. These activities must be funded at least at the President's requested level, if not at a higher

level. Social Security Changes You Need to Know As a result, it is important that Congress promptly reauthorize the Hydrographic Services Improvement Act, H.R. 1399, introduced by Representative Don Young of Alaska and currently pending before Congress. Moreover, MAPPS strongly supports H.R. 1382, the Digital Coast Act , introduced by Representative R.A. "Dutch"

Ruppersberger of Maryland and Rep. Young of Alaska. Enactment of H.R. 1382 and H.R. 1399 separately or as a merged bill will go a long

way toward a coordinated and comprehensive national mapping effort for coastal, state and territorial waters of the United States and better integrate navigational and non-navigational geospatial activities in NOAA. The Maritime Administration (MARAD) grant program for improvements to the Marine Highway Program should include hydrographic surveying & mapping activities that directly contribute to decisions regarding placement of ATONs on the inland waterways. These ATON's are essential for the safe passage of goods on the marine

transportation system. This grant program should provide incentives for private sector participation, again through a P3. Increased utilization of and partnership with the private sector geospatial community will help accelerate federally- funded research, enhance navigation and transportation, and create economic growth and job creation in the private sector. We would emphasize the need to better coordinate the geospatial activities among these various agencies and numerous programs and applications.

Thus we present the following plan: The United States federal government should merge the Hydrographic Services Improvement Act with the Digital Coast Act to substantially increase its support of non-military autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs).

1

AffirmativeDMHS AnLi

Contention Two—Environment[Maybe make this into a science diplomacy advantage]

Current ocean exploration is woefully inadequate in climate data collection—AUVs are the key first step McNutt, 13—Marcia, Executive Chair of Oceans 2020, a group of more than 110 ocean explorers gathered at the Aquarium of the Pacific in Long Beach, California, “Accelerating Ocean Exploration” SCIENCE 341:937 (30 August 2013). Reprinted with permission from AAAS in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, “The Report of Ocean Exploration Exploration 2020; A National Program,” July, http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/oceanexploration2020/oe2020_report.pdf. Page 13-14 //BR Last month, a distinguished group of ocean researchers and explorers convened in Long Beach, California, at the Aquarium of the Pacific to assess progress and future prospects in ocean exploration. Thirteen years ago, U.S. President Clinton challenged a similar group to provide a blueprint for ocean exploration and discovery. Since then, the fundamental rationale has not changed: to collect high-quality data on the physics, chemistry biology, and geology of the oceans that can be used to answer known questions as well as those we do not yet know enough to pose, to develop new instruments and systems to explore the ocean in new dimensions, and to engage a new generation of youth in science

and technology. Recently, however, exploration has taken on a more urgent imperative : to record the substantial changes occurring in largely undocumented regions of the ocean . With half of the ocean more than 10 kilometers from the nearest depth surrounding, ecosystem function in the deep sea still a mystery and no first-order baseline for many globally important ocean

processes, the current pace of exploration is woefully inadequate to address this daunting task, especially as the planet responds to changes in climate. To meet this challenge, future ocean exploration must depart dramatically from the classical ship-

based expeditions of the past devoted to mapping and sampling. As a first step , future exploration should make better use of autonomous platforms that are equipped with a broader array of in situ sensors, for lower-cost data gathering. Fortunately, new, more nimble, and easily deployed platforms are available, ranging from $200 kits for build-your-own remotely operated vehicles to long-range autonomous

underwater vehicles (AUVs), solar-powered autonomous platforms, autonomous boats, AUVs that operate cooperatively in swarming behavior through the use of artificial intelligence, and gliders that can cross entire oceans. New in situ chemical and biological sensors allow the probing of ocean processes in real time in ways not possible if samples are processed later in laboratories. Exploration also would greatly benefit from improvements in telepresence. For expeditions that require ships (very distant from shore and requiring the return of complex samples), experts on shore can now “join” through satellite links, enlarging the pool of talent available to comment on the importance of discoveries as they happen and to participate in real-time decisions that affect expedition planning. This type of communication can enrich the critical human interactions that guide the discovery process on such expeditions. Words such as “crowd sourcing,” “crowd funded,” and “citizen scientist” are nowhere to be found in the President’s Ocean Exploration Panel report of 2000, but at the Long Beach meeting, intense excitement revolved around growing public engagement in many aspects of ocean exploration through mechanisms that did not exist 13 years ago.

AUVs are key to monitor cold vents found on the subsurface sea floor.Furlong 13 – Masters student, University of Victoria (Jonathan, “Characteristic Morphology, Backscatter, and Sub-seafloor Structures of Cold-Vents on the Northern Cascadia Margin from High-Resolution Autonomous Underwater Vehicle Data” UMI Dissertations Publishing. ProQuest)In this chapter I discuss visible surface features of cold vents and attempt to explain what mechanisms exist in the subsurface to generate these features. Backscatter recordings are examined qualitatively for the acoustic signature of cold vents, and how they differ throughout this study area. Sub-bottom profiler seismic recordings illuminate the near-surface structure of the top 40 m of sediments. Multichannel seismic data

image well past the depth of the BSR which forms the lower limit of the hydrate stability field. Other seismic methods (DTAGS) are better at resolv ing shallower depths, yet still are limited in the very near surface. AUV sub-bottom profiler data help bridge that gap by imaging the very near surface (5 - 50 ms TWT), and at a higher resolution than surface seismic data. For mapping the occurrence of cold vent systems, shallow imaging is crucial , since small surface features (venting sites, carbonate mounds, CBCs, pockmarks, etc) are revealed only by near-seafloor sonars,

2

AffirmativeDMHS AnLi

high-resolution bathymetry, and ROV observations. Shallow AUV sub-bottom imaging allows the examination of discrete cold vent communities to be extended into the subsurface .

Cold vent monitoring is key to prevent Methane seepage, lack of oversight triggers immediate climate tipping events that causes extinction Furlong 13 – Masters student, University of Victoria (Jonathan, “Characteristic Morphology, Backscatter, and Sub-seafloor Structures of Cold-Vents on the Northern Cascadia Margin from High-Resolution Autonomous Underwater Vehicle Data” UMI Dissertations Publishing. ProQuest)The co-deposition of organic carbon with inorganic seafloor sediments is considered to remove carbon from the rapid-cycling biogeosphere .

Studies show that 16- 40 MT (megatons) of methane may be released annually from continental shelves (Judd et al., 2002). On margins, cold vent sites are considered zones of macro-seepage and account for the largest geological release of methane at 1,000 t of carbon annually (Etiope and Klusman, 2002). The leakage of methane from sediment to the atmosphere and ocean can occur as slow microseepage from sedimentary basins (Etiope and Klusman, 2002), or in localized areas of increased flow (i.e. seafloor cold vents). The release of methane from the seabed can be considered a variable process that may be heightened daily by tidal affects (Boles and Clark, 2001) or yearly to decadal by seismic activity (Tsunogai et al., 2012). Additionally, the nature of methane release varies from margin to margin. On active margins such as the Cascadia margin, venting processes are more complex than on passive margins, since they also involve sediment compression due to tectonic forces. The relationship between active tectonics and fluid venting across the Cascadia subduction zone was initially described by Hyndman and Davis (1992), later updated by Riedel et al. (2010) from IODP Expedition 311, and most recently modelled by Archer and Buffett (2012). Understanding the behaviour of methane in marine sediments is foremost when attempting to interpret slope failures and assess geo-hazards on continental margins. Earthquakes and the dissociation of gas hydrate have both been linked to the potential destabilization of continental slopes leading to slope failure. For example, the Storegga Slide offshore Norway (Bryn et al., 2005) is probably the most prominent slope failure recorded during the Holocene. The slide is suspected to have been triggered by the dissociation of gas hydrate following changes in ocean temperatures. The failure is dated at 8200 BP and mobilized 2500-3500 km3 of sediment as calculated from the slide scar dimensions (e.g. Haflidason et al., 2005). The slide triggered a tsunami that hit Norway (10-12 m), Scotland (4-6 m), Shetland

(20-30 m), and the Faroe Islands (>10 m) (Bondevik et al., 2005). Methane can also act as a potential modifier of the world`s climate. The influence of methane as a greenhouse gas is 21-23 times that of carbon dioxide (e.g. Lelieveld et al., 1998) but

only over a relatively short period of time as methane is rapidly oxidized to CO2 in the atmosphere. The end of the Palaeocene (~57 Ma) was denoted by a massive oxygen and carbon isotope excursion coinciding with intense global warming and deep- sea benthic extinction (Alegret and Ortiz, 2007). These prolific changes resonated in the environment and had effects on biological evolution thereafter (Kennett and Scott, 1991). Momentous events like these gave rise to the Clathrate Gun Hypothesis

(Kennett et al., 2003); this hypothesis links large methane release to near- instantaneous climate tipping events . A debate exists over whether the source of methane is derived from marine sediments (O’Hara, 2008) or sourced from the continent (Etiope et al., 2008).

AUVs are a pre-requisite to effective environmental policy—in-situ processing radically reframes our understanding of key environmental dynamics NRC‘96[National Research Council. “Undersea Vehicles and National Needs”. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 1996, http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=5069&page=55]While scientists have been studying oceanic communities for more than a century, the perspective afforded by research vessels at the surface has biased our knowledge substantially . For example, scientists have underestimated the pelagic biomass by as much as one-quarter (Robison, 1995; UNOLS, 1994) because gelatinous animals are destroyed by the collecting nets used to bring them to

the surface and because they are invisible to acoustic scans. Recent estimates, based on surveys by undersea vehicles, are beginning to revise our understanding and perceptions about oceanic life processes , but this effort has only begun. Nets and acoustic assessment have also obscured the behavior and ecology of oceanic animals because they cannot reveal their

activities in useful detail. Undersea vehicles have provided scientists and investigators with the tools to begin to solve some of these problems by giving them an in situ perspective . While net tows measure patterns at scales from ten to hundreds of meters in the vertical plane and at kilometer scales in the horizontal plane, direct observations from ROVs and DSVs provide resolution on spatial scales from a centimeter to a kilometer. Recently, ROVs and DSVs equipped with high-resolution video cameras provided effective platforms for this kind of marine exploration in water column depths up to 1,000meters (Hammer and Robison, 1992; Matsumoto and Harbison, 1993). These techniques have also been applied to comparable studies of bioluminescence (Widder et al., 1989) and marine snow

(Pilskaln et al., 1991). With the extension of these studies into deeper water, a large number of undescribed species and "new" ecological relationships are coming to light. Among the ecological features revealed by these measurements are animal associations, habitat partitioning, the role of substrate in spatial distribution patterns, and animal densities.

3

AffirmativeDMHS AnLi

Undersea vehicles allow observation of trophic relationships, physiological rates and processes, activity levels, behavioral patterns, standing

stocks, and reproductive patterns (Bailey et al., 1994; Robison, 1995; Adams et al., 1995a). Undersea vehicles can play a major role in forthcoming studies of marine biodiversity (NRC, 1995). The need to understand the dynamics of marine animal populations and their coupling and the physical and biological processes in their environment is fundamental to the larger issue of how global climate change affects marine systems . One of the U.S. components of the Global Ocean Ecosystem Dynamics study, the Georges Bank program, has focused on studying the population dynamics of four target species of plankton on the Bank (historically one of the world's great fisheries production areas). However, cod and haddock populations have been driven so low by overfishing that these fisheries on Georges Bank are now closed. Integrated surveys of distribution and abundance of the animals, process studies of the predators and prey, and the impact of major physical processes on the biological rates are required. The use of ROVs and AUVs, while limited in the initial stages of this research, holds promise for enhancing the understanding of how individual species exist in their environments on very small scales and the time series changes that take place over periods of months or years.2

AUVs are key to understanding and mitigating several other huge environmental threats—oil spills, coral reefs and biodiversity loss Bluefin robotics, 12—AUV Technology Company, September 2012 [Bluefin robotics is a Battelle company who develops, builds, and operates Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (AUVs) and related technologies for defense, commercial, and scientific customers worldwide, http://www.bluefinrobotics.com/assets/Papers/Glider-Observations-Support-Plankton-Population-Characterization-Sea-Technology-Sept-2012.pdf, accessed 26 June 2014] JBSampling and persistent monitoring of undersea habitats provide baseline information and important data characterizing change related to events (e. g., oil spills) and phenomena (e.g., climate change ), which informs scientific discovery and aids efforts to better understand and perhaps mitigate change . Autonomous glider technology has improved researchers’ ability to conduct both types of assessment: Rapid site characterization enables cost-effective identification of areas that warrant more detailed assessment, and deployments lasting several months provide previously unavailable temporal and spatial breadth that can reveal trends and illustrate change. Over the past two years, work conducted by the NOAA Cooperative Institute for Ocean Exploration, Research and Technology, headquartered at Florida Atlantic University’s Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute, has been shaped by the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. The Florida Shelf Edge Exploration (FLOSEE) expedition was launched in July 2010, three months after the spill, to explore and assess mesophotic

and shelf-edge reefs, which were deemed at risk via the Gulf of Mexico Loop Current and the Florida Current. Expedition goals included characterizing spill impacts on the ecosystems or, in the absence of such evidence, establishing baselines in advance of potential impacts, as the flow of oil from the well had not been contained when the expedition commenced. In September 2011, a follow-up

expedition, FLOSEE II, was launched to locate and characterize deep reefs, with a focus on coral and commercial fish. It assessed the effective-ness of marine managed areas for restoring coral and fis h , monitor ed the effects of oil contamination and characterized plankton populations above or near reefs. Mapping and biodiversity assessments were conducted from the NOAA vessel Nancy Foster using multi beam sonar and the University of Connecticut’s Kraken II ROV for high definition video surveys and MOCNESS (Multiple Opening and Closing Net Environmental Sensing System) trawls.

Furthermore, persistent temperature maxima have been associated with bleaching events affecting hard and soft corals and sponges. Corals are also susceptible to persistent salinity depressions, which can result from proximity to the Loop Current and possibly heavy rains or hurricanes. Surprisingly little data exists on the seasonal dynamics of phytoplankton populations and environmental correlates at shelf-edge reef environments. The capabilities of the Spray Glider enable data collection that can help answer some of these scientific questions. Understanding the temporal and spatial patterns of temperature, salinity, chlorophyll-a and turbidity provides insight into ecologically significant fluctuations associated with coral-reef function and health. Similarly, characterizing the large-scale distribution of phytoplankton concentrations above the reefs and in surrounding waters provides a marker of system health. Two missions have been conducted at Pulley Ridge with the Spray Glider. The first deployment was launched during FLOSEE II in September 2011, with recovery in November after more than 3,200 dives between 50 and 80 meters water depth. The Spray Glider was also deployed off Naples, Florida, bound for Pulley Ridge, approximately 130 nautical miles away, in February 2012, performing almost 2,000 dives down to 90 meters off the western edge of the ridge.

These studies also presented the opportunity to explore some of the technical questions related to glider work. Shelf edge reef topography complicates deployment at Pulley Ridge, as do highly variable currents and water density. Strong currents at the western edge of the ridge presented difficult conditions for the slow-moving glider. However, the strategy of minimizing the time the glider spent on the surface proved effective in making headway despite the currents. To obtain profiles within several meters of the seabed, the survey team used previously acquired multibeam bathymetry to assist with setting maximum dive depths. Because the entire mission took place in the euphotic zone, the effects of biofueling on the glider and sensors were also a concern. Indeed, it was evident that the sensitivity of the optical sensors was significantly reduced by biofueling after more than six weeks. These separate sorties enabled assessment of seasonal changes in chlorophyll distribution, turbidity, salinity and temperature structure above the reef and in surrounding waters. During the attended phase of the first mission, benthic video survey, CTD rosette profiling and plankton net trawls were also performed in the vicinity of the glider.

4

AffirmativeDMHS AnLi

The chlorophyll maxima over Pulley Ridge was quite consistent between the fall and winter sorties, ranging from 1 to 1.3 micrograms per liter at 50 to 55 meters water depth. In contrast, the temperature and salinity structure was highly variable between the two missions and was most

evident in a salinity inversion observed in the February 2012 data. Future Work These missions demonstrated that the Spray Glider is a capable, cost-effective means of monitoring distributions of chlorophyll, turbidity, temperature and salinity structure at shelf-edge mesophotic reef ecosystems . The longer term outcome of these missions could be the use of gliders as tools to indicate the presence and health of deep coral ecosystems by measurement of larval and plankton populations in the adjacent benthopelagic region. Another mission to Pulley Ridge was scheduled for September to November 2012, with plans to pilot the glider toward deeper water to the southeast where other deep coral reef ecosystems are known to exist. n

Species diversity loss causes global extinction – we’re at the tipping point – crossing the threshold in the next 10 years makes it irreversible Walsh, 10—Bryan, “Wildlife: A Global Convention on Biodiversity Opens in Japan, But Can It Make a Difference?” Ecocentric Blog @ TIME, 10-18, http://ecocentric.blogs.time.com/2010/10/18/wildlife-a-global-convention-on-biodiversity-opens-in-japan-but-can-it-make-a-difference/#ixzz131wU6CSp. //BR With that cheery backdrop, representatives from nearly 200 nations are meeting in the Japanese city of Nagoya—home to Toyota and not a whole lot else—for the 10th summit of the CBD, where they will set new goals for reducing species loss and slowing habitat destruction. At the very least, they should know how critical the biodiversity challenge is—as Japanese Environment Minister Ryo Matsumoto said in an opening

speech: All life on Earth exists thanks to the benefits from biodiversity in the forms of fertile soil, clear water and clean air. We are now close to a 'tipping point ' - that is, we are about to reach a threshold beyond which biodiversity loss will become irreversible, and may cross that threshold in the next 10 years if we do

not make proactive efforts for conserving biodiversity . Ahmed Djoghlaf, the executive secretary of the CBD, struck an even darker note, reminding diplomats that they were on a clock—and time was running out: Let's have the courage to look in the eyes of our children and admit that we have failed, individually and collectively, to fulfil the Johannesburg promise made by 110 heads of state to substantially reduce the rate of loss of biodiversity by 2010. Let us look in the eyes of our children and admit that we continue to lose biodiversity at an unprecedented rate, thus mortgaging their future. But what will actually come out of the Nagoya summit, which will continue until Oct. 29? Most likely there will be another agreement—a new protocol—outlining various global strategies on sustaining biodiversity and goals on slowing the rate of species loss. (You can download a PDF of the discussion draft document that will be picked over at Nagoya.) It won't be hard for governments to agree on general ambitions for reducing biodiversity loss—who's against saving pandas?—but the negotiations will be much trickier on the question of who will actually pay for a more biodiverse planet? And much as we've seen in international climate change negotiations, the essential divide is between the developed and developing nations—and neither side seems ready to bend. The reality is that much of the world's biodiversity—the most fantastic species and the most complete forests—is found in the poorer, less developed parts of the world. That's in part because the world's poor have been, well, too poor to develop the land around them in the way rich nations have. (There was once a beautiful, undeveloped island off the East Coast of the U.S., with wetlands and abundant forests. It was called Mannahatta. It's a little different now.) As a result, the rural poor—especially in tropical nations—are directly dependent on healthy wildlife and plants in a way that inhabitants of developed nations aren't. So on one hand that makes the poor directly vulnerable when species are lost and forests are chopped down—which often results in migration to thronging urban areas. But on the other, poverty often drives the rural poor to slash-and-burn forests for agriculture, or hunt endangered species to sell for bush meat. Conservation and development have to go hand in hand. That hasn't always been the mantra of the conservation movement—as Rebecca Tuhus-Dubrow writes in Slate, conservation projects in the past sometimes displaced the human inhabitants over a reserve or park, privileging nature over people. But that's changed in recent decades—environmental groups like Conservation International or the Nature Conservancy now spend as much of their time working on development as they do in protecting nature. "Save the people, save the wildlife"—that's the new mantra. The missing ingredient is money—and that's what will be up for debate at Nagoya. As climate change has risen on the international agenda, funding for biodiversity has lagged—the 33 member nations of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) donated $8.5 billion for climate change mitigation projects in 2008, but just $3 billion annually for biodiversity. One way to change that could be through "payment for ecosystem services." A biodiverse landscape, intact forests, clean water and air—all of these ebbing qualities of a healthy world are vital for our economies as well. (The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity, a UN-funded study, estimates that nature degradation costs the world $2 trillion to $5 trillion a year, with the poorest nations bearing the brunt of the loss.) Rich countries could pay more biodiverse developing nations to keep nature running—allowing poorer countries to capitalize on their natural resources without slashing and burning. Will that work? I'm skeptical—the experience of climate change negotiations have shown that the nations of the world are great at high ideals and fuzzy goals, but not so hot at actually dividing up the pie in a more sustainable fashion. That doesn't mean there aren't smaller solutions—like Costa Rica's just-announced debt-for-nature deal—but a big bang from Japan this month doesn't seem too likely. The problem is as simple as it is unsolvable, at least so far—there's no clear path to national development so far that doesn't take from the natural world. That worked for rich nations, but we're rapidly running out of planet, as a report last week from the World Wildlife Fund showed. And there's something greater at stake as well, as the naturalist E.O. Wilson

once put it: The one process now going on that will take millions of years to correct is the loss of genetic and

species diversity by the destruction of natural habitats-this is the folly our descendants are least likely to forgive us. We're losing nature. And that loss really is forever.

5

AffirmativeDMHS AnLi

Defer Aff—coral reef and ocean ecosystem collapse is an invisible threshold for extinction Watston, 2K—founder Sea Shepherd conservation Society. Founding Director Greenpeace, MA Environmentalist[Paul, “The Politics of Extinction,” http://www.eco-action.org/dt/beerswil.html]Individual humans are for the most part insulated from the reality of species loss . Alienated from the natural world, wrapped in a cocoon of

material pleasures, guided by anthropocentric attitudes, the average human being is unaware and non-caring about the biological holocaust that is transpiring each and every day. The facts are clear. More plant and animal species will go through extinction within our generation than have been lost thorough natural causes over the past two hundred million years. Our single human generation, that is, all people born between 1930 and 2010 will witness the complete obliteration of one third to one half of all the Earth's life forms , each and every one of them the product of more than two billion years of evolution. This is biological meltdown, and what this really means is the end to vertebrate evolution on planet Earth . Nature is under siege on a global scale. Biotopes, i.e., environmentally distinct regions, from tropical and temperate rain forests to coral reefs and coastal estuaries, are disintegrating in the wake of human onslaught. The destruction of forests and the proliferation of human activity will remove more than 20 percent of all terrestrial plant species over the next fifty years . Because plants form the foundation for entire biotic communities, their demise will carry with it the extinction of an exponentially greater number of animal species -- perhaps ten times as many faunal species for each type of plant eliminated. Sixty-five million years ago, a natural cataclysmic event resulted in extinction of the dinosaurs. Even with a plant foundation intact, it took more than 100,000 years for faunal biological diversity to re-establish itself. More importantly, the resurrection of biological diversity assumes an intact zone of tropical forests to provide for new speciation after extinction. Today, the tropical rain forests are disappearing more rapidly than any other bio-region, ensuring that after the age of humans, the Earth will remain a biological, if not a literal desert for eons to

come. The present course of civilization points to ecocide -- the death of nature . Like a run-a-way train, civilization is speeding along tracks of our own manufacture towards the stone wall of extinction . The human passengers sitting comfortably in their seats, laughing, partying, and choosing to not look out the window. Environmentalists are those perceptive few who have their faces pressed against the glass, watching the hurling bodies of plants and animals go screaming by. Environmental activists are those even fewer people who are trying desperately to break into the fortified engine of greed that propels this destructive specicidal juggernaut. Others are desperately throwing out anchors in an attempt to slow the monster down while all the while, the authorities, blind to their own impending destruction, are clubbing, shooting and jailing those who would save us all. SHORT MEMORIES Civilized humans have for ten thousand years been marching across the face of the Earth leaving deserts in their footprints. Because we have such short memories, we forgot the wonder and splendor of a virgin nature. We revise history and make it fit into our present perceptions. For instance, are you aware that only two thousand years ago, the coast of North Africa was a mighty forest? The Phoenicians and the Carthaginians built powerful ships from the strong timbers of the region. Rome was a major exporter of timber to Europe. The temple of Jerusalem was built with titanic cedar logs, one image of which adorns the flag of Lebanon today. Jesus Christ did not live in a desert, he was a man of the forest. The Sumerians were renowned for clearing the forests of Mesopotamia for agriculture. But the destruction of the coastal swath of the North African forest stopped the rain from advancing into the interior. Without the rain, the trees died and thus was born the mighty Sahara, sired by man and continued to grow southward at a rate of ten miles per year, advancing down the length of the continent of Africa. And so will go Brazil. The precipitation off the Atlantic strikes the coastal rain forest and is absorbed and sent skyward again by the trees, falling further into the interior. Twelve times the moisture falls and twelve times it is returned to the sky -- all the way to the Andes mountains. Destroy the coastal swath and desertify Amazonia -- it is as simple as that. Create a swath anywhere between the coast and the mountains and the rains will be stopped. We did it before while relatively primitive. We learned nothing. We forgot. So too, have we forgotten that walrus once mated and bred along the coast of Nova Scotia, that sixty million bison once roamed the North American plains. One hundred years ago, the white bear once roamed the forests of New England and the Canadian Maritime provinces. Now it is called the polar bear because that is where it now makes its last stand. EXTINCTION DIFFICULT TO APPRECIATE Gone forever are the European elephant, lion and tiger. The Labrador duck, giant auk, Carolina parakeet will never again grace this planet of ours. Lost for all time are the Atlantic grey whales, the Biscayan right whales and the Stellar sea cow. our children will never look upon

the California condor in the wild or watch the Palos Verde blue butterfly dart from flower to flower . Extinction is a difficult concept to fully appreciate. What has been is no more and never shall be again. It would take another creation and billions of years to recreate the passenger pigeon. It is the loss of

billions of years of evolutionary programming. It is the destruction of beauty, the obliteration of truth, the removal of uniqueness, the scarring of the sacred web of life. To be responsible for an extinction is to commit blasphemy against the divine. It is the greatest of all possible crimes, more evil than murder, more appalling than genocide , more monstrous than even the apparent unlimited perversities of the human mind. To be responsible for the complete and utter destruction of a unique and sacred life form is arrogance that seethes with evil, for the very opposite of evil is live. It is no accident that these two words spell out each other in reverse. And yet, a reporter in California recently told me that "all the redwoods in California are not worth the life on one human being." What incredible arrogance. The rights a species, any species, must take precedence over the life of an individual or another species. This is a basic ecological law. It is not to be

tampered with by primates who have molded themselves into divine legends in their own mind. For each and every one of the thirty million plus species that grace this beautiful planet are essential for the continued well-being of which we are all a part, the planet Earth -- the divine entity which brought us forth from the fertility of her sacred womb. As a sea-captain I like to compare the structural integrity of the biosphere to that of a ship's hull. Each species is a rivet that keeps the hull intact. If I were to go into my engine room and find my engineers busily popping rivets from the hull, I would be upset and naturally I would ask them what they were doing. If they told me that they discovered that they could make a dollar each from the rivets, I could do one of three things. I could ignore them. I could ask them to cut me in for a share of the profits, or I could kick their asses out of the engine room and off my ship. If I was a responsible captain, I would do the latter. If I did not, I would soon find the ocean pouring through the holes left by the stolen rivetsand very shortly after, my ship, my crew and myself would disappear beneath the waves. And that is the state of the world today. The political leaders, i.e., the captains at the helms of their nation states, are ignoring the rivet poppers or they are cutting themselves in for the profits. There are very few asses being kicked out of the engine room of spaceship Earth. With the rivet poppers in command, it will not be long until the biospheric integrity of the Earth collapses under the weight of ecological strain and tides of death come pouring in.And that will be the price of progress -- ecological collapse, the death of nature, and with it the horrendous and mind numbing specter of massive human destruction.

6

AffirmativeDMHS AnLi

Contention Three—Rare Earth MineralsRare Earth Minerals (REMs) depleting now– AUVs access new supplies which are key for the aerospace industry and high tech manufacturing and allow us to beat out China Green, Senior Editor-in-Chief at Robotics Business Review, 14 (Tom, 5-12-14, Robotics Business Review, “Deep Sea Dive for Rare Earth Elements”, http://www.roboticsbusinessreview.com/article/deep_sea_dive_for_rare_earth_elements)After a year of falling prices and depleting customer inventories, buyers of Rare Earth Elements (REEs) are coming back into this $10B market, but now supplies are getting scarce and prices are beginning to soar. With populations consuming metals and minerals on the rise, especially new middle-class consumers in China and India, demand is set to skyrocket . Future supply chains and national economies will witness major disruptions, according to a PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) study: Minerals and metals scarcity in manufacturing: The ticking time bomb. Three deep-ocean mining companies , Nautilus Minerals; UK Seabed Resources (the British division of Lockheed Martin); and DeepGreen Resources, plan to mine the sea floor under the Pacific Ocean (most notably in the Bismarck Sea off Papua New Guinea) using a combination of remotely operated or autonomous underwater vehicles, pumps, suction and riser pipes to extract the minerals. These REEs, with odd monikers like lanthanum, cerium, praseodymium, promethium, neodymium, samarium, europium, gadolinium, terbium, dysprosium, holmium, erbium, thulium, ytterbium, and lutetium, are not household names, but what they do makes every household—and the people in those households—live better lives. For example, most of our fancy electronic gadgets—like our Smartphones and laptops—depend on REEs to operate. Better yet for this Pacific sea hunt, the REEs aren’t alone on the sea floor: “staggering” levels of magnesium, gold, silver, cobalt, nickel and copper are there for the taking as well; much of which are easy pickings as mineral-rich nodules scattered over the sea bottom. Frontrunner: Nautilus Minerals Of the three contenders, the Canadian company, Nautilus Minerals (TSX:NUS), is the more ready to mine. “Nautilus plans to deploy three machines, operated by remote control. Operators sitting on a ship stationed above the deposit will control mine-bots on the seafloor: an initial cutter for clearance; a bulk cutter to do most of the work; and a machine to collect and transport the material to a pumping station. slurry ship “The material will then be pumped up in slurry form to the ship, where it will be de-watered and set to shore for processing. For nodules, robots will roam the seabed.” Critical to high-tech everything REEs are metals with unique physical, chemical and light-emitting properties vital to hybrid vehicles, rechargeable batteries, wind turbines ( renewable energy) mobile (cell) phones, compact fluorescent light bulbs, laptop computers, disk drives, catalytic converters, and LED, Plasma, and LCD display panels. Neodymium, for example, is responsible for ensuring that the likes of Smartphones, hard drives, earphones, even MRI scanners, do the job they are designed to do. Far from abundant on land With over 30 percent of the world’s known REE deposits and by far the cheapest extraction process, China supplies 95 percent of the world’s REE s . However, China, with a rising middle class and booming domestic market, is steadily reducing export quotas. The Word Trade Organization (WTO), of which China is a member, ruled in March of 2014 that China was hoarding and taking unfair advantage of the market. That decision was two years in coming, and now China will appeal the current WTO judgment, which might take another two years. Byron Capital analyst, John Hykawy said “I’ve heard from so many critical materials buyers at large corporations that they want security of supply. And security of supply to them means avoiding Chinese supply at all costs because they got fooled once. They don’t want to get fooled again.” 2- to 3-miles down: REEs not alone on the seabed In the meantime, REEs are again getting to be in short supply, and with demand forecast to progressively increase, the world drastically needs new suppliers of REEs. The London Metal Exchange lists neodymium at $800 Kg; terbium metal at 1,900 Kg; and scandium metal 15,500.00 per Kg. Relatively inexpensive is lanthanum at $13 Kg. However, the battery in a Toyota Prius hybrid requires more than 10kg of lanthanum. Now multiply $130 times millions of Toyota’s and the need for lots of lanthanum comes into focus. Stephen Ball, chief executive officer of Lockheed Martin UK, owner of UK Seabed Resources, told the BBC “It’s another source of minerals – there’s a shortage and there’s difficulty getting access, so there’s strategic value for the UK government in getting an opportunity to get these minerals.” UK Seabed Resources says surveys have revealed huge numbers of nodules – small lumps of rock rich in valuable metals – lying on the ocean floor south of Hawaii and west of Mexico. The exact value of these resources is impossible to calculate reliably, but a leading

7

AffirmativeDMHS AnLi

UN official described the scale of mineral deposits in the world’s oceans as “staggering” with “several hundred years’ worth of cobalt and nickel.” “These tennis-ball sized nodules, found approximately four kilometers (2.5 miles) beneath the ocean’s surface, can provide millions of tons of copper, nickel, cobalt and manganese, as well as rare earth minerals, that are used in the construction, aerospace, alternative energy, and communications industries, among others,” reports Lockheed Martin. The Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology and the University of Tokyo confirmed the discovery of a “huge new deposit” on the Pacific seabed, claiming the “deposit can be mined at very low cost and will be able to produce materials that are 20 to 30 times more concentrated than those currently being mined in China . ” Robot submersibles hold the key Located approximately 5,700 meters or 3.5 miles down, the Japanese scientists “claim the deposits to be approximately 6.8 million metric tons of rare earths, equivalent to 230 years of local demand.” Although subsea mining at depths of 500 feet or less has been carried out for some time, deep sea projects have had to await technology, which is now coming on line, funded by companies like Nautilus Minerals, with subsea robot mining tools built by technology partners like Soil Machine Dynamics.

Autonomous underwater vehicles key to inexpensive detection of mineral deposits AND new technology means surveys can be done quickly and accuratelyWiltshire, ’10, Specialist at Ocean and Resources Engineering[J. C., "MINERAL EXTRACTION, AUTHIGENIC MINERALS." Marine Policy & Economics: A Derivative of the Encyclopedia of Ocean Sciences(2010): 274., Google Books, http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=dqzXwFsOFMcC&oi=fnd&pg=PA274&dq=(%22Rare+Earth+Elements%22+OR+%22rare+earth+minerals%22)+AND+(%22autonomous+underwater+vehicles%22+OR+%22Autonomous+Benthic+Explorer%22)&ots=PIzchVTPjs&sig=C1I_dhR2fdZIW6VUSsl3m8t-n44#v=onepage&q&f=false, pg 276]The first step in minerals development is to find an economic mine site. This is found by surveying and mineral sampling. A great deal of mineral sampling has already been done over the last 40 years throughout the world’s ocean. These data are available for initial planning purposes. Following a detailed literature review the prospective ocean miner would send out a research vessel to sample extensively in the areas under consideration. New acoustical techniques can be calibrated to show certain kinds of bottom cover, including the density of manganese nodule cover. This is one way to rapidly survey the bottom to highlight the areas with potentially economic accumulation of authigenic minerals. Significant advances in marine electronics, navigation, and autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs) are being brought together. New “chirp” sonars which transmit a long pulse of sound in which the frequency of the transmitted pulse changes linearly with time give high resolution and long-range seafloor and sub- bottom imagery . Navigation based on the satellite global positioning system (GPS) can now give accurate underwater positions (≤1m) when linked to an acoustic relay. This level of survey equipment is now available on underwater autonomous vehicles, meaning that the cost of a ship is not necessarily an impediment. Sampling for metal concentrations follows the initial surveys. Sampling may be from a ship, a remotely operated vehicle (ROV), or a submersible. Sampling is likely to begin with dredges, progress to some kind of coring, and finish with carefully oriented drilled samples giving a three-dimensional picture of the ore distribution. These data, after chemical analysis of the contained metals, will give grade and tonnage information. The grade and tonnage estimates of the deposit will be entered into a financial model to determine whether it is economically profitable to mine a given deposit.

China REM monopoly prevents US high tech manufacturing and causes all future development to offshore – US action is key now to win the race and cause reshoring Hannis, Senior fellow in defense studies at the American Foreign Policy Council, 12 (Eric, 11-20-12, US News, “Are We Losing the Race for Rare Earths?”,

8

AffirmativeDMHS AnLi

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2012/11/20/the-us-needs-rare-earth-independence-from-china)The United States, like most of the industrialized world, is currently engaged in a race to develop viable, non-Chinese sources of the rare earth elements that are so critical to modern technologies. And we better move fast, or we will lose that race. Why are rare earths so important? Everything from smartphones to iPods to missile systems requires rare earths. Almost every piece of high tech gadgetry contains some combination of rare earths to make volumes louder, E-mails vibrate, and bombs able to hit their targets. Nations that control rare earth production own one of the most capable economic and national security levers in the modern world. Over the last quarter century, that lever has been controlled overwhelmingly by China. China began a dedicated campaign to dominate the rare earth supply chain back in the 1970s. In 1992, Deng Xiaoping's drive to control these elements was famously reflected in his statement that the "Middle East has oil, China has rare earths." China today has the largest share of rare earth deposits on Earth—almost half the world's reserves. As a result, Beijing has been able to effectively use access to rare earths as a way to compel high tech companies to establish production in China. It has also worked to eliminate the competition; starting in the 1990s, China dumped huge quantities of rare earths onto the world market, resulting in plunging prices that forced U.S. companies out of the business. With U.S. and foreign competitors out of the way, China began to use rare earths as an economic development lever. It works like this: Companies that produce their high tech products in China can get the benefit of lower prices as well as a guaranteed supply. China's intent all along was not just to develop rare earth production, but also the downstream high tech industries that depend on rare earths. This supply chain brings with it thousand of jobs—and tremendous dependency on China. The country currently has a stranglehold on the rare earth supply, amounting to more than 95 percent of worldwide production. But a backlash is beginning. Many companies are increasingly loathe to move their production to mainland China. Most are afraid of the potential of intellectual property infringement and industrial espionage. But the need to gain a cost effective, guaranteed supply of rare earths means that many have been forced to make a "deal with the devil." If viable, non-Chinese sources are developed soon, however, companies will have an alternative that will allow them a way out of the China relocation trap.

And that’s key to hegemony - 1) REM independence is key to weapons development and preserving hegemony

Hannis, Senior fellow in defense studies at the American Foreign Policy Council, 12 (Eric, 11-20-12, US News, “Are We Losing the Race for Rare Earths?”, http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2012/11/20/the-us-needs-rare-earth-independence-from-china) This race is also important for defense reasons: A reliable domestic source of rare earths for weapons production is a critical national security goal for modern nations. As China proved in 2010 when it placed a rare earth embargo on Japan because of a territorial dispute, it is not afraid to use access to rare earths as a lever to get its way in the international arena. Because of concerns over China's dominance of the rare earths market, the U.S. Department of Defense was directed by Congress in 2011 to study the problem. The Department of Defense's analysis resulted in an April 2012 report entitled Rare Earth Materials in Defense Applications, which determined that we are at risk for interruption of some

critical rare earth elements because of Chinese production hegemony . But where are we in the race to develop rare earth production? The United States, with approximately 13 percent of the world's total reserves, has one of the most economically-viable concentrations of rare earths in California. Other countries with large deposits of rare earths include Australia, Russia, Mongolia, and Kazakhstan, among others. Production in California is rapidly developing, and will be able to supply the raw rare earth ore

9

AffirmativeDMHS AnLi

for much of America's needs within a year or two. The problem is that mining for rare earths is just the start. The industrial capacity that takes raw rare earth elements and makes them into components that can be used in high tech products largely does not exist in the United States—and may not be developed for another 10 to 15 years. So the production of rare earth metals, alloys, and magnets have to rely on factories located outside the United States, and some even in China. An astounding 80 percent of the worldwide rare earth magnet production is from China. So the problem is not just about access; we must also develop U.S. capabilities to refine and make rare earths into useable components. Otherwise, we are simply shipping our raw materials to China, or other countries, for processing. This state of

affairs is unsustainable. Our national security and our economic health alike depend upon the

development an end-to-end, domestic rare earths supply chain. In much the same way that we should

strive for independence from Middle Eastern oil, the United States now needs to make "rare earth

independence" from China a key priority of government . After all, the nation that supplies our rare

earths shares one key similarity to the region that supplies much of our oil: Neither are getting

friendlier to America.

2) Manufacturing is key to defense technology that’s the foundation of military primacyO'Hanlon, Scholar at the Brookings Institution, 12 (Michael, January 2012, The Brookings Institution, “The Arsenal of Democracy and How to Preserve It: Key Issues in Defense Industrial Policy”, http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/papers/2012/1/26%20defense%20industrial%20base/0126_defense_industrial_base_ohanlon )The current wave of defense cuts is also different than past defense budget reductions in their likely industrial impact, as the U.S. defense industrial base is in a much different place than it was in the past. Defense industrial issues are too often viewed through the lens of jobs and pet projects to protect in congressional districts. But the overall health of the firms that supply the technologies our armed forces utilize does have national security resonance. Qualitative superiority in weaponry and other key military technology has become an essential element of American military power in the modern era

— not only for winning wars but for deterring them. That requires world-class scientific and

manufacturing capabilities —which in turn can also generate civilian and military export opportunities for the United States in a globalized marketplace.

3) Manufacturing is key to competitiveness that underpins growth and power projectionBaru, Visiting Professor at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy and Institute of South Asian Studies (Singapore), 9 (Sanjava, January 2009, The Seminar, “Year of the power shift?”, , http://www.india-seminar.com/2009/593/593_sanjaya_baru.htm)There is no doubt that economics alone will not determine the balance of global power, but there is no doubt either that economics has come to matter for more. The management of the economy, and of the treasury, has been a vital aspect of statecraft from time immemorial. Kautilya’s Arthashastra says, ‘From the strength of the treasury the army is born. …men without wealth do not attain their objectives even after hundreds of trials… Only through wealth can material gains be acquired, as elephants (wild) can be captured only by elephants (tamed)… A state with depleted resources, even if acquired, becomes only a liability.’4 Hence, economic policies and performance do have strategic consequences.5 In the modern era, the idea that strong economic performance is the foundation of power was argued most persuasively by historian Paul Kennedy. ‘Victory (in war),’ Kennedy claimed, ‘has repeatedly gone to the side with more flourishing productive base . ’6 Drawing attention to the interrelationships between economic wealth, technological innovation, and the ability of states to efficiently mobilize economic and technological resources for power projection and national defence, Kennedy argued that nations that were able to better combine military and economic strength scored over others. ‘The fact remains,’ Kennedy argued, ‘that all of the major shifts in the world’s military-power balance have followed alterations in the productive balances; and further, that the rising and falling of the various empires and states in the international system has been confirmed by the outcomes of the major

10

AffirmativeDMHS AnLi

Great Power wars, where victory has always gone to the side with the greatest material resources.’7 In Kennedy’s view the geopolitical consequences of an economic crisis or even decline would be transmitted through a nation’s inability to find adequate financial resources to simultaneously sustain economic growth and military power – the classic ‘guns vs butter’ dilemma.

The pursuit of hegemony is inevitable, sustainable, and prevents great power war Ikenberry, Brooks, and Wohlforth, Associate Professor of Government at Dartmouth College and the Albert G. Milbank Professor of Politics and International Affairs at Princeton University and Global Eminence Scholar at Kyung Hee University in Seoul and the Daniel Webster Professor of Government at Dartmouth College, 13 (John Ikenberry, Stephen G. Brooks, William C. Wohlforth, January/February 2013, Foreign Affairs, “Lean Forward: In Defense of American Engagement” http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/138468/stephen-g-brooks-g-john-ikenberry-and-william-c-wohlforth/lean-forward)Of course, even if it is true that the costs of deep engagement fall far below what advocates of retrenchment claim, they would not be worth

bearing unless they yielded greater benefits. In fact, they do. The most obvious benefit of the current strategy is that it reduces the risk of a dangerous conflict. The United States' security commitments deter states with aspirations to regional hegemony from contemplating expansion and dissuade U.S. partners from trying to solve security problems on their own in ways that would end up threatening other states. Skeptics discount this benefit by arguing that U.S. security guarantees aren't necessary to prevent dangerous rivalries from erupting. They maintain that the high costs of territorial conquest and the many tools countries can use to signal their benign intentions are enough to prevent conflict. In other words, major powers could peacefully manage regional multipolarity without the American pacifier. But that outlook is too sanguine. If Washington got out of East Asia, Japan and South Korea would likely expand their military capabilities and go nuclear, which could provoke a destabilizing reaction from China. It's worth noting that during the Cold War, both South Korea and Taiwan tried to obtain nuclear weapons; the only thing that stopped them was the United States, which used its security

commitments to restrain their nuclear temptations. Similarly, were the United States to leave the Middle East, the countries

currently backed by Washington--notably, Israel, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia--might act in ways that would intensify the region's

security dilemmas. There would even be reason to worry about Europe. Although it's hard to imagine the return of great-power military competition in a post-American Europe, it's not difficult to foresee governments there refusing to pay the budgetary costs of higher military outlays and the political costs of increasing EU defense cooperation. The result might be a continent incapable of securing itself from threats on its periphery, unable to join foreign interventions on which U.S. leaders might want European help, and vulnerable to the influence of outside rising powers. Given how easily a U.S. withdrawal from key regions could lead to dangerous competition, advocates of retrenchment tend to put forth another argument: that such rivalries wouldn't actually hurt the United States. To be sure, few doubt that the

United States could survive the return of conflict among powers in Asia or the Middle East--but at what cost? Were states in one or both of

these regions to start competing against one another, they would likely boost their military budgets, arm client states, and perhaps even start regional proxy wars, all of which should concern the United States, in part because its lead in military capabilities would narrow. Greater regional insecurity could also produce cascades of nuclear proliferation as powers such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan built nuclear forces of their own. Those countries' regional competitors might then also seek nuclear arsenals. Although nuclear deterrence can promote stability between two states with the kinds of nuclear forces that the Soviet Union and the United States possessed, things get shakier when there are multiple nuclear rivals with less robust arsenals. As the number of nuclear powers

increases, the probability of illicit transfers, irrational decisions, accidents, and unforeseen crises goes up . The case for abandoning the United States' global role misses the underlying security logic of the current approach. By reassuring allies and actively

managing regional relations, Washington dampens competition in the world s key areas, thereby preventing the emergence of a hothouse in which countries would grow new military capabilities. For proof that this strategy is working, one need look no further than the defense budgets of the current great powers: on average, since 1991 they have kept their military expenditures as A percentage of GDP to historic lows, and they have not attempted to match the United States' top-end military capabilities. Moreover, all of the world's most modern militaries are U.S. allies, and the United States' military lead over its potential rivals .is by many measures growing. On top

of all this, the current grand strategy acts as a hedge against the emergence regional hegemons. Some supporters of retrenchment argue that the U.S. military should keep its forces over the horizon and pass the buck to local powers to do the dangerous work of counterbalancing rising regional powers. Washington, they contend, should deploy forces abroad only when a truly credible contender for regional hegemony arises, as in the cases of Germany and Japan during World War II and the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Yet there is already a potential contender for regional hegemony--China--and to balance it, the United States will need to maintain its key alliances in Asia and the military capacity to intervene there. The implication is that the United States should get out of Afghanistan and Iraq, reduce its military presence in Europe, and pivot to Asia. Yet that is exactly what the Obama administration is doing. MILITARY DOMINANCE, ECONOMIC PREEMINENCE Preoccupied with security issues, critics of the current grand strategy miss one of its most important benefits: sustaining an open global economy and a favorable place for the United States within it. To be sure, the sheer size of its output would guarantee the United States a major role in the global economy whatever grand strategy it adopted. Yet the country's military dominance undergirds its economic leadership. In addition to protecting the world economy from instability, its military commitments and naval superiority help secure the sea-

11

AffirmativeDMHS AnLi

lanes and other shipping corridors that allow trade to flow freely and cheaply. Were the United States to pull back from the world, the task of securing the global commons would get much harder. Washington would have less leverage with which it could convince countries to cooperate on economic matters and less access to the military bases throughout the world needed to keep the seas open. A global role also lets the United States structure the world economy in ways that serve its particular economic interests. During the Cold War, Washington used its overseas security commitments to get allies to embrace the economic policies it preferred--convincing West Germany in the 1960s, for example, to take costly steps to support the U.S. dollar as a reserve currency. U.S. defense agreements work the same way today. For example, when negotiating the 2011 free-trade agreement with South Korea, U.S. officials took advantage of Seoul's desire to use the agreement as a means of tightening its security relations with Washington. As one diplomat explained to us privately, "We asked for changes in labor and environment clauses, in auto clauses, and the Koreans took it all." Why? Because they feared a failed agreement would be "a setback to the political and security relationship." More broadly, the United States wields its security leverage to shape the overall structure of the global economy. Much of what the United States wants from the economic order is more of the same: for instance, it likes the current structure of the World Trade Organization and the International Monetary Fund and prefers that free trade continue. Washington wins when U.S. allies favor this status quo, and one reason they are inclined to support the existing system is because they value their military alliances. Japan, to name one example, has shown interest in the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the Obama administration's most important free-trade initiative in the region, less because its economic interests compel it to do so than because Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda believes that his support will strengthen Japan's security ties with the United States. The United States' geopolitical dominance also helps keep the U.S. dollar in place as the world's reserve currency, which confers enormous benefits on the country, such as a greater ability to borrow money. This is perhaps clearest with Europe: the EU'S dependence on the United States for its security precludes the EU from having the kind of political leverage to support the euro that the United States has with the dollar. As with other aspects of the global economy, the United States does not provide its leadership for free: it extracts disproportionate gains. Shirking that responsibility would place those benefits at risk. CREATING COOPERATION What goes for the global economy goes for other forms of international cooperation. Here, too, American leadership benefits many countries but disproportionately helps the United States. In order to counter transnational threats, such as terrorism, piracy, organized crime, climate change, and pandemics, states have to work together and take collective action. But cooperation does not come about effortlessly, especially

when national interests diverge. The United States' military efforts to promote stability and its broader leadership make it easier for

Washington to launch joint initiatives and shape them in ways that reflect U.S. interests. After all, cooperation is hard to come by in

regions where chaos reigns, and it flourishes where leaders can anticipate lasting stability. U.S. alliances are about security first, but they

also provide the political framework and channels of communication for cooperation on nonmilitary issues. NATO, for example, has spawned new institutions, such as the Atlantic Council, a think tank, that make it easier for Americans and Europeans to talk to one another and do business. Likewise, consultations with allies in East Asia spill over into other policy issues; for example, when American diplomats travel to Seoul to manage the military alliance, they also end up discussing the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Thanks to conduits such as this, the United

States can use bargaining chips in one issue area to make progress in others. The benefits of these communication channels are especially pronounced when it comes to fighting the kinds of threats that require new forms of cooperation, such as terrorism and pandemics. With its alliance system in place, the United States is in a stronger position than it would otherwise be to advance cooperation and share burdens. For example, the intelligence-sharing network within NATO, which was originally designed to gather information on the Soviet Union, has been adapted to deal with terrorism. Similarly, after a tsunami in the Indian Ocean devastated surrounding countries in 2004, Washington had a much easier time orchestrating a fast humanitarian response with Australia, India, and Japan, since their militaries were already comfortable working with one another. The operation did wonders for the United States' image in the region. The United States' global role also has the more direct effect of facilitating the bargains among governments that get cooperation going in the first place. As the scholar Joseph Nye has written, "The American military role in deterring threats to allies, or of assuring access to a crucial resource such as oil in the Persian Gulf, means that the provision of protective force can be used in bargaining situations. Sometimes the linkage may be direct; more often it is a factor not mentioned openly but present in the back of statesmen's minds." THE DEVIL WE KNOW Should America come home? For many prominent scholars of international relations, the answer is yes--a view that seems even wiser in the

wake of the disaster in Iraq and the Great Recession. Yet their arguments simply don't hold up. There is little evidence that the United States would save much money switching to a smaller global posture. Nor is the current strategy self-defeating: it has not provoked the formation of counterbalancing coalitions or caused the country to spend itself into

economic decline. Nor will it condemn the United States to foolhardy wars in the future. What the strategy does do is help prevent the outbreak of conflict in the world's most important regions, keep the global economy humming, and make international cooperation easier . Charting a different course would threaten all these benefits. This is not to say that the United States' current foreign policy can't be adapted to new circumstances and challenges. Washington does not need to retain every commitment at all costs, and there is nothing wrong with rejiggering its strategy in response to new opportunities or setbacks. That is what the Nixon administration did by winding down the Vietnam War and increasing the United States' reliance on regional partners to contain Soviet power, and it is what the Obama administration has been doing after the Iraq war by pivoting to Asia. These episodes of rebalancing belie the argument that a powerful and internationally engaged America cannot tailor its policies to a changing world. A grand strategy of actively managing global security and promoting the liberal economic order has served the United States exceptionally well for the past six decades, and there is no reason to give it up now. The country's globe-spanning posture is the devil we know, and a world with a

disengaged America is the devil we don't know. Were American leaders to choose retrenchment, they would in essence

be running a massive experiment to test how the world would work without an engaged and liberal leading power. The results could well be disastrous.

12

AffirmativeDMHS AnLi

Contention Four—FisheriesBest evidence proves a majority of fisheries are still in decline Plumer, 13 (10/29/2013, Brad, “Just how badly are we overfishing the oceans?” http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/10/29/just-how-badly-are-we-overfishing-the-ocean/0/, JMP)So just how badly are we overfishing the oceans? Are fish populations going to keep shrinking each year — or could they recover? Those are surprisingly contentious questions, and there seem to be a couple of schools of thought here. The pessimistic view, famously expressed by fisheries expert Daniel Pauly, is that we may be facing "The End of Fish." One especially dire 2006 study in Science warned that many commercial ocean fish stocks were on pace to “collapse” by mid-century — at which point they would produce less than 10 percent of their peak catch. Then it's time to eat jellyfish. Other experts have countered that this view is far too alarmist.** A number of countries have worked hard to improve their fisheries management over the years, including Iceland, Australia, New Zealand, and the United States. "The U.S. is actually a big success story in rebuilding fish stocks," Ray Hilborn, a marine biologist at the University of Washington, told me last year. Overfishing isn't inevitable. We can fix it. Both sides make valid points — but the gloomy view is hard to dismiss. That's the argument of a new paper in Marine Pollution Bulletin by Tony Pitcher and William Cheung of the University of British Columbia that weighs in on this broader

debate. They conclude that some fisheries around the world are indeed improving, though these appear to be a minority for now. "Several deeper analyses of the status of the majority of world fisheries confirm the previous dismal picture," they

conclude. " Serious depletions are the norm world-wide , management quality is poor, catch per effort is still declining. " The decline of fisheries One reason the debate about overfishing is so contentious is that it's hard to get a precise read on the state of the world's marine fisheries. (The U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization tries its best in this annual report.) Ideally, we'd have in-depth stock assessments for the entire world, but those are difficult, expensive, and fairly rare. So, in their paper, Pitcher and Cheung review a number of recent studies that use indirect measurements instead. For example, they note that recent analyses of fish catches suggest that about 58 percent of the world's fish stocks have now collapsed or are overexploited: It's important to note that this is only one estimate — and a disputed one at that. A 2011 study in Conservation Biology by Trevor Branch et. al., by contrast, estimated that only 7 to 13 percent of stocks were collapsed and 28 to 33 percent "overexploited."*** Focusing on catches can be a tricky metric for judging the state of fisheries (it can be hard, for instance, to track changes in fishing practices over time that might bias the results). So the authors consider a variety of other metrics,

too. One example: The amount of effort that fishermen have put into catching fish has increased significantly in the past three decades, as measured by engine power and days that fishermen spend at sea. But the amount of fish actually caught has nevertheless stagnated since the 1990s: "Given the increase in global fishing effort, the lack of increase in global fisheries catch in the last decade and the fact that most productive areas have now been exploited by fisheries," Pitcher and Cheung note, it's quite possible that "global exploited fish stocks are likely to be in a decreasing trend." Could fisheries recover? That all said, there are also some reasons for optimism. In 2009, ecologist Boris Worm and his colleagues took a look at more than 350 detailed fish stock assessments and found that many fisheries in North America and Europe were actually recovering. In the United States, annual catch limits and market-based permit programs have helped some fish populations rebound. The real question is whether these success stories are the exception rather than the rule. Pitcher and Cheung argue that the fish stocks analyzed in that 2009 paper make up just 16 percent of the global catch — and are mostly confined to well-managed fisheries in richer countries. By contrast, more than 80 percent of the world's fish are caught in the rest of the world, in places like Asia and Africa. While data here is patchier, many of the nations in these regions are far less likely to follow the U.N.'s Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, and evidence suggests that "serious depletions are the norm" here: "It all depends where you look," Pitcher said in an interview. " There are a few

places where fisheries are doing better: The U.S., Australia, Canada, Norway. But those are relatively rare . In most places, the evidence suggests that things are getting worse." Given that the United States imports 91 percent of its seafood, that's an important caveat.

AUVs are comparatively better than conventional methods of fisheries management—solve several internal links that other tech doesn’t Smale ’12, Marine Biological Association Research Fellow “Regional-scale benthic monitoring for ecosystem-based fisheries management (EBFM) using an autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV)”, ICES Journal of Marine Science, http://icesjms.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2012/05/18/icesjms.fss082.fullThe AUV is a powerful tool for assessing the quantity and quality of benthic habitat for fisheries management, and far exceeds the ability of other commonly used methods to obtain large amounts of quantitative photographic data of the benthos. For example, photographic samples have been collected previously from submerged reefs in the region, by scuba divers (Bellchambers et al., 2008), “drop” cameras (Smale et al., 2010a), and towed video systems. In a single day in the field, a team of

13

AffirmativeDMHS AnLi

divers can typically collect 400 individual (non-overlapping) images and a remotely deployed “drop” camera can collect 700 images, depending on weather conditions and sampling protocol. During the surveys described here, the AUV collected .15 000 stereo image pairs each day, a

considerable increase in efficiency. Therefore, while initial expenditure on an AUV is greater (an AUV suitable to conduct the

monitoring programme would cost a total of $300 000), there are considerable reductions in cost relating to time at sea and personnel training (i.e. for scientific divers). Conversely, additional costs relating to expertise needed to operate the vehicle and maintenance may be higher than those associated with the other methods and would need to be considered in any formal analysis of cost-effectiveness. Benthic assemblage structure at the Abrolhos and Rottnest was quantified to provide a benchmark against which to detect future ecological change. The coexistence of coral- and kelp-dominated assemblages at the Abrolhos and, to a lesser extent, Rottnest provides a rare opportunity to test ecological hypotheses related to species interactions and oceanic warming, whereas the relative dominance of these habitat formers may represent a useful early warning signal for detecting ecological effects of seawater warming (Smale et al., 2010a). Here, continued sampling at the Abrolhos will have adequate power (.0.80) to detect ,35% change in cover of kelps and branching corals (i.e. principally

Acroporids) over time. As such, the power of AUV sampling to detect change in the cover of these key indicators bodes well for effective monitoring of these sensitive and important habitats. The AUV surveys detected high rates of coral bleaching (.10% of the entire seabed area) at one of the Abrolhos sites 2011, whereas no bleached corals were recorded in 2010. In early 2011, most of the Western Australian coastline experienced a “marine heat wave”, in that seawater temperatures were 2–48C higher than normal for up to 8 weeks (Pearce et al., 2011; Smale and Wernberg, 2012). Satellite-derived SSTs were the highest on record (i.e. for 30 years), while in situ loggers recorded warming anomalies of up to 58C in inshore waters (Pearce et al., 2011). Over 2000 km of coastline was subjected to the warming event, which was principally driven by strong La Nin˜a conditions superimposed onto a decadal-scale seawater warming trend (Pearce et al., 2011). At the Abrolhos, surface seawater temperature peaked at 28.78C in March, which is 58C higher than the longterm monthly mean for the region. Even at 25-m depth at the Geebank monitoring site, seawater temperature exceeded 278C. The high incidence of bleached corals was a direct consequence of persistent seawater warming, and ongoing regular AUV Figure 7. MDS ordinations, based on Bray–Curtis similarity matrices generated from square-root transformed per cent cover data, to indicate assemblage structure at each reference site and each sampling year at Abrolhos (left) and Rottnest (right), WA. Each centroid represents the average of two or three grids (25 × 25 m) sampled at each site (except “25 m Geebank” in 2010, see Methods). Low stress values (,0.1) indicate adequate representation of multidimensional distance in the two-dimensional MDS plots. Figure 8. Daily mean temperature at monitoring sites at Abrolhos and Rottnest during 2010 and 2011. Temperature data were collected (every 30 min) by in situ loggers deployed onto rocky reefs at 25 m depth. Page 8 of 11 D. A. Smale et al. Downloaded from http://icesjms.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on June 26, 2014 surveys will facilitate assessments of the

longer-term ecological consequences of the bleaching event. Understanding the levels of resilience and rates of recovery of these coral assemblages will become critically important, if, as predicted, the frequency and intensity of short-term extreme warming events increases (Solomon et al., 2007).

AUVs are a critical strategy to help end overfishing- improved information brings light to the catch-setting processStump ’11, Policy Director at the Marine Fish Conservation Network“INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE FOR 21ST CENTURY FISHERIES: AN INVESTMENT STRATEGY TO END OVERFISHING AND BUILD AMERICA’S FISHERIES“, Marine Fish Conservation Network, http://www.pcffa.org/MFCNFundingReport(Dec2011).pdfThe NOAA President’s FY2012 budget for NMFS seeks an increase of $16.2 million for Expanding Annual Stock Assessments (EASA) above the enacted FY2010 level of $50.9 million, part of which would go toward six proposed new fishery-independent surveys by 2016. The EASA-

requested funding level is intended to cover improved fishery -independent surveys using advanced sampling technologies , including

the deployment of new submersible AUVs and other innovative technologies, in order to provide data for data-poor stocks in regions that are inaccessible to conventional sampling gear and to support assessments of currently unassessed stocks in out-years . 69 The Survey and Monitoring Projects budget would receive $24.2 million to maintain resource monitoring activities for bluefin tuna, red snapper, West Coast groundfish, Maine and New Hampshire inshore trawl

surveys, Chesapeake Bay multi-species surveys, Bering Sea pollock surveys and Gulf of Maine groundfish surveys, all of which contribute vital data to maintain and update adequate stock assessments . The MARMAP funding of $0.842 million (equal to FY2010

funding) is intended to maintain the reef fish monitoring on the continental shelf from Cape Lookout, NC to Fort Pierce, FL in 2012, 2014, and 2016, supplemented by the Southeast Fishery-Independent Survey (SEFIS), which began in 2010 at an estimated cost of $1.5 million for additional ship time, not including other survey-related costs. A more comprehensive region-wide survey is estimated to cost as much as $11 million.70 SEAMAP, now under the Regional Studies budget line, would receive $5.1 million (equal to FY2010 funding) to continue its fishery-independent surveys in conjunction with state and university partnerships through cooperative agreements with states from North Carolina to Texas as well as the U.S. Virgin Island and Puerto Rico.

14

AffirmativeDMHS AnLi

Overfishing kills fisheries which are key to food security and the economy.Tilman et al ’13 Bren School of the Environment, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA, (7/13, Matthew G. Burgess, Stephen Polasky, and David Tilmana, “Predicting overfishing and extinction threats in multispecies fisheries,”Proceedings of the National Academy of Science U S A., http://www-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.proxy.lib.umich.edu/pmc/articles/PMC3791778/?tool=pmcentrez)FTMarine fisheries are an important global source of food and livelihoods (1–4), but there are concerns that current fishing practices threaten some marine species with severe depletion or eventual extinction (2–5). Many of the largest commercial fishing methods, such as trawling, longlining, and seining, unavoidably catch multiple species simultaneously (6–9). Multispecies fisheries pose a particular threat of extinction or severe depletion because fishing can remain profitable as long as some valuable species remain abundant , even while others collapse (6–11). In contrast, in a single-species fishery profits tend to fall as the target population declines, thereby removing the incentive to fish before extinction occurs (10). Multispecies fisheries pose a threat to two types of species or stocks (populations): (i) commercially valued species, called “weak stocks”, which are more vulnerable to overharvesting than are other commercially valuable species (6), and (ii) by-catch species, which are caught accidentally and create little economic incentive to cease fishing as their populations collapse because they have

little or no commercial value (7–9). Failure to prevent collapse of weak stocks and by-catch species can impose substantial long-term environmental and economic costs. Slow-growing populations are most likely to collapse , but

can take several decades to recover (5). Recovery often requires long-term fishery closures or reductions in effort , having substantial economic and social consequences (3, 5). Moreover, population declines caused by one fishery can diminish yields and profits in other commercial or artisanal fisheries that depend on the same species (e.g., ref. 12). Despite these costs, species threatened by fishing have rarely been identified until after their populations have declined substantially (2–5, 7, 8). Assessments of fishery impacts on species mostly focus on estimating current exploitation rates or past population trends (13–15), which identifies already declining species rather than predicting future declines. Data limitations have made empirical prediction of future threats from fishing challenging, particularly for weak stocks and by-catch species. Oceans are difficult to sample extensively, and few economic incentives exist to gather data on species other than the most commercially valued species (7, 8). Some predictive models (e.g., ref. 16) have been developed to forecast the impacts of some fisheries, but these are often data intensive. Some of the characteristics that make a population susceptible to overfishing are well known—for example, low population growth rates (3–11, 17, 18), high value and/or low fishing costs (10, 11, 17–19), and schooling behavior (18). Recently, some correlative approaches based on these characteristics have been developed for assessing likely relative threats to data-poor species (4, 20–22). However, predicting the severity of future threats in absolute terms with this type of approach can be challenging.

Dwindling food supplies causes less access to food for low income countriesLester R. Brown 11 is the President of the Earth Policy Institute, “The New Geopolitics of Food,” May 2011, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/04/25/the_new_geopolitics_of_food?page=full, Accessed Date: 3-15-13 y2kBeyond that, modern agriculture requires its own infrastructure: machine sheds, grain-drying equipment, silos, fertilizer storage sheds, fuel storage facilities, equipment repair and maintenance services, well-drilling equipment, irrigation pumps, and energy to power the pumps. Overall, development of the land acquired to date appears to be moving very slowly. So how much will all this expand world food output? We don't know, but the World Bank analysis indicates that only 37 percent of the projects will be devoted to food crops. Most of the land bought up so far will be used to produce biofuels and other industrial crops. Even if some of these projects do eventually boost land productivity, who will benefit? If virtually all the inputs -- the farm equipment, the fertilizer, the pesticides, the seeds -- are brought in from abroad and if all the output is shipped out of the country, it will contribute little to the host country's economy. At best, locals may find work as farm laborers, but in

highly mechanized operations, the jobs will be few. At worst, impoverished countries like Mozambique and Sudan will be left with less land and water with which to feed their already hungry populations. Thus far the land grabs have

contributed more to stirring unrest than to expanding food production. And this rich country-poor country divide could grow even more pronounced -- and soon. This January, a new stage in the scramble among importing countries to secure food began to unfold when South Korea, which imports 70 percent of its grain, announced that it was creating a new public-private entity that will be responsible for acquiring part of this grain. With an initial office in Chicago, the plan is to bypass the large international trading firms by buying grain directly from U.S. farmers. As the Koreans acquire their own grain elevators, they may well sign multiyear delivery contracts with farmers, agreeing to buy specified quantities of wheat, corn, or soybeans at a fixed price. Other importers will not stand idly by as South Korea tries to tie up a portion of the U.S. grain harvest even before it gets to market. The enterprising Koreans may soon be joined by China, Japan, Saudi Arabia, and other leading importers. Although South Korea's initial focus is the United States, far and away the world's largest grain exporter, it may later consider brokering deals with Canada, Australia, Argentina, and other major exporters. This is happening just as China may be on the verge of entering the U.S. market as a potentially massive importer of grain. With China's 1.4 billion increasingly affluent consumers starting to compete with U.S. consumers for the U.S. grain harvest, cheap food, seen by many as an American birthright, may be coming to an end. No one knows

where this intensifying competition for food supplies will go, but the world seems to be moving away from the international cooperation that evolved overseveral decades following World War II to an every-country-for-itself

15

AffirmativeDMHS AnLi

philosophy. Food nationalism may help secure food supplies for individual affluent countries , but it does little to enhance world food security . Indeed, the low-income countries that host land grabs or import grain will likely see their food situation deteriorate.

Access to food is a moral responsibility—we are obligated to ensure it WATSON 1977 (Richard, Professor of Philosophy at Washington University, World Hunger and Moral Obligation, p. 118-119)These arguments are morally spurious. That food sufficient for well-nourished survival is the equal right of every human individual or nation is a specification of the higher principle that everyone has equal right to the necessities of life. The moral stress of the principle of equity is primarily on equal sharing, and only secondarily on what is being shared. The higher moral principle is of human equity per se. Consequently, the moral action is to distribute all food equally, whatever the consequences . This is the hard line apparently drawn by such moralists as Immanuel Kant and Noam Chomsky—but then, morality is hard. The conclusion may be unreasonable (impractical and irrational in

conventional terms), but it is obviously moral. Nor should anyone purport surprise; it has always been understood that the claims of morality—if taken seriously—supersede those of conflicting reason. One may even have to sacrifice one’s life or one’s nation to be moral in situations where practical behavior would preserve it. For example, if a prisoner of war undergoing torture is to be a (perhaps

dead) patriot even when reason tells him that collaboration will hurt no one, he remains silent. Similarly, if one is to be moral, one distributes available food in equal shares (even if everyone then dies ). That an action is necessary to save one’s life is no excuse for behaving unpatriotically or immorally if one wishes to be a patriot or moral. No principle of morality absolves one of behaving immorally simply to save one’s life or nation. There is a strict analogy here between adhering to moral principles for the sake of being moral, and adhering

to Christian principles for the sake of being Christian. The moral world contains pits and lions, but one looks always to the highest light. The ultimate test always harks to the highest principle —recant or die— and it is pathetic to profess morality if one quits when the going gets rough. I have put aside many questions of detail—such as the mechanical problems of distributing food—

because detail does not alter the stark conclusion. If every human life is equal in value, then the equal distribution of the necessities of life is an extremely high, if not the highest, moral duty. It is at least high enough to override the excuse that by doing it one would lose one’s life. But many people cannot accept the view that one must distribute equally even in f the nation collapses or all people die. If everyone dies, then there will be no realm of morality. Practically speaking, sheer survival comes first. One can adhere to the principle of equity only if one exists. So it is rational to suppose that the principle of survival is morally higher than the principle of equity. And though one might not be able to argue for unequal distribution of food to save a nation—for nations can come and go—one might well argue that unequal distribution is necessary for the survival of the human species. That is, some large group—say one-third of present world population—should be at least well-nourished for human survival. However, from an individual standpoint, the human species—like the nation—is of no moral relevance. From a naturalistic standpoint, survival does come first; from a moralistic standpoint—as indicated above—survival may have to be sacrificed. In the milieu of morality, it is immaterial whether or not the human species survives as a result of individual behavior.

16

AffirmativeDMHS AnLi

Contention Five—Solvency Only U.S. federal investment can catalyze private sector tech and R&D development Avery, 13—President and Director Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, June 11 2013 [Dr. Susan K., Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Published June 11 2013, http://www.whoi.edu/page.do?pid=8915&tid=3622&cid=171149] JBMoving forward, we need to be even more adaptive and agile, applying new technologies in ways that both make crucial observations more effectively and make coincident observations of the biology, chemistry, and physics of the ocean. At the same time we need at our modeling and prediction centers to establish the resources and mindset that will support testing and adoption of research results that lead to improved

predictions. We are on the edge of exploration of many ocean frontiers that will be using new eyes in the ocean. Public -funded/ private- funded investment in those eyes is required, but will not be successful without adequate and continuing federal commitment to ocean science . Support such as Jim’s and the Schmidt Ocean Institute, which was founded by Eric Schmidt and operates the research vessel Falkor, help fill gaps in support for research and development or for access to the

ocean. However, the fact remains that federal funding is by far the leading driver of exploration, observation, and technical research and development that has a direct impact on the lives of people around the world and on U.S. economic growth and leadership. It also remains the bellwether by which philanthropic entrepreneurs judge the long-term viability of the impact their investment will have on the success that U.S. ocean science research will have around the globe.

P3s are an essential catalyst for AUV development, they provide cost savings to the people and improve current practices.FIND 14 – Federal information and news dispatch (FIND, “House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Hearing”, federal press release,http://insurancenewsnet.com/oarticle/2014/02/07/house-transportation-and-infrastructure-subcommittee-on-coast-guard-and-maritime-a-457472.html#.U6xpufmICQo, HW)There is an enormous capacity and capability in the private sector to provide NOAA, the Coast Guard, Corps of Engineers and other government agencies the hydrographic surveying, charting, aerial photography, photogrammetry, LIDAR, and other geospatial disciplines that support ATON. The private sector stands ready to continue to assist these agencies achieve their important missions. MAPPS urges Congress to enact legislation to accelerate and complete the transition from government or university

performance of commercially available geospatial services to contractor performance, while refocusing agencies on inherently governmental activities, such as establishing standards, coordinating user requirements, determining needs, and managing contracts. Federal agencies should maintain an "intellectual" core capability in surveying and mapping, versus a large dollar of capital capability. Congressional appropriations and

authorizations should be directed toward commercial contracting for data collection requirements, rather than capital equipment. Creating a pathway to greater utilization of the private sector and forming public-private partnerships will result in cost savings to the tax payer, improve the economy, enhance navigation , reduce duplication , and make programs more efficient . We commend Congress for its leadership on ATON, hydrography and nautical charting programs. Important steps have been taken, and progress has been made, but we must continue to strive to bring the full expertise, innovation and efficiency of the private

sector to all of the federal government's mapping and charting activities. In summary, the ATON of the future can and should be smaller, lighter, more agile and more self-sustaining than the current LNB's we know today. A new public-private partnership is the key to such success.

AUVs key to rapid environmental assessment (REA)Hagen 8 – Senior Engineer for HUGIN(Per Espen, “Rapid environmental assessment with autonomous underwater vehicles — Examples from HUGINoperations”,ScienceDirect,http://www.sciencedirect.com.proxy.lib.umich.edu/science/article/pii/S0924796307000413, HW)

17

AffirmativeDMHS AnLi

With the shift towards littoral and expeditionary operations after the end of the Cold War, the ability to rapidly assess the environmental conditions has become a fundamental enabler for successful operations . The concept of rapid environmental assessment (REA) is based on the use of a multitude of assets, new and existing, for collecting information on meteorology, oceanography and hydrography. Depending on the actual operation, the data collection may need to be covert. The information is then assimilated into products specifically tailored to support the operation. Especially in the complex littoral battlespace, conditions may change rapidly and can complicate operations substantially when unfavourable. Good knowledge of the prevailing environmental conditions can boost the performance of platforms, sensors and weapons, and thus provide a decisive tactical advantage. With the REA methodology, fast collection, processing, integration and dissemination of data is more important than achieving the highest possible quality. Autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs) are underwater robots without any physical connection with a mother vessel. They are typically 1.5–6 m long with dry weights from less than 50 kg to more than 2 tons. Endurance and depth rating similarly vary greatly between vehicles. AUVs have been in routine commercial use since the late 1990s in the offshore oil and gas survey industry; over the last few years the technology has also seen operational military use in several NATO nations. For the oil industry, the main rationale for employing AUVs was the potential cost savings as oil

exploration moves to increasingly greater water depths. However, the customers soon learned that AUVs also provide data quality vastly superior to that achieved by other means (Bingham et al., 2002). In the military arena, main drivers for adoption of

AUVs include their ability to operate covertly and to perform dangerous operations such as mine hunting without endangering human lives. AUVs can be equipped with a variety of sensors. Side scan or synthetic aperture sonars, multibeam and fishery echo sounders, sub-bottom profilers, CTD sensors, acoustic Doppler current profilers (ADCPs), optical backscatter (OBS) sensors, video and still image cameras, chemical sniffers and magnetometers are all in use today. Other types of payloads can also be employed, including weapons and detachable probes. Of course, the available volume, weight and power consumption is limited on an AUV. The limited power available also means that AUVs generally have a low-drag shape. This further constrains the integration of sensors, compared to e.g. remotely operated vehicles (ROVs), which are powered through an umbilical to the mother vessel.

18