Agency

Aff
1AC

Contention 1 Exploration

US neglecting ocean exploration now
Drs. McClain, Deep Sea News Editor & Dove, Georgia Aquarium Research Center
Research and Conservation Director, 12
[Craig, National Evolutionary Synthesis Center Assistant Director of Science, & Alistair, Al Dove is an
Australian marine biologist currently serving as Director of Research and Conservation at the Georgia
Aquarium Research Center in Atlanta, 10-16-12, Deep Sea News, We Need an Ocean NASA Now Pt.1,
http://deepseanews.com/2012/10/we-need-an-ocean-nasa-now-pt-1/, accessed 6-24-14, AFB]

Whether giant fish or giant crustaceans, are opportunities to uncover the oceans mysteries are
quickly dwindling.
The Ghost of Ocean Science Present
Our nation faces a pivotal moment in exploration of the oceans. The most remote regions of the deep
oceans should be more accessible now than ever due to engineering and technological advances.
What limits our exploration of the oceans is not imagination or technology but funding. We as a
society started to make a choice: to deprioritize ocean exploration and science.
In general, science in the U.S. is poorly funded; while the total number of dollars spent here is large, we
only rank 6th in world in the proportion of gross domestic product invested into research. The
outlook for ocean science is even bleaker. In many cases, funding of marine science and exploration,
especially for the deep sea, are at historical lows. In others, funding remains stagnant, despite rising
costs of equipment and personnel.
The Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, a committee comprised of leading ocean scientists, policy
makers, and former U.S. secretaries and congressmen, gave the grade of D- to funding of ocean
science in the U.S. Recently the Obama Administration proposed to cut the National Undersea
Research Program (NURP) within NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, a move
supported by the Senate. In NOAAs own words, NOAA determined that NURP was a lower-priority
function within its portfolio of research activities. Yet, NURP is one of the main suppliers of funding
and equipment for ocean exploration, including both submersibles at the Hawaiian Underwater
Research Laboratory and the underwater habitat Aquarius. This cut has come despite an overall
request for a 3.1% increase in funding for NOAA. Cutting NURP saves a meager $4,000,000 or 1/10 of
NOAAs budget and 1,675 times less than we spend on the Afghan war in just one month.
One of the main reasons NOAA argues for cutting funding of NURP is that other avenues of Federal
funding for such activities might be pursued. However, other avenues are fading as well. Some
funding for ocean exploration is still available through NOAAs Ocean Exploration Program. However,
the Office of Ocean Exploration, the division that contains NURP, took the second biggest cut of all
programs (-16.5%) and is down 33% since 2009. Likewise, U.S. Naval funding for basic research has also
diminished.
The other main source of funding for deep-sea science in the U.S. is the National Science Foundation
which primarily supports biological research through the Biological Oceanography Program. Funding
for science within this program remains stagnant, funding larger but fewer grants. This trend most
likely reflects the ever increasing costs of personnel, equipment, and consumables which only larger
projects can support. Indeed, compared to rising fuel costs, a necessity for oceanographic vessels, NSF
funds do not stretch as far as even a decade ago.
Shrinking funds and high fuel costs have also taken their toll on The University-National
Oceanographic Laboratory System (UNOLS) which operates the U.S. public research fleet. Over the
last decade, only 80% of available ship days were supported through funding. Over the last two years
the gap has increasingly widened, and over the last ten years operations costs increased steadily at
5% annually. With an estimated shortfall of $12 million, the only solution is to reduce the U.S.
research fleet size. Currently this is expected to be a total of 6 vessels that are near retirement, but
there is no plan of replacing these lost ships.
The situation in the U.S. contrasts greatly with other countries. The budget for the Japanese Agency
for Marine-Earth Science and Technology (JAMSTEC) continues to increase, although much less so in
recent years. The 2007 operating budget for the smaller JAMSTEC was $527 million, over $100 million
dollars more than the 2013 proposed NOAA budget. Likewise, China is increasing funding to ocean
science over the next five years and has recently succeeded in building a new deep-sea research and
exploration submersible, the Jiaolong. The only deep submersible still operating in the US is the DSV
Alvin, originally built in 1968.

Exploration funding key to protect ocean biodiversity and the ocean economy
Adams, National Resources Defense Council Oceans Advocate, 14
(Alexandra, 3/25/14, National Resources Defense Council Ocean Advocate, Natural Resources Defense
Council, A Blue Budget Beyond Sequester: Taking care of our oceans,
http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/aadams/a_blue_budget_beyond_sequester.html, accessed 6/27/14,
BCG)

This past year was a tough year - from deep sequester cuts to a government shutdown. Our oceans
definitely felt the budget crunch. After much excruciating negotiation, Congress finally passed a
budget and now we are on the road to what we hope will be a saner way to govern and plan.
The President has just released his budget for Fiscal Year 2015. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) budget can mean the difference between thriving oceans and coastal
communities, or the decline in this invaluable public resource. This years budget signals that we will
invest in protecting that resource, but by no means provides all that will be needed for the big job
ahead. With half of Americans living in coastal areas, NOAAs work means protecting our citizens and
our natural resources. Moreover, with a national ocean economy that is larger than the entire U.S.
farm sector in terms of jobs and economic output, keeping this economic powerhouse functioning
matters to us all.
For fiscal year 2015, NOAA has proposed a budget of approximately $5.5 billion, an increase of 3.2%
above the 2014 enacted funding levels, which took steps to mitigate the worst effects of sequestration
but did not fund programs at the levels to which they ultimately need to be supported. This is a very
modest increase, given the enormity of the agencys task. Based on this request, there is every reason
why Congress should fund the Presidents Budget. Even the small increases this year recognize the
agencys critical role in feeding our nation, protecting our coastal economies and preserving our
precious ocean resources.
NOAA has dual responsiblilities ranging from mapping the ocean floor to maintaining orbiting
satellites for weather forecasting. And if we want to see investments in protecting coastal economies
and ocean health, in addition to accurate weather data, we need to ensure that NOAAs budget is able
to support both its wet, ocean side, as well as the dry weather forecasting activities. This means
funding both effective ocean, coastal, and fisheries programs, in addition to weather forecasts,
warnings and satellites. The National Ocean Service (NOS), which helps us understand and protect our
oceans and coasts, will need investments to continue its work. In FY 2015, NOAA requests a small
increase of $20.6 million for NOS over the 2014 enacted levels.
With renewed commitment from both the Administration and communities around our nation to
prepare for the impacts of a changing climate, NOAAs budget includes programs to help our nation
adapt to these changes. Some of our nations fishermen are on the front lines of climate impacts, as
they watch more acidic waters decimate oyster harvests while fish populations shift away from their
classic geographic range. Because ocean acidification is changing the very chemistry of our waters and
threatening productive coastal economies, the Presidents Budget has committed $15 million in
funding for ocean acidification research and monitoring. Just ask any shellfish farmer and you will hear
that this investment is long overdue and will help make the difference between abundant harvests and
seasons without oysters to sell.
NOAAs National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is tasked with managing our oceans fisheries. In years
past we have seen our fish stocks crash, but thanks to Congressional action in 1996 and 2006 on the
Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Management Act, stocks around the nation are now rebounding.
Implementing this highly successful Act requires funding to gather accurate data on the status of our fish
stocks and fishery managers to help implement programs. Funding these programs will help ensure our
nations fisheries can continue to support coastal economies while filling our dinner plates for years to
come. This year, NOAA is requesting nearly flat funding for NMFS compared to the FY14 enacted levels,
as those provided funds for fisheries disaster assistance which are not reoccurring.
Unfortunately, some critical programs wont get what they need this year. This years budget cuts
funding for Ocean Exploration and Research by $7 million. This funding has supported exploration by
the research vessel Okeanos of deep sea corals and other marine life in the submarine canyons and
seamounts off the Mid-Atlantic and New England coasts that fisheries managers and ocean
conservation groups, including NRDC, are working to protect. Even though funds are stretched,
shortchanging exploration and research will lead to weaker protections for species and resources that
are already under stress.

Scenario 1 Ocean Collapse

Ocean ecosystem collapse risks mass extinction
Lewis, University of Iowa senior research writer and editor, 11
*Richard, 1/10/2011, Brown University, Species loss tied to ecosystem collapse and recovery,
https://news.brown.edu/articles/2011/01/extinction, accessed 7/1/2014 CK]

PROVIDENCE, R.I. [Brown University] The worlds oceans are under siege. Conservation biologists
regularly note the precipitous decline of key species, such as cod, bluefin tuna, swordfish and sharks.
Lose enough of these top-line predators (among other species), and the fear is that the oceanic web of
life may collapse.
In a new paper in Geology, researchers at Brown University and the University of Washington used a
group of marine creatures similar to todays nautilus to examine the collapse of marine ecosystems
that coincided with two of the greatest mass extinctions in the Earths history. They attribute the
ecosystems collapse to a loss of enough species occupying the same space in the oceans, called
ecological redundancy.
While the term is not new, the paper marks the first time that a loss of ecological redundancy is
directly blamed for a marine ecosystems collapse in the fossil record. Just as ominously, the authors
write that it took up to 10 million years after the mass extinctions for enough variety of species to
repopulate the ocean restoring ecological redundancy for the ecosystem to stabilize.
Its definitely a cautionary tale because we know its happened at least twice before, said Jessica
Whiteside, assistant professor of geological sciences at Brown and the papers lead author. And you
have long periods of time before you have reestablishment of ecological redundancy.
If the theory is true, the implications could not be clearer today. According to the United Nations-
sponsored report Global Biodiversity Outlook 2, the population of nearly one-third of marine species
that were tracked had declined over the three decades that ended in 2000. The numbers were the
same for land-based species. In effect, we are currently responsible for the sixth major extinction
event in the history of the Earth, and the greatest since the dinosaurs disappeared, 65 million years
ago, the 2006 report states.

Scenario 2 - Economy

The time for an Ocean NASA is now - OSEA will bring sustainable growth to the
economy
http://deepseanews.com/2012/10/we-need-an-ocean-nasa-now-pt-3/, accessed 6-24-14, BCG]

We are at a time for renewed commitment to ocean exploration and science. As stated by the Joint
Ocean Commission, Ocean programs continue to be chronically underfunded, highlighting the need
for a dedicated ocean investment fund. Captain Don Walsh, one of three men to visit the deepest part
of the ocean, recently stated it best: What we need is an Ocean NASA. We borrow and modify John F.
Kennedys famous speech at Rice University on the decision to go to the moon: In short, our leadership
in science and in industry, our hopes for peace and security, our obligations to ourselves as well as
others, all require us to make this effort, to solve these mysteries, to solve them for the good of all
men, and to become the worlds leading ocean-faring nationWe set sail because there is new
knowledge to be gained, and new rights to be won, and they must be won and used for the progress of
all people. There is much to be gained from creating NASA-style Ocean Science and Exploration
Agency (OSEA). Every dollar we commit to science returns $2.21 in goods and services. Meeting the
scientific, technological, logistical, and administrative demands of scientific exploration creates jobs
and requires substantial personnel beyond just scientists and engineers. The materials purchased for
this cause support even further employment. As with NASA, meeting these scientific and engineering
challenges will disseminate ideas, knowledge, applications, and technology to rest of society. This
knowledge gained from basic research will form the backbone for applied research and economic gain
later. And much like NASA has, OSEA will inspire the next generation of scientist and engineers, instilling
in the young a renewed appreciation for the oceans of which we are all stewards: our oceans. It will
provide a positive focus for society in a time where hope is often lacking and faith in science is low.
OSEA will be the positive message that renews interest in our oceans and their conservation.

Failure to restore economic power compromises US foreign policy, risking war
Lieberthal & OHanlon, Brookings Institution foreign policy scholars, 12
[Kenneth M. & Michael, 7-3-12, Los Angeles Times, The real national security threat: America's debt,
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul/03/opinion/la-oe-ohanlon-fiscal-reform-20120703, accessed 7-2-
14, AFB]
Alas, globalization and automation trends of the last generation have increasingly called the American
dream into question for the working classes. Another decade of underinvestment in what is required
to remedy this situation will make an isolationist or populist president far more likely because much
of the country will question whether an internationalist role makes sense for America especially if
it costs us well over half a trillion dollars in defense spending annually yet seems correlated with more
job losses.
Lastly, American economic weakness undercuts U.S. leadership abroad. Other countries sense our
weakness and wonder about our purported decline. If this perception becomes more widespread, and
the case that we are in decline becomes more persuasive, countries will begin to take actions that
reflect their skepticism about America's future. Allies and friends will doubt our commitment and may
pursue nuclear weapons for their own security, for example; adversaries will sense opportunity and
be less restrained in throwing around their weight in their own neighborhoods. The crucial Persian Gulf
and Western Pacific regions will likely become less stable. Major war will become more likely.
When running for president last time, Obama eloquently articulated big foreign policy visions: healing
America's breach with the Muslim world, controlling global climate change, dramatically curbing global
poverty through development aid, moving toward a world free of nuclear weapons. These were, and
remain, worthy if elusive goals. However, for Obama or his successor, there is now a much more urgent
big-picture issue: restoring U.S. economic strength. Nothing else is really possible if that fundamental
prerequisite to effective foreign policy is not reestablished.

Coordinated and prioritized ocean exploration strategy key to solve effective ocean
policy, ensuring leadership and competitiveness
Sutley & Holdren National Ocean Council co-chairs 13
[Nancy H. Chair: Council on Environmental Quality, John P. Director, Office of Science and Technology
Policy, National Ocean Council, April 2013, NATIONAL OCEAN POLICY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN,
http://www.oceanchampions.org/pdfs/national_ocean_policy_implementation_plan.pdf, accessed
6/26/14, CK]

For the United States to continue to be a global leader in understanding and acting on the connections
between our well-being and the health of the natural environment, we need to continue exploring
and expanding our knowledge of the ocean, our coasts, and the Great Lakes. Management and policy
decisions must be based in the context sound science provides, through the integration of natural and
social science data, information, and knowledge. National Ocean Policy actions will contribute to high-
quality science and ensure that information based on that science is made available to guide decisions
and actions. Insight gained from scientific research, advances in observations, and innovative
technologies will further enable evaluation of trade-offs between alternative management scenarios,
enhance our ability to balance competing demands on ecosystems, and strengthen our Nation's
economic and scientific competiveness. At the same time, increasing understanding of the ocean,
coasts, and Great Lakes among our people and communities will empower better-informed public
stewardship of ocean resources.
Advance fundamental scientific knowledge through exploration and research. Through Federal research
and exploration activities and partnerships with non-governmental organizations, new ocean
discoveries will expand our knowledge and understanding of oceanic and Great Lakes biodiversity,
biogeochemical processes, ecosystem services, and climate interactions. Agencies will use the Ocean
Research Priorities Plan, a document built with input from the ocean science and technology
community, as a reference in determining research directions. They will conduct expeditions in poorly
known or unknown regions of the ocean and Great Lakes. They will also work to incorporate natural,
social, and behavioral-science information in decision-support tools, which will enable Federal, State,
tribal, regional, and local authorities to manage ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes resources more
efficiently and effectively.
Advance technologies to explore and better understand the complexities of land, ocean, atmosphere,
ice, biological, and social interactions on a global scale. Environmental observation provides the basis
for informing decision-making. New technologies, including improved remote sensing systems, and
the coordination among agencies needed to develop and implement them, are critical to improving
our understanding of the underlying physical and ecological processes driving the ocean, coasts, and
Great Lakes, as well as to identifying more efficient means of monitoring these ecosystems. Federal
agencies will evaluate how to most effectively integrate observational data, test and develop ocean
sensors and communication standards, and implement data and modeling techniques to support a
global observational capability to show how observed variables change over time.

Scenario 3 Diseases

Ocean exploration is key to unlocking medical innovations to solve diseases
National Academies Reports, 7
[National non-profit organization for science, engineering, and medicine, Oceans and Human Health,
http://dels.nas.edu/resources/static-assets/osb/miscellaneous/Oceans-Human-Health.pdf, p. 2-4,
accessed 6/28/14, BCG)

The ocean benefits human health and well-being in immeasurable ways. The nutritional benefits of
eating fish, rich in protein and omega-3 fatty acids, make the ocean an indispensablebut not
unlimitedsource of healthy food. Ocean science is revealing many other ways the ocean can benefit
human health, from providing new sources of drugs to helping unravel many of the mysteries of
human disease.
THE OCEAN IS THE MOST PROMISING FRONTIER FOR SOURCES OF NEW DRUGS
In 1945, a young organic chemist named Werner Bergmann set out to explore the waters off the coast
of southern Florida. Among the marine organisms he scooped from the sand that day was a Caribbean
sponge that would later be called Cryptotethya crypta. Back in his lab, Bergmann extracted a novel
compound from this sponge that aroused his curiosity.
The chemical Bergmann identified in this sponge, spongothymidine, eventually led to the
development of a whole class of drugs that treat cancer and viral diseases and are still in use today.
For example, Zidovudine (AZT) fights the AIDS virus, HIV, and cytosine arabinoside (Ara-C) is used in
the treatment of leukemias and lymphomas. Acyclovir speeds the healing of eczema and some herpes
viruses. These are just a few examples of how the study of marine organisms contributes to the health
of thousands of men, women, and children around the world.
New antibiotics, in addition to new drugs for fighting cancer, inflammatory diseases, and
neurodegenerative diseases (which often cannot be treated successfully today), are greatly needed.
With drug resistance nibbling away at the once-full toolbox of antibiotics, the limited effectiveness of
currently available drugs has dire consequences for public health.
Historically, many medicines have come from nature mostly from land-based natural organisms.
Because scientists have nearly exhausted the supply of terrestrial plants, animals, and microorganisms
that have interesting medical properties, new sources of drugs are needed.
Occupying more than 70 percent of the Earths surface, the ocean is a virtually unexplored treasure
chest of new and unidentified speciesone of the last frontiers for sources of new natural products.
These natural products are of special interest because of the dazzling diversity and uniqueness of the
creatures that make the sea their home.
One reason marine organisms are so interesting to scientists is because in adapting to the various
ocean environments, they have evolved fascinating repertoires of unique chemicals to help them
survive. For example, anchored to the seafloor, a sponge that protects itself from an animal trying to
take over its space by killing the invader has been compared with the human immune system trying to
kill foreign cancer cells. That same sponge, bathed in seawater containing millions of bacteria, viruses,
and fungi, some of which could be pathogens, has developed antibiotics to keep those pathogens under
control. Those same antibiotics could be used to treat infections in humans.
Sponges, in fact, are among the most prolific sources of diverse chemical compounds. An estimated 30
percent of all potential marine-derived medications currently in the pipelineand about 75 percent of
recently patented marine-derived anticancer compoundscome from marine sponges.
Marine-based microorganisms are another particularly rich source of new medicines. More than 10
drugs available today derive from land-based microbes. Scientists see marine-based microbes as the
most promising source of novel medicines from the sea. In all, more than that the exploration of
unique habitats, such as deep-sea environments, and the isolation and culture of marine
microorganisms offer two underexplored opportunities for discovery of novel chemicals with
therapeutic potential. The successes to date, which are based upon a very limited investigation of both
deep-sea organisms and marine microorganisms, suggest a high potential for continued discovery of
new drugs.

These diseases risk extinction
Dr. Casadevall, Albert Einstein College of Medicine Microbiology and Infectious
Diseases professor, 12
[Arturo, MD and Ph.D from New York University, Sep 2012, Microbial Biotechnology, The Future of
Biological Warfare, 5(5): 584587, Wiley, accessed 7-10-14, AFB]

In considering the importance of biological warfare as a subject for concern it is worthwhile to review
the known existential threats. At this time this writer can identify at three major existential threats to
humanity: (i) largescale thermonuclear war followed by a nuclear winter, (ii) a planet killing asteroid
impact and (iii) infectious disease. To this trio might be added climate change making the planet
uninhabitable. Of the three existential threats the first is deduced from the inferred cataclysmic effects
of nuclear war. For the second there is geological evidence for the association of asteroid impacts with
massive extinction (Alvarez, 1987). As to an existential threat from microbes recent decades have
provided unequivocal evidence for the ability of certain pathogens to cause the extinction of entire
species. Although infectious disease has traditionally not been associated with extinction this view
has changed by the finding that a single chytrid fungus was responsible for the extinction of numerous
amphibian species (Daszak et al., 1999; Mendelson et al., 2006). Previously, the view that infectious
diseases were not a cause of extinction was predicated on the notion that many pathogens required
their hosts and that some proportion of the host population was naturally resistant. However, that
calculation does not apply to microbes that are acquired directly from the environment and have no
need for a host, such as the majority of fungal pathogens. For those types of hostmicrobe interactions
it is possible for the pathogen to kill off every last member of a species without harm to itself, since it
would return to its natural habitat upon killing its last host. Hence, from the viewpoint of existential
threats environmental microbes could potentially pose a much greater threat to humanity than the
known pathogenic microbes, which number somewhere near 1500 species (Cleaveland et al., 2001;
Taylor et al., 2001), especially if some of these species acquired the capacity for pathogenicity as a
consequence of natural evolution or bioengineering.

Plan

Draft
The United States federal government should increase sustained, coordinated, and prioritized
exploration of the Earths oceans through an endowed Ocean Science and Exploration Agency.

Contention 2 Solvency

An Ocean NASA would galvanize US ocean exploration, bolstering science and
leadership

We are at a time for renewed commitment to ocean exploration and science. As stated by the Joint
Ocean Commission, Ocean programs continue to be chronically underfunded, highlighting the need
for a dedicated ocean investment fund. Captain Don Walsh, one of three men to visit the deepest part
of the ocean, recently stated it best: What we need is an Ocean NASA.
We borrow and modify John F. Kennedys famous speech at Rice University on the decision to go to the
moon:
In short, our leadership in science and in industry, our hopes for peace and security, our obligations to
ourselves as well as others, all require us to make this effort, to solve these mysteries, to solve them
for the good of all men, and to become the worlds leading ocean-faring nationWe set sail because
there is new knowledge to be gained, and new rights to be won, and they must be won and used for
the progress of all people.
There is much to be gained from creating NASA-style Ocean Science and Exploration Agency (OSEA).
Every dollar we commit to science returns $2.21 in goods and services. Meeting the scientific,
technological, logistical, and administrative demands of scientific exploration creates jobs and
requires substantial personnel beyond just scientists and engineers. The materials purchased for this
cause support even further employment. As with NASA, meeting these scientific and engineering
challenges will disseminate ideas, knowledge, applications, and technology to rest of society. This
knowledge gained from basic research will form the backbone for applied research and economic gain
later. And much like NASA has, OSEA will inspire the next generation of scientist and engineers,
instilling in the young a renewed appreciation for the oceans of which we are all stewards: our oceans.
It will provide a positive focus for society in a time where hope is often lacking and faith in science is
low. OSEA will be the positive message that renews interest in our oceans and their conservation.

Patchwork approach wont solve mission focus and sustainable funding key only
OSEA solves

Although parts of OSEA are realized in other government and private organizations, they do not meet
the full mission nor can such a distributed structure be expected to meet the challenges of this pivotal
moment. For example, NOAA fills a much-needed role but its mission is largely applied. NOAAs
mission statement is Science, Service, and Stewardship. To understand and predict changes in climate,
weather, oceans, and coasts, To share that knowledge and information with others, and To conserve
and manage coastal and marine ecosystems and resource. Contrast that to NASAs simple mission,
to pioneer the future in space exploration, scientific discovery and aeronautics research.
In an agency with a chiefly applied mission, those programs that are purely exploratory must
eventually invent an applied focus or face the axe. For example, even under NURP, exploration often
focused on corals and fish of considerable economic and conservation importance rather than those
species of greatest novelty or knowledge deficit. The current situation at NOAA also highlights how
less applied scientific programs are likely to be lost. Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute also
provides another model that comes close to OSEA but is heavily reliant on private funding that can often
be significantly reduced during recessions as endowments shrink. Moreover, a private foundation is
unlikely to meet the full financial burden to support the full mission of an OSEA or provide a resource
to the ocean science community as whole. This is not meant to criticize either NOAA or MBARI, indeed
both supported our own research and have made immense contributions to ocean science and
exploration, but neither do they fully realize our vision for OSEA.
As John F. Kennedy stated, We must be bold. It is time for a great national effort of the United States
of America, time for us to renew our commitment to uncovering the mysteries of the blue planet we
live on. We need a NASA-style Ocean Science and Exploration Agency (OSEA). to explore and research
the greatest depths of oceans with a community of scientists, engineers, and citizens.

Exploration key to solve laundry list of impacts spurs all other sections of oceanic
science and is self-reflexive, facilitating sustainable ocean policymaking
Schubel, Aquarium of the Pacific president and CEO, and McKinnie, NOAA's Office of
Ocean Exploration and Research senior advisor, 13
*Jerry, David, Accelerating Ocean Exploration, included in Ocean Exploration 2020 forum, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration & Aquarium of the Pacific, September 2013, The Report of
Ocean Exploration 2020: A National Forum,
http://www.aquariumofpacific.org/downloads/oe2020report.pdf, p. 9-10, 6/28/14, GNL]

Weve only explored five to ten percent of the World Ocean just imagine what wed find if we could
explore even more of Earths final frontier.
We have an unprecedented opportunity to increase the pace and efficiency of exploring the unknown
ocean in all of its dimensions in space and time. The past 20 years have seen a dramatic increase in
attempts by the U.S. government, academic institutions, private industry and entrepreneurs, and others
to explore unknown ocean areas and phenomena. The results of these expeditions establish a
foundation that inspires others to follow: to build on the discoveries and apply the knowledge gained
to address some of the most pressing challenges we face as a nation and an interconnected world, in
addition to the ultimate challengeour human survival.
Ocean Exploration: An Opportunity and A Necessity
A strong commitment to ocean exploration and research is an opportunity, an urgent necessity, and
an issue of national security.
Every ocean exploration expedition yields new data and information, often new species, and
sometimes entirely new ecosystems. Scientists from different disciplines, resource managers, and the
public working together, unfettered by preconceived notions or constrained by narrowly defined
hypotheses, are empowered by the exploratory process.
Exploration:
demands integration of observations, concepts, thoughts, and ideas.
leads to discovery of new resourcesfood, medicines, minerals, and new sources of energy.
leads to new connections among diverse observations that allow us to quickly provide information
critical for establishing or refining marine policy, as well as making important decisions concerning the
conservation and sustained use of marine resources.
is a critical early phase of research. It guides research to areas and topics of promise and helps
generate and refine research hypotheses, thus increasing the return on the nations investment in
research. As we saw with the discovery of hydrothermal vents and chemosynthetic communities in the
1970s, exploration sometimes requires us to rethink long-held and well-established scientific paradigms,
exposing our ignorance and dramatically expanding our knowledge as a result.
pushes technology development. As we seek to explore new depths, in new time horizons, and
understand new details of the ocean, new technologies and tools are developed, from sensors to
telecommunications.
inspires and moves us as humans to action, forever changing our perspectives and daily lives, and
leaves us with a legacy of knowledge and renewed passion to ensure humanitys survival on the ocean
planetEarth.
We depend on the ocean more now than ever beforeas a nation and as a global community. As new
technologies and new partnerships allow us to explore and exploit more of the ocean, more quickly,
and at a higher resolution and rate than could even be imagined a decade ago, the pressures and
impacts on the ocean systems and resources on which we depend also increase. Nations around the
world understand the political and economic importance of exploring the ocean, whether in the Arctic
or in the South China Sea. Ocean Exploration 2020 is a timely reminder of what we can achieve if we
seize our opportunities to actand the consequences if we do not.

Inherency
Existing Programs Fail

Existing ocean exploration programs are insufficient lack of funding and focus
Committee on Exploration of the Seas, National Research Council, 3
[Committee on Exploration of the Seas Ocean Studies Board Division on Earth and Life Studies, 2003,
Exploration of the Seas: Voyage into the Unknown, The National Research Council of the National
Academies, http://explore.noaa.gov/sites/OER/Documents/national-research-council-voyage.pdf, p.
136-137, accessed 6/29/14, GNL]

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administrations (NOAA) Office of Ocean Exploration, which
was established in 2000, does not have the wherewithal to undertake the interdisciplinary, global
ocean exploration program proposed in this report. Significantly higher allocations are needed to
support a more comprehensive program. More money is needed to increase the programs scope, its
flexibility, and researchers access to equipment all of which will serve to increase its chances for
success.
The budget for NOAAs Office of Ocean Exploration is indicative of current limitations on U.S. ocean
exploration. Initially funded at $4 million in 2001, during ensuing years the program has been funded for
$13.2 million and $14.2 million annually. The budget for fiscal year 2004 is in the same range although at
the time of publication Congressional support is uncertain. This initial effort has been worthwhile, and
it serves as a basis for evaluating what can be accomplished. The effort has been partially proposal
driven and partially driven by agency mission, without significant thematic direction or input from the
scientific community. That aside, some regional workshops have been held to engage more members of
the scientific community in the offices efforts.
Fiscal limitations have constrained NOAAs ability to carry out a comprehensive exploration program.
Critical elements, such as the following, have been compromised by a lack of money:
Postcruise science is not funded. Not all discoveries are made during an actual offshore effort, and
some discoveries could be missed if specialized onshore tests cannot be performed. Few significant
discoveries have been announced or exploited. Data management is not funded, so the oceanographic
research community has little access to information.
Only limited technology development is funded. New sensors, for example, to investigate novel sites
or measure unsampled properties of the ocean, are not being developed.
Ship costs are usually leveraged with other planned programs. The resulting ad hoc efforts do not
allow complete freedom to explore a particular site or to venture out of relatively well-studied areas to
explore the entire worlds oceans.
Project planning is often for the short term because of the nature of government budgeting and
within-agency appropriations.
International cooperative efforts are not supported.
The scientific community does not see the program as a significant resource of funding for sustained
exploration programs. The NOAA effort is not large enough to generate significant discoveries in the
ocean sciences nor is it likely to advance the new technologies that could initiate commercial
opportunities. Despite its small budget; however, the NOAA program has demonstrated that there is
substantial interest from the U.S. ocean research community. The NOAA exploration program has
received many proposals that it was unable to fund.
Focus

Applied science focus undermining exploration now

The Ghost of Ocean Science Past
85% of Americans express concerns about stagnant research funding and 77% feel we are losing our
edge in science. So how did we get here? Part of the answer lies in how ocean science and exploration
fit into the US federal science funding scene. Ocean science is funded by numerous agencies, with few
having ocean science and exploration as a clear directive. Contrast to this to how the US traditionally
dealt with exploration of space. NASA was recognised early on as the vehicle by which the US would
establish and maintain international space supremacy, but the oceans have always had to compete
with other missions.
We faced a weak economy and in tough economic times we rightly looked for areas to adjust our
budgets. Budget cuts lead to tough either/or situations: do we fund A or B? Pragmatically we choose
what appeared to be most practical and yield most benefit. Often this meant we prioritized applied
science because it was perceived to benefit our lives sooner and more directly and, quite frankly, was
easier to justify politically the expenditures involved.
In addition to historical issues of infrastructure and current economic woes, we lacked an
understanding of the importance of basic research and ocean exploration to science, society, and
often to applied research. As example, NOAA shifted funding away from NURP and basic science and
exploration but greatly increased funding to research on applied climate change research. Increased
funding for climate change research is a necessity as we face this very real and immediate threat to
our environment and economy. Yet, did this choice, and others like it, need to come at the reduction
of our countrys capability to conduct basic ocean exploration and science and which climate change
work relies upon?
Just a few short decades ago, the U.S. was a pioneer of deep water exploration. We are the country
that in 1960 funded and sent two men to the deepest part of the worlds ocean in the Trieste. Five
years later, we developed, built, and pioneered a new class of submersible capable of reaching some
of the most remote parts of the oceans to nimbly explore and conduct deep-water science. Our
countrys continued commitment to the DSV Alvin is a bright spot in our history and has served as model
for other countries submersible programs. The Alvin allowed us to be the first to discover
hydrothermal vents and methane seeps, explore the Mid-Atlantic ridge, and countless other scientific
firsts. Our rich history with space exploration is dotted with firsts and it revolutionized our views of
the world and universe around us; so has our rich history of ocean exploration. But where NASA
produced a steady stream of occupied space research vehicles, Alvin remains the only deep-capable
research submersible in the service in the United States.
NOAA shifting away from exploration focus
We faced a weak economy and in tough economic times we rightly looked for areas to adjust our
budgets. Budget cuts lead to tough either/or situations: do we fund A or B? Pragmatically we choose what
appeared to be most practical and yield most benefit. Often this meant we prioritized applied science
because it was perceived to benefit our lives sooner and more directly and, quite frankly, was easier
to justify politically the expenditures involved. In addition to historical issues of infrastructure and current economic woes,
we lacked an understanding of the importance of basic research and ocean exploration to science, society, and often to applied research. As
example, NOAA shifted funding away from NURP and basic science and exploration but greatly increased
funding to research on applied climate change research. Increased funding for climate change
research is a necessity as we face this very real and immediate threat to our environment and economy. Yet, did this choice, and
others like it, need to come at the reduction of our countrys capability to conduct basic ocean exploration
and science and which climate change work relies upon?

US ocean agencies do not focus on ocean exploration
85% of Americans express concerns about stagnant research funding and 77% feel we are losing our
edge in science. So how did we get here? Part of the answer lies in how ocean science and exploration
fit into the US federal science funding scene. Ocean science is funded by numerous agencies, with few
having ocean science and exploration as a clear directive. Contrast to this to how the US traditionally
dealt with exploration of space. NASA was recognised early on as the vehicle by which the US would
establish and maintain international space supremacy, but the oceans have always had to compete with
other missions. What lies below? We faced a weak economy and in tough economic times we rightly
looked for areas to adjust our budgets. Budget cuts lead to tough either/or situations: do we fund A or
B? Pragmatically we choose what appeared to be most practical and yield most benefit. Often this
meant we prioritized applied science because it was perceived to benefit our lives sooner and more
directly and, quite frankly, was easier to justify politically the expenditures involved. In addition to
historical issues of infrastructure and current economic woes, we lacked an understanding of the
importance of basic research and ocean exploration to science, society, and often to applied research.
As example, NOAA shifted funding away from NURP and basic science and exploration but greatly
increased funding to research on applied climate change research. Increased funding for climate change
research is a necessity as we face this very real and immediate threat to our environment and economy.
Yet, did this choice, and others like it, need to come at the reduction of our countrys capability to
conduct basic ocean exploration and science and which climate change work relies upon? Just a few
short decades ago, the U.S. was a pioneer of deep water exploration. We are the country that in 1960
funded and sent two men to the deepest part of the worlds ocean in the Trieste. Five years later, we
developed, built, and pioneered a new class of submersible capable of reaching some of the most
remote parts of the oceans to nimbly explore and conduct deep-water science. Our countrys continued
commitment to the DSV Alvin is a bright spot in our history and has served as model for other
countries submersible programs. The Alvin allowed us to be the first to discover hydrothermal vents
and methane seeps, explore the Mid-Atlantic ridge, and countless other scientific firsts. Our rich history
with space exploration is dotted with firsts and it revolutionized our views of the world and universe
around us; so has our rich history of ocean exploration. But where NASA produced a steady stream of
occupied space research vehicles, Alvin remains the only deep-capable research submersible in the
service in the United States.

Funding

Exploration programs are being cut
http://deepseanews.com/2012/10/we-need-an-ocean-nasa-now-pt-3/, accessed 6-24-14, CK]
provides another model that comes close to OSEA but is heavily reliant on private funding that can
often be significantly reduced during recessions as endowments shrink. Moreover, a private foundation
is unlikely to meet the full financial burden to support the full mission of an OSEA or provide a
resource to the ocean science community as whole. This is not meant to criticize either NOAA or
MBARI, indeed both supported our own research and have made immense contributions to ocean
science and exploration, but neither do they fully realize our vision for OSEA.
Funding for oceanic exploration is low now exploration sectors of agencies are
being cut and funding is being diverted

In general, science in the U.S. is poorly funded; while the total number of dollars spent here is large,
we only rank 6th in world in the proportion of gross domestic product invested into research. The
outlook for ocean science is even bleaker. In many cases, funding of marine science and exploration,
especially for the deep sea, are at historical lows. In others, funding remains stagnant, despite rising
costs of equipment and personnel. The Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, a committee comprised of
leading ocean scientists, policy makers, and former U.S. secretaries and congressmen, gave the grade of
D- to funding of ocean science in the U.S. Recently the Obama Administration proposed to cut the
National Undersea Research Program (NURP) within NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, a move supported by the Senate. In NOAAs own words, NOAA determined that NURP
was a lower-priority function within its portfolio of research activities. Yet, NURP is one of the main
suppliers of funding and equipment for ocean exploration, including both submersibles at the Hawaiian
Underwater Research Laboratory and the underwater habitat Aquarius. This cut has come despite an
overall request for a 3.1% increase in funding for NOAA. Cutting NURP saves a meager $4,000,000 or
1/10 of NOAAs budget and 1,675 times less than we spend on the Afghan war in just one month. One of
the main reasons NOAA argues for cutting funding of NURP is that other avenues of Federal funding
for such activities might be pursued. However, other avenues are fading as well. Some funding for
ocean exploration is still available through NOAAs Ocean Exploration Program. However, the Office
of Ocean Exploration, the division that contains NURP, took the second biggest cut of all programs (-
16.5%) and is down 33% since 2009. Likewise, U.S. Naval funding for basic research has also
diminished. The other main source of funding for deep-sea science in the U.S. is the National Science
Foundation which primarily supports biological research through the Biological Oceanography
Program. Funding for science within this program remains stagnant, funding larger but fewer grants.
This trend most likely reflects the ever increasing costs of personnel, equipment, and consumables
which only larger projects can support. Indeed, compared to rising fuel costs, a necessity for
oceanographic vessels, NSF funds do not stretch as far as even a decade ago. Shrinking funds and high
fuel costs have also taken their toll on The University-National Oceanographic Laboratory System
(UNOLS) which operates the U.S. public research fleet. Over the last decade, only 80% of available ship
days were supported through funding. Over the last two years the gap has increasingly widened, and
over the last ten years operations costs increased steadily at 5% annually. With an estimated shortfall
of $12 million, the only solution is to reduce the U.S. research fleet size. Currently this is expected to
be a total of 6 vessels that are near retirement, but there is no plan of replacing these lost ships. The
situation in the U.S. contrasts greatly with other countries. The budget for the Japanese Agency for
Marine-Earth Science and Technology (JAMSTEC) continues to increase, although much less so in
recent years. The 2007 operating budget for the smaller JAMSTEC was $527 million, over $100 million
dollars more than the 2013 proposed NOAA budget. Likewise, China is increasing funding to ocean
science over the next five years and has recently succeeded in building a new deep-sea research and
exploration submersible, the Jiaolong. The only deep submersible still operating in the US is the DSV
Alvin, originally built in 1968.

Funding key multiple reasons insufficient funding undermines exploration
National Research Council 3
(Committee on Exploration of the Seas; the operating arm of the National Academy of Sciences,
Exploration of the Seas: Voyage into the Unknown, http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10844 ,
pp. 31-32, accessed 6/25/14, BCG)

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administrations (NOAA) Office of Ocean Exploration, which was
established in 2000, does not have the wherewithal to undertake the interdisciplinary, global ocean
exploration program proposed in this report. Significantly higher allocations are needed to support a
more comprehensive program. More money is needed to increase the programs scope, its flexibility,
and researchers access to equipment all of which will serve to increase its chances for success. The
budget for NOAAs Office of Ocean Exploration is indicative of current limitations on U.S. ocean
exploration. Initially funded at $4 million in 2001, during ensuing years the program has been funded
for $13.2 million and $14.2 million annually. The budget for fiscal year 2004 is in the same range
although at the time of publication Congressional support is uncertain. This initial effort has been
worthwhile, and it serves as a basis for evaluating what can be accomplished. The effort has been
partially proposal driven and partially driven by agency mission, without significant thematic direction or
input from the scientific community. That aside, some regional workshops have been held to engage
more members of the scientific community in the offices efforts. Fiscal limitations have constrained
NOAAs ability to carry out a comprehensive exploration program. Critical elements, such as the
following, have been compromised by a lack of money:
Postcruise science is not funded. Not all discoveries are made during an actual offshore effort, and
some discoveries could be missed if specialized onshore tests cannot be performed. Few significant
discoveries have been announced or exploited.
Data management is not funded, so the oceanographic research community has little access to
information.
Only limited technology development is funded. New sensors, for example, to investigate novel sites
or measure unsampled properties of the ocean, are not being developed.
Ship costs are usually leveraged with other planned programs. The resulting ad hoc efforts do not
allow complete freedom to explore a particular site or to venture out of relatively well-studied areas to
explore the entire worlds oceans.
Project planning is often for the short term because of the nature of government budgeting and
within-agency appropriations.
International cooperative efforts are not supported.
The scientific community does not see the program as a significant resource of funding for sustained
exploration programs.
The NOAA effort is not large enough to generate significant discoveries in the ocean sciences nor is it
likely to advance the new technologies that could initiate commercial opportunities. Despite its small
budget; however, the NOAA program has demonstrated that there is substantial interest from the U.S.
ocean research community. The NOAA exploration program has received many proposals that it was
unable to fund.

Funding and philosophy shift gutted staffed exploration of the ocean
Dokoupil, NBC News senior writer, 13
*Tony, 1/14/13, Newsweek, The Last Dive? Funding for Human expeditions in the Ocean May Have
Run Aground, http://www.newsweek.com/last-dive-funding-human-expeditions-ocean-may-have-run-
aground-63201, accessed 6/29/14, BCG)

Last spring James Cameron became a modern newsreel hero, diving the Mariana Trench, the Earths
deepest point, and seeming to signal a new golden age of discovery. Virgin Oceanics Sir Richard
Branson and Sylvia Earle herself, with money from Google chairman, Eric Schmidt, were each developing
their own deep-diving machines. And this (quite collegial) race to the bottom was heralded as the
ocean version of NASAs hand-off to private rocket-makers. On with the era of civil inquiry! On with
individual enterprise! Or as Cameron tweeted from the ocean floor, in a message Twitter declared one
of 2012s best moments of just plain awesomeness: Hitting bottom never felt so good.
But a year later, something far from a golden age has emerged. When the public looked away, piloted
exploration stopped. Schmidt stopped funding Earle. Bransons effort stalled indefinitely. Even Cameron
ran out of time and money, completing just eight first phase dives around Australia and Papua New
Guinea. Today he says his history-making machine is in his engineering shop in Santa Barbara, Calif.,
ready to dive and available to the science community, but stowed like a moldy wet suit. The hoped-for
second phase of his work has no committed funding.
At the same time, government support for ocean exploration has sunk to unprecedented lows. The
Pisces subsonce part of an arsenal of public ships, submarines, and laboratories that gave American
scientists unmatched access to the deepwere defunded the same month Cameron touched bottom.
As of today, none of those subs is operational, the last extended-stay underwater laboratory was
shuttered, and at least 40 percent of the academic fleet is scheduled for retirement in the next decade.
Its a record dry spell, the result of budget cuts but also a shift in philosophy, a definitive break in the
decades-old debate over whether its even necessary to send people into extreme spaces, when
machines are cheaper, safer, and harder working. The body is a pain, says Robert Ballard, the marine
geologist who discovered the Titanic, striking a common note about the problems with manned travel.
It has to go to the bathroom. It has to be comfortable. But the spirit is indestructible. It can move at the
speed of light.
For two decades, hes been arguing the virtues of telepresence technology: remotely controlled subs
and rovers, pumping video to an unlimited number of researchers worldwide. This year he seems to
have finally closed the conversation. While the National Atmospheric and Oceanic Administration
(NOAA) pulled money from manned exploration, Ballards telepresence efforts comprise the only
federal program dedicated to systematic exploration of the planets largely unknown ocean,
according to NOAAs Office of Ocean Exploration and Research.
Its a paradigm shift, says Ballard, at the University of Rhode Island, a move into the next great era of
exploration. He promises to provide digital access of more of the Earth than was visited by all previous
generations combinedand still be home in time for cocktails.

Lack of Funding Forces Privatization

Lack of funding will force increasing reliance on privatization
Bidwell, US News and World Report, 13
*Allie, 9/25/13, US News and World Report, Scientists Release First Plan for National Ocean
Exploration Program, http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/09/25/scientists-release-
first-plan-for-national-ocean-exploration-program, 6/25/14, GNL]

More than three-quarters of what lies beneath the surface of the ocean is unknown, even to trained
scientists and researchers. Taking steps toward discovering what resources and information the
seas hold, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Aquarium of the Pacific
released on Wednesday a report that details plans to create the nation's first ocean exploration
program by the year 2020.
The report stems from a national convening of more than 100 federal agencies, nongovernmental
organizations, nonprofit organizations and private companies to discuss what components should
make up a national ocean exploration program and what will be needed to create it.
"This is the first time the explorers themselves came together and said, 'this is the kind of program we
want and this is what it's going to take,'" says Jerry Schubel, president and CEO of the Aquarium of
the Pacific, located in Long Beach, Calif. "That's very important, particularly when you put it in
the context that the world ocean is the largest single component of Earth's living infrastructure
... and less than 10 percent of it has ever been explored."
In order to create a comprehensive exploration program, Schubel says it will become increasingly
important that federal and state agencies form partnerships with other organizations, as it is unlikely
that government funding for ocean exploration will increase in the next few years.
Additionally, Schubel says there was a consensus among those explorers and stakeholders who
gathered in July that participating organizations need to take advantage of technologies that are
available and place a greater emphasis on public engagement and citizen exploration utilizing the
data that naturalists and nonscientists collect on their own.
"In coastal areas at least, given some of these new low-cost robots that are available, they could
actually produce data that would help us understand the nation's coastal environment," Schubel
says.

Streamlining

Now key time for streamlining ocean competition growing
Eilperin, Washington Post, 9
*Juliet, May 4, 2009, The Washington Post, Finding Space for All in Our Crowded Seas
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/03/AR2009050301930.html,
accessed 6-25-14, CK]

The ocean is getting crowded: Fishermen are competing with offshore wind projects, oil rigs along with
sand miners, recreational boaters, liquefied gas tankers and fish farmers. So a growing number of
groups -- including policymakers, academics, activists and industry officials -- now say it's time to
divvy up space in the sea.
"We've got competition for space in the ocean, just like we have competition for space on land," said
Andrew Rosenberg, a natural resources and environment professor at the University of New
Hampshire who has advised Massachusetts on the issue. "How are you going to manage it? Is it the
people with the most power win? Is it whoever got there first? Is it a free-for-all?"
To resolve these conflicts, a handful of states -- including Massachusetts, California and Rhode Island -
- have begun essentially zoning the ocean, drawing up rules and procedures to determine which
activities can take place and where. The federal government is considering adopting a similar
approach, though any coherent effort would involve sorting out the role of 20 agencies that
administer roughly 140 ocean-related laws.
"It's really an idea whose time has come, and it's one of my top priorities," said Jane Lubchenco, who
chairs the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. "By focusing on different sectors,
nobody is paying attention to the whole -- in particular, the health of the system."
But conducting what experts call "marine spatial planning" presents scientific and political challenges,
since so little of the ocean has been mapped in detail, and so many interest groups want to use it. The
federal government has mapped only 20 percent of the "exclusive economic zone" that stretches from
the U.S. coast out 200 nautical miles, and that's just its geophysical bottom, not the habitats and
species that exist at varying levels.
Exploration

Exploration not keeping pace with need now is key to catch up before we fall
too far behind
McNutt, Ocean Exploration 2020 Executive Chair and Science editor-in-chief, 13
*Marcia, Accelerating Ocean Exploration, included in Ocean Exploration 2020 forum, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration & Aquarium of the Pacific, September 2013, The
Report of Ocean Exploration 2020: A National Forum,
http://www.aquariumofpacific.org/downloads/oe2020report.pdf, p. 5, 6/25/14, GNL]

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 an 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.
The US is lacking exploration now
Hayward, Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy senior fellow, 11
*Steven F., April 2011, Pacific Research Institute, 2011 Almanac of Environmental Trends,
http://www.pacificresearch.org/docLib/20110419_almanac2011.pdf, accessed 6/29/14 CK]

Despite our burgeoning datasets and increasingly sophisticated monitoring capabilities (such as earth-
observation satellites), large gaps remain in our data and our understanding of many key
environmental issues. Many specific uncertainties are presented in the analysis of indicators and
datasets throughout this Almanac, but here are the top five environmental areas where our knowledge
and understanding are inadequate:
1. The oceans-especially the deep oceans. The United States spends vastly more on space research
than on ocean research, even though surprising discoveries from the deep oceans continue to roll in
whenever we look closely. NASAs 2010 budget is $18.3 billion, while the 2010 budget of NOAA, the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, is $4.7 billion. Part of this difference occurs because
satellites cost much more than ocean-exploration equipment, but part of it is due to the neglect of our
own unexplored frontier.
2. Biodiversity. No one doubts that species extinction-along with its main drivers, such as habitat
fragmentation-is occurring on a scale larger than some natural or background rate of extinction.
Scientists are making rapid progress in cataloguing species, but large uncertainties remain about how
biodiversity works on the ground, and even how to define ecosystems.
3. Arctic conditions. Everyone knows about retreating ice sheets and melting tundra, but it is not clear
that these changes are the result of human-caused global warming. Several peer-reviewed studies have
identified long-wave changes in upper-air wind patterns, deep ocean currents, and minor pollutants
such as black carbon as likely factors in the observed changes. Underneath the ice cap is another
realm of mystery, made more important by the likelihood of large mineral resources (especially oil
and gas) that several nations are now rushing to claim and exploit.
4. Chemical exposure. We use thousands of synthetic chemicals in our daily lives, but many compounds
have never been thoroughly tested or examined for potential harm to humans or ecosystems. And even
for chemicals tested and monitored, there are large ranges of uncertainty about what level of exposure
might be harmful. However, we do have a good understanding of basic chemical families that are
hazardous. Meanwhile, chemical anxiety-chemophobia-is often whipped up by activist groups.
5. Invasive species. Non-native species introduced through human trade or migration are considered a
priori to be ecologically harmful. This assumption requires more thought. Science writer Ronald Bailey
points to evidence that many non-native or exotic species appear to have increased overall
biodiversity in the areas where they were introduced (http://reason.org/ news/show/invasion-invasive-
species). Some species, such as the zebra mussels that have proliferated in the Great Lakes, are
obviously pests, but the blanket condemnation of invasive species should be reconsidered.

Infrastructure

Current ocean exploration infrastructure is not up to date
(Operating arm of the National Academy of Sciences, An Ocean Infrastructure Strategy for U.S. Ocean
Research in 2030, http://dels.nas.edu/resources/static-assets/osb/miscellaneous/Biennial-Report-
2009-2010.pdf, p. 30, accessed 6/30/14, BCG)

The nations research infrastructure forms the backbone of scientific enterprise and is essential for the
application of scientific knowledge to societal needs. However, significant components of the U.S.
ocean infrastructure are aged or obsolete, and in some areas, the capacity is insufficient to meet the
needs of the ocean community. There has been concern that the growing technology gap in facilities
will lead to the decline of the nations leadership in marine technology development. This could result
in increasing reliance on foreign facilities, potentially reducing the access of domestic researchers to
new technology and observational data.
Research Fleet

Current programs in exploration will stall future research projects
National Research Council, 9
[Operating arm of the National Academy of Sciences, Science at Sea: Meeting Future Oceanographic
Goals with a Robust Academic Research Fleet, pp. 73-74,
http://nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12775, accessed 6/29/14, BCG)

Due to insufficient funds to support research on increasingly expensive ships, the number of ship days
requested is rapidly outpacing operational days. Crew and fuel costs are likely to continue as
significant factors in total operational fleet costs. The push for more efficient ship scheduling may lead
to longer lead times for research projects and reductions in the ability of the future fleet to
accommodate late-breaking scientific and funding opportunities. Present trends in science and
technology indicate further growth in major research programs requiring significant ship resources. The
increasing cost of ship time and economies of scale may lead to greater use of Global class UNOLS
vessels, which are capable of simultaneously carrying out multiple science operations. Complex
programs are less likely to require multiple legs, lowering operational costs, if put on the largest ships of
the fleet. The reliance on Ocean class vessels in the current fleet renewal strategy probably will not
lead to a future fleet with reduced operational costs, but may lead to a fleet with fewer capabilities.

Current research fleets are not adequate
(Operating arm of the National Academy of Sciences, Science at Sea: Meeting Future Oceanographic
Goals with a Robust Academic Research Fleet, http://nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12775, pg. 7,

The academic research fleet provides U.S. and international users with access to the oceanfrom the
nearshore coastal zones to deep, remote regions far from land. Research vessels provide
oceanographers with opportunities to study issues of increasing societal relevance, including the
oceans role in climate, natural hazards, economic resources, human health, and ecosystem
sustainability. A highly capable fleet of ships also provides a platform for innovative basic research in
chemical, biological, and physical oceanography; marine geology and geophysics; atmospheric science;
and emerging interdisciplinary areas. Reports from the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy (USCOP) and
the Joint Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology (JSOST) have recognized the academic fleet
as an essential component of ocean research infrastructure (U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy, 2004;
Joint Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology, 2007). At the same time, there is community
concern that the fleet is in dire need of both modernization and recapitalization (i.e., U.S. Commission
on Ocean Policy, 2004; Malakoff, 2008; UNOLS Fleet Improvement Committee, 2009).

Current vessels being built are not cost efficient or effective
http://nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12775, pg. accessed 6/29/14, BCG)

The ship replacement and retirement plan outlined in the 2009 UNOLS Fleet Improvement Plan will
reduce the academic research fleet by nearly 40 percent by 2025 (Figure 5-4; UNOLS Fleet
Improvement Committee, 2009). The projected retirement of three Global class ships reduces overall
ship sizes and could produce overall fleet economies. However, Global class vessels are presently the
most heavily subscribed. Chapters 2 and 3 conclude that there will be increased demand for the large
research vessels with their deck loading, berthing, and sea state capacities. The new and planned
Ocean class ships are significantly less capable than the Global class in terms of deck loads and
berthing. Accommodating heavy deck loads and large science parties on Ocean class vessels would
require scheduling extra legs, leading to more time in port and a greater number of ship days per
research mission. In addition, the current Ocean class ship, Kilo Moana, has a day rate that is
comparable to the Global class (Figure 5-5). Thus, if day rates for the planned Ocean class vessels are
similar to Kilo Moana, total operating costs for 2025 will not decrease. Furthermore, with the planned
addition of Ocean class vessels, there will be fewer vessels able to support the widest-ranging, most
resource intensive marine science research programs of the future and the decrease in overall fleet
size will create greater difficulty in scheduling multiship operations.

UNOLS fleet relies on state and private funds
Goals with a Robust Academic Research Fleet, pp. 7-8, http://nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12775,

The U.S. academic research fleet is managed through the University- National Oceanographic
Laboratory System (UNOLS; Box 1-1), a consortium that unites research institutions, federal agencies,
and state and private interests. Although the academic fleet has existed since before World War II
(history provided in Appendix A), the UNOLS management structure was not established until 1971,
based on a recommendation of the Stratton Commission report Our Nation and the Sea (Commission on
Marine Science, 1969; Byrne and Dinsmore, 2000; Bash, 2001). From 18 original operating institutions
(Byrne and Dinsmore, 2000), by 2009 membership had grown to 61 institutions representing 26 states
and Panama, Puerto Rico, and Bermuda (Appendix B). UNOLS coordinates the schedules of 22 vessels
berthed in 13 states and Bermuda.
UNOLS assists federal and states agencies in performing their seagoing responsibilities. The National
Science Foundation (NSF), Office of Naval Research (ONR), National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Minerals Management Service (MMS), and U.S.
Coast Guard (USCG) support the UNOLS consortium through a cooperative agreement. Other agencies,
including the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(NASA), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), and Department of Energy (DOE) support ship time on
UNOLS vessels (Annette DeSilva, personal communication, 2009). State funds and private resources are
also used to support the academic fleet.

Solvency
OSEA Solves Science

OSEA solves commitment to basic research and exploration would create
sustainable basis for future science capacity

What Does an OSEA look like? At the core OSEA would need a mission dedicated to basic research and
exploration of the >;90% of the worlds oceans that remain unexplored. High risk with the potential for
high impact would be the norm. Pioneering knows no other way to achieve those truly novel and
impactful gains.
To achieve these goals, OSEA would need substantial infrastructure and fleet including international
and regional class research vessels, a submersible, remotely operated vehicles, and autonomous
underwater vehicles. Funding would need to be secure on decadal cycles to insure both the longevity
and permanence of this mission but allow for oversight to ensure OSEA was meeting its mission and
financial responsibilities. An ocean exploration center would be staffed with a vibrant community of
researchers, engineers, and administrators, postdoctoral fellows, graduate students, and visiting
experts with a strong interacting and supportive community working toward uncovering the mysteries
of the oceans. Research would be funded internally from a broad OSEA budget, not externally, freeing
scientists and engineers to actually do science and engineering as opposed to the only current option,
which is writing grants to other agencies with a less than 10% chance of funding.
OSEA would also be a resource both for the research community and the public by being dedicated to
open science, i.e. making scientific research, data and dissemination accessible to all levels of an
inquiring society, amateur or professional. Publications, data, software, and engineering would be
freely available and open to all. All internal processes would be transparent.
The mission of OSEA in the spirit of open science would be equally dedicated to public outreach. For too
long have science and society been disconnected. OSEA would involve the public as the ultimate
funders of our work. A novel and cutting edge education and outreach group would develop a
strategic plan to involve children and adults in the mission. There would be multiple opportunities for
anyone to be involved including the public. Citizen scientists would be essential components, allowing
adults to take a residence and contribute to OSEA and become life long ambassadors long after their
residence.

OSEA Key AT Other Agencies/Private

Patchwork approach wont solve mission focus and sustainable funding key only
OSEA solves

Although parts of OSEA are realized in other government and private organizations, they do not meet
the full mission nor can such a distributed structure be expected to meet the challenges of this pivotal
moment. For example, NOAA fills a much-needed role but its mission is largely applied. NOAAs
mission statement is Science, Service, and Stewardship. To understand and predict changes in climate,
weather, oceans, and coasts, To share that knowledge and information with others, and To conserve
and manage coastal and marine ecosystems and resource. Contrast that to NASAs simple mission,
to pioneer the future in space exploration, scientific discovery and aeronautics research.
provides another model that comes close to OSEA but is heavily reliant on private funding that can often
be significantly reduced during recessions as endowments shrink. Moreover, a private foundation is
unlikely to meet the full financial burden to support the full mission of an OSEA or provide a resource
to the ocean science community as whole. This is not meant to criticize either NOAA or MBARI, indeed
both supported our own research and have made immense contributions to ocean science and
exploration, but neither do they fully realize our vision for OSEA.
As John F. Kennedy stated, We must be bold. It is time for a great national effort of the United States
of America, time for us to renew our commitment to uncovering the mysteries of the blue planet we
live on. We need a NASA-style Ocean Science and Exploration Agency (OSEA). to explore and research
the greatest depths of oceans with a community of scientists, engineers, and citizens.

Commitment Key

Sustained commitment key understanding the ocean key to climate, food,
energy, and commerce security
US Commission on Ocean Policy, 4
[quoted in Ocean Exploration 2020 forum, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration &
Aquarium of the Pacific, September 2013, The Report of Ocean Exploration 2020: A National
Forum, http://www.aquariumofpacific.org/downloads/oe2020report.pdf, p. vi, 6/25/14, GNL+

Given the importance of the ocean in human history and in regulating climate change, guaranteeing
food security, providing energy resources, and enabling worldwide commerce, it is astounding that we
still know so little about it. This is due primarily to the lack of a long-term, large-scale national
commitment to ocean exploration. The ocean and its depths need to be systematically explored to
serve the interests of the nation and humankind.

Prioritization Solvency

A national programmatic prioritization approach is key to lead a new
exploration program
Ocean Exploration 2020 forum, 13
[National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration & Aquarium of the Pacific, September 2013,
The Report of Ocean Exploration 2020: A National Forum,
These characteristics of a national program of ocean exploration imply a network of universities,
nongovernmental organizations, the private sector, and government agencies working together in
pursuit of shared goals. Federaland in particular, NOAAleadership is essential to help design and
maintain what might be called an architecture for collaboration that convenes national and
international ocean exploration stakeholders regularly to review and set priorities, to match potential
expedition partners, to facilitate sharing of assets, and to help test and evaluate new technologies.
The program should facilitate the review and analysis of new and historical data and the synthesis and
transformation of data into a variety of informational products. In this leadership role, NOAA would
promote public engagement, and guide and strengthen the national ocean exploration enterprise.
A conventional federal government approach wont work. In describing characteristics of the national
ocean exploration program in 2020, participants used words including: nimble, flexible, creative,
innovative, and responsive. A program with these qualities just might ignite the ocean exploration
movement envisioned by the participants in the first gathering of the community of ocean explorers.

Coordination Solvency

Comprehensive and coordinated approach is key to effective ocean exploration

The forum examined the future of ocean exploration through the lens of a coordinated federal effort
involving multiple agencies led by NOAA in collaboration with the private sector. It is a vision that
captures many of the nations ocean exploration activities, but not all. Some will be excluded because of
national security, others because of constraints by funders. The proposed framework for Ocean
Exploration 2020 captures more of the nations existing ocean exploration enterprise than ever before
and offers ways of expanding and enhancing it.
This report is a record of Ocean Exploration 2020. Ocean Exploration 2020 participants described ocean
exploration as a great opportunity, an urgent necessity, and an issue of national security. They agreed
that a national program in 2020 should include the following attributes.
OCEAN EXPLORATION PRIORITIES
In 2020, clear priorities are identified by the exploration community and revisited on a regular basis.
Having a clear, focused set of ocean exploration priorities is a critical element in developing and
sustaining a national program of ocean exploration. No group is better qualified to identify these
priorities than the community of ocean explorers. The community identified the polar regions,
particularly the Arctic; ocean acidification; and the water column (noting that exploration extends from
the sub-seafloor to the surface) as important exploration priorities. The Indo-Pacific and Central Pacific
regions are also important for further exploration. Participants agreed that a clear mission statement
for national ocean exploration is critical as is a process to engage ocean exploration stakeholders on a
recurrent basis in determining priorities.
PARTNERSHIPS
In 2020, there is an extensive and dynamic network of partnerships that link public agencies, private
sector organizations, and academic institutions.
There was near unanimity that in 2020 and beyond, most dedicated ocean exploration expeditions and
programs will be partnershipspublic and private, national and international. NOAA has been assigned
a leadership role in developing and sustaining a national program of ocean exploration under the Ocean
Exploration Act of 2009, one that promotes collaboration with other federal ocean and undersea
research and exploration programs.
PLATFORMS
In 2020, a greater number of ships, submersibles, and other platforms are dedicated to ocean
exploration.
There is a critical need for new ships and other platforms. The need for autonomous underwater
vehicles and remotely operated vehicles is greater than for human occupied vehicles. A national
program requires a mix of dedicated and shared ocean exploration assets. Participants agreed that
ocean exploration should take advantage of all sources of available and relevant data. For example,
cabled observatories, recoverable observatories, the various ocean observation networks, and
satellites are all important in a national program of ocean exploration.
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT
By 2020, private sector investments in exploration technology development specifically for the
dedicated national program of exploration exceed the federal investment, but federal partners play a
key role in testing and refining new technologies.
Forum participants agreed that a top priority for a national ocean exploration program of distinction is
the development of mechanisms to fund emerging and creatively disruptive technologies to enhance
and expand exploration capabilities. In addition to the significant federal government investment in
ocean exploration technology developmentwhether by the U.S. Navy, NASA, NOAA, or other civilian
agenciesmany felt strongly that increased investment would come from the private sector to achieve
the kind of program they envisioned. Participants also felt that national program partners should
continue to play a key role in testing and refining these technologies as well as working to adapt
existing and proven technologies for exploration.
CITIZEN SCIENCE
In 2020, citizen scientists play an increasingly important role in ocean exploration.
There was a consensus among Forum participants that citizen explorers will play an increasing role in
ocean exploration by 2020. These citizen explorers may follow and contribute to national expeditions
online, analyze data from past expeditions and submit their work to national and international data
bases, or they may use their own tools, such as small, inexpensive remotely operated vehicles equipped
with cameras or measuring devices to collect data that are then quality controlled and included in
national databases. Opportunities for citizen explorers to participate in shipboard experiences should
also be expanded.
DATA SHARING
In 2020, all data obtained through publicly funded, dedicated civilian ocean exploration projects are
available quickly and widely at little or no additional cost to the user.
There was a strong consensus among Ocean Exploration 2020 participants that all data, including
images and access to samples resulting from publicly supported, dedicated civilian exploration
expeditions, be made widely available at little or no additional cost in real time or as soon as
appropriate quality assurances have been completed. Ocean exploration data should reside within
established data repositories and their existence be made widely known.
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT In 2020, ocean explorers are part of a coordinated communication network and
have the tools they need to engage the public.
Participants were in strong agreement that we need to enhance and expand existing efforts and find
new ways to communicate with the public about ocean exploration. We can provide better interaction
between scientists and the public during expeditions, especially increasing the use of telepresence for
active engagement.
Ocean Exploration 2020 participants also agreed that a shared strategy is needed to communicate
effectively and engage with the public about ocean exploration. Many ocean exploration scientists need
more experience and better resources, tools, and partnerships to implement this communication
strategy and to build public support for the national program.
Toward a National Program of Ocean Exploration
Ocean Exploration 2020 participants agreed that there is a critical need for effective coordination
among the federal agencies in all aspects of ocean exploration and research. Likely federal budget
ocean exploration allocations for these agencies are too small for independent approaches.
The community noted that a national program must be flexible, responsive, and inclusive, and called
for NOAA to act as a coordinator and facilitator of all exploration activities. The program must have the
means to grow partnerships of all kinds to seize the opportunityand respond to the urgent need to
understand the global ocean.
Finally, Ocean Exploration 2020 participants noted the value of this National Forum and the need for
regular opportunities for the community of ocean explorers to come together. Maintaining the
momentum from Ocean Exploration 2020 is critical, and NOAA and its partners need to take advantage
of all opportunities to capture the energy and maintain the commitment of the ocean exploration
community.

Focus and coordination program key to capacity-building partnerships
As we move ahead in setting national priorities, we need a clear national mission statement that has
been vetted widely and endorsed by the extended community of ocean explorers. This mission
statement should be revisited every few years and revised as appropriate to reflect changing national
priorities, new areas of promising potential for discovery, and new funding opportunities. Such a
mission statement should also acknowledge that exploration includes the concept of serendipitous
discovery: exciting, unexpected results from mission-driven or hypothesis-testing data collection
activities.
A national mission statement would provide a focus to bring greater coherency among discrete
exploration activities and would offer opportunities for greater coordination and collaboration among
federal agencies and between the public and private sectors.

Endowment Solvency

Endowment solves sustainable funding
Migliaccio, Vermont Supreme Court Legal Extern, 14
*Emily, Vermont Law JD, 2014, THE NATIONAL OCEAN POLICY: CAN IT REDUCE MARINE POLLUTION
AND STREAMLINE OUR OCEAN BUREAUCRACY? Issue 3, Volume:15,
http://vjel.vermontlaw.edu/publications/national-ocean-policy-can-reduce-marine-pollution-
streamline-ocean-bureaucracy/, Pages 654-655, accessed 6/26/14, CK]

Unfortunately, the area that received the lowest grade out of the four here listedand one that is
probably most needed for the implementation of the NOPis funding. The JOC gave this category a
D- because ocean programs are chronically underfunded.175 In order to implement the NOP to
the fullest extent possible under existing authorities and as directed by the 2010 Executive Order, the
government must allocate resources to the NOC. The Presidents Fiscal Year 2011 Budget Request
contains additional funding to advance priority activities identified in the Final Recommendations of
the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force. 176 However, some legislators are skeptical about the
Obama Administrations plan to begin implementing the NOP. 177 Mostly hailing from the Republican
party, the opposition fears that the money to support the Policy will be siphoned from other
important programs, and argue that the White House fails to garner Congressional authorization.178
Also, Republicans are concerned that the Implementation Plan is a plan for the government to zone
the ocean, establishing areas for specific uses while precluding other activities (such as oil drilling).179
The JOC suggests a very respectable solution to the lack of funding: establish an ocean investment
trust fund to provide the financial support for national, regional, state, and local programs working to
understand and manage our ocean and coastal resources. 180 The JOC also recommends that an
integrated ocean and coastal budget be established to make it easier to track support for and analyze
the progress of programs situated across the federal government that are closely related, and in some
cases overlapping and duplicative.181 As mentioned above, a bill for a National Endowment for the
Oceans is presently before Congress, but the likelihood of that passing is unknown at this point.

Endowment is funded through revenues in industries
Ocean Conservatory 10
*Ocean Conservatory, 2010, Climate Action Network, The National Endowment for the Oceans:
Investing in monitoring, researching, protecting, and restoring our ocean
http://www.usclimatenetwork.org/resource-database/the-national-endowment-for-the-oceans-fact-
sheet accessed 6/27/14, CK]

Given the environmental and economic importance of marine and coastal ecosystems, we should be
investing more in monitoring, researching, protecting, and restoring the vitality of these systems. We
should be facilitating their ability to adapt to long-term change and their resilience so that they can
better recover when disasters happen, whether man-made or natural. The National Endowment for
the Oceans Act would ensure that some of the revenue that comes from the extraction and use of
ocean resources is invested back into understanding and conserving our ocean.

Endowment grants are key to solve laundry list
Niell, World Ocean Observatory Director, 11
*Peter, 7/07/11, Huff Post Green, National Endowment for the Ocean, Coasts, and Great Lakes
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-neill/national-endowment-for-th_b_891257.html, accessed
6/27/14 CK]

The proposed legislation would create a funding process based on interest from the Oil Spill Liability
Trust Fund, 12.5 percent of revenues from offshore energy development (to include oil, gas, and
renewable energy), and 10 percent of civil penalties for regulatory violations on the Continental Shelf.
Overhead is capped at 3%. The Endowment would be overseen by the Secretary of Commerce, more
specifically by a seven person Council comprising additional representatives of other Federal agencies
with over-lapping authority. Panels of experts and community representatives would advise.
Here is some specific language from the Act. Its purposes "are to protect, conserve, re-store, and
understand the oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes of the United States, ensuring present and future
generations will benefit from the full range of ecological, economic, educational, social, cultural,
nutritional, and recreational opportunities and services these resources are capable of providing."
"Activities harming ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems jeopardize the economies and social
structure of communities dependent on resources from such ecosystems."
"The coastal regions of the United States have high biological productivity and contribute
approximately 50 percent of the gross domestic product of the United States. The oceans, coasts, and
Great Lakes are susceptible to change as a direct and indirect result of human activities, which can
inhibit ecosystem integrity and productivity, biodiversity, environmental quality, national security,
economic competitiveness, availability of energy, resistance to natural hazards, and transportation
safety and efficiency."
"A variety of human activities have caused dramatic declines in the health and productivity of ocean,
coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems of the United States, including chemical, nutrient, thermal, and
biological pollution, including the introduction of invasive species, and the introduction of marine
debris; unwise land use and coastal development; loss and degradation of habitat, including upstream
freshwater habitat for anadromous, diadromous, and migratory fish species; overfishing and by-catch of
non-target marine species; and global climate change and ocean acidification."
These are strong, perhaps unexpected statements, grounded in reality, indicative of insightful
legislative purpose, based on research and best practice.
The legislation would establish a grants program to fund projects to restore habitat, manage fisheries,
plan for sustainable coastal development, acquire coastal properties for preservation, and relocate
critical coastal infrastructure. Applicants could include states, regional associations, non-
governmental organizations, and research organizations. To be eligible, states would be required to
provide an approved five-year coastal management plan and, in some cases, match Federal grant funds
dollar for dollar.
This is a welcome step forward, and is the logical and practical follow-up to the nation's new National
Ocean Policy that was established by President Obama earlier this year. Now, of course, comes the
hard part, as the Act enters the troubled waters of the legislative process -- review by sub-
committees, full committees, the Senate, the House of Representatives, and then the so-called
reconciling, trading, compromising and diluting by opposing interests in what passes for governance
these days. Think of this initiative as one of those alewives or salmon that return home to inland places
to spawn, avoiding all the dangers of the open ocean, surviving the hunters, the pollutants, and the
dams. Let's hope this one makes it; we need this initiative badly if we are ever to deal successfully with
the once and future ocean.

Stable funding key to addressing current problems
streamline-ocean-bureaucracy/, Pages 643-644, 6/26/14, CK]

The draft Plan was open for public comment until March 28, 2012;114 and on April 16, 2013, the NOC
released the Final Plan.115 The Final Plan is a relatively short document organized into five sections(1)
The Ocean Economy, (2) Safety and Security, (3) Coastal and Ocean Resilience, (4) Local Choices, and (5)
Science and Information.116 The first three sections describe how the NOP will positively impact
Americas ocean economy, security, and ocean and coastal resilience. The fourth section describes the
need for more localized efforts at addressing ocean and coastal priorities, given that priorities vary
across all regions within the United States.117 The last section addresses the need for partners and
stakeholders to make a scientific, technological, and educational commitment to addressing ocean
and coastal priorities.118 In the Plan, the NOC recognizes that completion of the actions is dependent
upon the availability of funds and resources.119 The Plan is meant to be flexible:
[The] Plan is intended to be a living document. It is designed to be adaptive to new information or
changing conditions, and will be updated periodically as progress is made, lessons are learned, new
activities are planned, and as the Nation continually strives to improve the stewardship of the ocean,
coasts, and Great Lakes for the benefit of current and future generations.120
Now, with the Implementation Plan complete, the United States is in the final stage
121
actual
implementation of the NOP.
Endowment Eligibility Criteria

National Endowment grants solve for the ocean three reasons
Ocean Conservatory 10
*Ocean Conservatory, 2010, Climate Action Network, The National Endowment for the Oceans:
Investing in monitoring, researching, protecting, and restoring our ocean
http://www.usclimatenetwork.org/resource-database/the-national-endowment-for-the-oceans-fact-
sheet accessed 6/27/14, CK]

The National Endowment for the Oceans provides funding for grants to conserve, restore, and better
understand ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes resources. Three grant programs will be overseen by the
Secretary of Commerce:
1. Formula grants that would go to coastal and Great Lakes States and territories with an approved
Coastal Zone Management Plan and affected tribes. To be eligible, a State or tribe must submit a five-
year plan, with opportunity for public input and comment, detailing goals and projects and activities for
which the funding will be used.
2. Grants to regional planning bodies are intended to help implement Regional Strategic Plans,
including baseline ecological and socio-economic assessments. These grants will also support the
development and implementation of plans to improve ecosystem health and economic sustainability.
3. National competitive grants would be available through the Ocean Resources and Assistance Grant
Program. State, local, regional and affected Indian tribal entities; non-profit organizations; and academic
institutions would be eligible to apply for these grants. A National Endowment for the Oceans Council
consisting of seven members from federal agencies with relevant expertise would be established to
review grant applications and provide funding recommendations to the Secretary.
Eligible Uses Include: restoration of wetlands, coral reefs, sea grass beds, and watersheds
research, monitoring, observation, and modeling of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes systems
adaptation to the impacts of climate change and mitigation of coastal hazards, including
infrastructure protection research and monitoring of ocean acidification and other climate change
impacts to oceans, coasts, and the Great Lakes conservation of marine and near-shore areas through
land acquisition and management conservation of sensitive marine, coastal, and Great Lakes species
and their habitat baseline data collection, ecosystem assessments, and mapping for use in planning
for sustainable ocean uses and protecting ecosystem health planning to reduce conflicts, facilitate
compatible uses, and preserve ecosystem services

AT US Cant Legally Explore

US can legally explore and mine the ocean
Groves, Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Senior Research Fellow, 12
*Steven, 12/4/2012, The Heritage Foundation, The U.S. Can Mine the Deep Seabed Without Joining the
U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/12/the-us-
can-mine-the-deep-seabed-without-joining-the-un-convention-on-the-law-of-the-sea, accessed 6/29/14
CK]

No legal barriers prohibit U.S. access, exploration, or exploitation of the resources of the deep seabed.
Deep seabed mining is a high seas freedom that all nations may engage in regardless of their
membership or non-membership in UNCLOS or any other treaty. Like other high seas freedoms, the
right to engage in deep seabed mining is inherent to all sovereign nations under customary
international law. Rather, it is the convention that attempts to restrict access to the deep seabed and
infringe on the intrinsic rights of the United States and other nations that have chosen to remain non-
parties.
High seas freedoms are not conditional on membership in a treaty. Neither the United States nor any
other nation need be party to UNCLOS to exercise them. While the convention addressed and
codified various high seas freedoms, enjoyment of those freedoms is not conditional on membership.
Rather, high seas freedomsincluding freedom of navigation and overflight, freedom of fishing,
freedom to lay submarine cables, and freedom to engage in marine scientific researchare enjoyed
and exercised regularly by the United States and other UNCLOS non-parties based on their status as
sovereign and independent nations.

Aesthetics Solvency

Oceans have aesthetic qualities that spur exploration

Over a decade ago, one of us (CM) made his first submersible dive off of Rum Cay in the Bahamas. At
the surface the temperature was a warm 91F and at the bottom 2,300 feet down the temperature was
near freezing. Despite my large size, I dont remember feeling cramped inside the soda can-sized sub at
any moment. The entire time I pressed my face against a 6-inch porthole, my cheek against the cool
glass, and focused my eyes on the few feet of illuminated sea floor around me and the miles of black
beyond. Here in the great depths of oceans I got my first look at the giant isopod, a roly-poly the size
of a large shoe. This beast and the surrounding abyss instantly captured my imagination, launching me
on a journey of ocean science and exploration to unravel the riddles of life in the deep.
A thousand miles away, off the coast of Yucatan Mexico, the other of us (AD) experienced equal
wonder at the discovery of the largest aggregation ever recorded of the largest of fish in the world,
the whale shark. These spotted behemoths gather annually in the hundreds off the coast of Cancun,
one of the worlds most popular tourist destinations, and yet this spectacular biological was unknown
to science until 2006. Swimming among them, I reverted to a childish state of wonder, marveling at
their size, power and grace, and boggling that they have probably been feeding in these waters since
dinosaurs, not tourists, inhabited the Yucatan.

Arctic

Exploration key to Arctic, Arctic key to addressing climate change
[National Research Council Committee on Exploration of the Seas, *The National Research Council was
organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science
and technology with the Academys purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal
government, 2003, The National Academies, Exploration of the Seas: Interim Report, This free PDF was
downloaded from: http://www.nap.edu/catalog/10630.html,page 10-12Accessed 6/30/14 CK]

The Southern Ocean is the least explored of the worlds ocean. There are few observations during the
austral winter and, even during the austral summer, there are regions beneath the floating ice shelves
that remain inaccessible to ships. Highly specialized, but mostly unsampled, biota occupy the extreme
habitats under the ice. The Southern Ocean is highly productive biologically, containing large stocks of
living resources that require understanding for effective protection and management (Figure 4).
The waters under the floating ice are extremely cold and dense, contributing to the formation of the
Antarctic Bottom Water with special physical and chemical properties. Deep water formation is one of
the most important oceanographic processes on Earth, and a driving mechanism that initiates deep-
reaching convection and global-scale thermohaline circulation. The Southern Ocean is one of the
regions this process is known to occur. Vast areas of the Southern Ocean seafloor remain unmapped, yet
it contains records of the disintegration of the Gondwana supercontinent and the opening of the Drake
Passage. Many believe the latter to be one of the key events leading to the present global climate.
Many important aspects of the Southern Ocean have not been properly explored because of the lack
of suitable technology. An ocean exploration program could foster the development of a new
generation of specialized AUVs and other types of probes that can be lowered through holes drilled
through hundreds of meters of ice.
The Arctic Ocean is flanked by broad continental margins likely to contain new living and non-living
resources. Because of its ice cover, remoteness, and harsh weather, it has been the target of numerous
heroic, and in earlier times often tragic, visits by explorers. This region remains a high priority for
exploration because of its influence on the habitability of northern North America and Eurasia.
The tectonic history of the western Arctic Ocean is basically unknown. The ultra-slow spreading of the
Arctic midocean ridges gives rise to spectacular topographic relief and a complex crustal architecture.
Volcanic activity is markedly reduced, with the result that major portions of the ridge are composed of
rocks from the mantle. Virtually nothing is known about this mechanism of building new crust in this
extreme environment. The present isolation of the Arctic Ocean and its separation from all other ridge
systems also raises fundamental questions about the evolution and ecology of Arctic vent fauna.
Hydrographic barriers and geologic features enclosing the Arctic Ocean spreading centers pose a
significant barrier to dispersal of vent species. The recent recovery of a few specimens of vent fauna
while dredging along the Gakkel Ridge in the Arctic Ocean confirms the existence of vent ecosystems
in this region. Indeed, these isolated ecosystems may hold keys to the evolution of life at
hydrothermal vents (Figure 5).
The Arctic sea ice cover existed millions of years ago. Properties of the warm Arctic Ocean prior to the
sea ice cover are unknown and can only be resolved by applying new technology to sample the history
of oceanic sediments beneath the ice. These sediments may illustrate past examples of a scenario that
could develop again due to global warming.
Exploration of the polar oceans will be most effectively undertaken through a large, multi-platform
ocean exploration program. Expense and logistical support necessitate strong international
collaboration, for which there is growing support. Because our current understanding of the polar
oceans is fragmented and spatially limited they are a strong candidate for program initiation.

Arctic prioritization key need data for effective Arctic stewardship
McNutt, Ocean Exploration 2020 Executive Chair and editor-in-chief of Science, 13
*Marcia, Accelerating Ocean Exploration, included in Ocean Exploration 2020 forum, National

Should any region of the ocean receive priority? Although the southern oceans are still largely
unexplored, and coral reef hot spots for biodiversity are gravely imperiled by ocean warming and
acidification, there was much support by Long Beach participants for prioritizing the Arctic, a region
likely to experience some of the most extreme climate change impacts. An ice-free ocean could affect
weather patterns, sea conditions, and ecosystem dynamics and invite increases in shipping, tourism,
energy extraction, and mining. Good decisions by Arctic nations on Arctic stewardship, emergency
preparedness, economic development, and climate change adaptation will need to be informed by
good science. Exploration of this frontier needs to happen now to provide a useful informational
baseline for future decisions.

Arctic rapidly changing effective stewardship key to ecosystems, communication,
shipping, mapping, security
6/26/14, CK]

The Arctic is rapidly changing. One of the most dramatic changes is the decrease in sea ice, which is
likely to increase vessel traffic in the U.S. Arctic. Commercial vessels may capitalize on more
expeditious routes, cruise ships and recreational vessels are expected to bring more tourists to the
region, fishing grounds are shifting, and oil and gas companies are moving forward with exploration
activities and obtaining leases to drill into the Arctic seabed. This brings a need for improvements to
our Arctic communication systems and environmental response management capabilities; our ability
to observe and forecast sea ice; and the accuracy of maps and charts of the region. Our maritime
safety and security in the Arctic hinge upon these actions.
Enhance communication systems in the Arctic to improve our capability to prevent and respond to
maritime incidents and environmental impacts. Federal agencies will improve Arctic communication
systems by advancing both technical capabilities and partnerships. Agencies will strengthen existing
communication systems to allow vessels, aircraft, and shore stations to effectively communicate with
each other and to receive information such as real- time weather and sea ice forecasts that will
significantly decrease the risk of loss of life at sea or damage to property or the marine environment.
Agencies will partner with each other, Native communities, industry, and other countries as
appropriate to identify user needs and existing capabilities prior to building new communication
systems.
Improve Arctic environmental incident prevention and response to ensure coordinated agency action,
minimize the likelihood of disasters, and expedite response activities. Increased Arctic vessel traffic
brings increased risks of collisions, groundings, and other serious marine incidents that can lead to loss
of life and property and damage the marine environment. A coordinated and prepared all-hazards
response-management system will mitigate the impacts of marine-pollution events on fragile Arctic
communities and ecosystems. To improve responses, Federal agencies will conduct joint spill-response
workshops and exercises, develop and implement response coordination and decision-support tools
like the Arctic Environmental Response Management Application, and improve spill prevention,
containment, and response infrastructure, plans, and technology for use in ice-covered waters.
Improve Arctic sea ice forecasting to support safety at sea. Sea ice forecasting is one of the most
urgent and timely issues in the Arctic region. To ensure the best tactical and long-term ice forecasts are
available for safe operations and planning, Federal agencies will work together to better quantify the
rates of sea ice melt and regrowth, understand shifting patterns of distribution of ice, develop better
maps of the ice edge, expand participation in the sea ice observation program, and coordinate with
international partners to enable better model-based forecasting over larger areas. Improved
observations will contribute to improved forecasts, which will better inform Arctic maritime safety and
security activities.
Improve Arctic mapping and charting for safe navigation and more accurate positioning.
Advancements in hydrographic charting will enhance the safety of navigation in the Arctic region by
reducing the risk of damaging maritime incidents. Federal agencies will update nautical charts and
establish priorities, in concert with Native communities and stakeholders, for shoreline and
hydrographic surveying activities. Further, mapping gravity data over the State of Alaska will help
correct meters-level errors in Arctic positioning. Such efforts will support U.S. Navy and U.S. Coast
Guard operations and help ensure the safety and security of all mariners in the Arctic.

MISSING NEED STEWARDSHIP KEY TO CONFIDENCE BUILDING MEASURES

Confidence building measures in the Arctic are a prerequisite to stability and relations

Huebert, University of Calgary political science professor, 10
(Rob, The Newly Emerging Arctic Security Environment, Prepared for the Canadian Defence & Foreign
Affairs Institute, March 2010,
http://www.cdfai.org/PDF/The%20Newly%20Emerging%20Arctic%20Security%20Environment.pdf,
accessed 7/1/14, GNL)

Yet it is hard to conceptualise what that conflict would look like. From a rational perspective, any
conflict over resources would not provide the winner with meaningful gains. A conflict over
resources or boundaries in the region would undoubtedly result in huge environmental damage to the
region. Such a conflict would never be profitable to any side from a rational perspective. It is highly
unlikely that any side would attempt to pursue such a policy as an aggressor. Here is the real problem:
because each of the Arctic states is in the process of rearming just in case, they are all contributing
to the growing strategic value of the region. As this value grows, each state will attach a greater value
to their own national interests in the region. In this way, an arms race may be beginning. And once the
weapons systems are in place, states can behave in strange ways. Denmarks escalation of the Hans
Island issue is a prime example. The island has little value to either Canada or Denmark. The ongoing
exchange of alcohol prior to 2002 seemed the best way that both sides could pretend that they cared,
but really did not. Only when the Danes obtained a new military capability did the issue suddenly
escalate. If this can happen for an insignificant issue between allies, what are the risks for issues that are
of significant importance? In order to avoid this potential outcome, the Arctic states need to act on
their stated intention to cooperate. Discussions need to be held to ensure that these new capabilities
do not ignite an arms race in the region or led to deterioration in the relationships that already exist.
The Arctic Council the main multilateral body for the Arctic has a prohibition on discussing issues
related to security. Now is the time to eliminate such restrictions. The Arctic states need to have an
open and frank discussion. Measures for building confidence and cooperation must be established.

Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (UAVs)

AUVs Solve Exploration

Autonomous vehicles are most effective ocean floor scanning tech
Makinen, LA Times, 14
*Julie, 4/15/2014, Los Angeles Times, Plane search goes underwater; The hunt for debris from missing
Malaysia Airlines jet now relies on a submarine scanning the seabed., Part A Page 4, Lexis, Accessed
6/29/14 CK]

Investigators looking for Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 have put away their towed pinger locator and are
about to call off searches for surface debris. Now, it's all up to a little yellow robotic submarine to find
the missing Boeing 777 in an area bigger than the city of Los Angeles.
Technicians aboard the Australian ship Ocean Shield on Monday afternoon deployed the Bluefin-21
underwater autonomous vehicle in the Indian Ocean, sending it almost three miles down to the
seabed and using its side-scanning sonar arrays to look for wreckage from the plane.
"It is time to go underwater," retired Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston, who is coordinating the search
from Perth, Australia, said in announcing the new phase of operations.
Unless the robot sub gets lucky, the process could take a while: The U.S. Navy, which lent the Bluefin-
21 to the search team, said mapping the area where the plane most likely disappeared could take six
weeks to two months.
The 16-foot, 1,650-pound sub moves at a walking pace and will be searching an area of about 600
square miles. Houston said the first day's work was set to cover about 15 square miles, but the vehicle
automatically returned to the surface after just six hours because it exceeded its maximum operating
depth of 2.8 miles. Searchers planned to send it back out Tuesday.
"The whole key on these searches is you have to be methodical and persistent, and they can take quite a
bit of time," said David Kelly, president and chief executive of Bluefin Robotics, the Quincy, Mass.,
company that makes the vessel.
The Bluefin-21 -- which costs $4 million to $6 million, depending on options -- typically operates on a
24-hour cycle. It takes two hours each way to get to the seafloor and back and can search for 16
hours. Once it surfaces, it requires four hours to download the data gathered and prepare the machine
for its next dive.
While it's combing through the pitch-black waters, hovering about 150 feet above the seabed as it
scans a half-mile-wide swath, the Bluefin-21 uses sonar to gather data that will yield a high-resolution,
3-D map of the seafloor.
If something noteworthy is detected, Kelly said, the sonar can be swapped out for high-definition
cameras. When the cameras are being used, the sub hovers just 15 feet off the seafloor and takes a
series of overlapping pictures that provide a composite image.
The depth at which the Bluefin-21 will work -- 2.8 miles -- is hard even for oceanographers to fathom:
That's as deep as Mt. Whitney is tall. Horizontally, it's equal to the distance traveled driving along
Wilshire Boulevard from Rodeo Drive in Beverly Hills to the La Brea Tar Pits.
Kelly said the Bluefin-21 recently was tested at that depth in Hawaiian waters because Phoenix
International, the company that owns and operates it on behalf of the Navy, was checking "upgraded
capabilities."

AUVs are have diverse set of functions- now is key time to deploy
McNutt, Ocean Exploration 2020 executive chair, 13
[Marcia, 8/30/2013, SCIENCE, Accelerating Ocean Exploration Page 5,
http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/oceanexploration2020/oe2020_report.pdf, accessed 6/29/14 CK]
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
Presidents 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. However, there is not yet a body of experience on how to
take advantage of this new paradigm on the scale of a problem as large as ocean exploration. For ex-
ample, what tasks are most suitable for citizen scientists, and how can they be trained efficiently? Can
the quality control of their work be automated? Can crowd-sources tasks be scheduled to avoid
duplication and gaps?
Should any region of the ocean receive priority? Although the southern oceans are still largely
unexplored, and coral reef hot spots for biodiversity are gravely imperiled by ocean warming and
acidification, there was much support by Long Beach participants for prioritizing the Arctic, a region
likely to experience some of the most extreme climate change impacts. An ice-free ocean could affect
weather patterns, sea conditions, and ecosystem dynamics and invite increases in shipping, tourism,
energy extraction, and mining. Good decisions by Arctic nations on Arctic stewardship, emergency
preparedness, economic development, and climate change adaptation will need to be informed by
good science. Exploration of this frontier needs to happen now to provide a useful informational
baseline for future decisions.
AUVs Solve Biofouling
AUV tech solves biofouling
FIT 11*.
[Florida Institute of Technology, *2011 last date referenced, Florida Tech "Large Scale Seawater Facility
for Development of Hullbug."<https://www.fit.edu/research/portal/project/75/large-scale-seawater-
facility-for-development-of-hullbug>. Accessed 7/1/14 CK]

In a recent study by Schultz et al (2011) the economic impact of biofouling on the Arleigh Burke-class
destroyer DDG-51 was analyzed and estimated to cost the entire DDG-51 class $56M/year (direct cost
of distillate fuel marine $104.16/barrel). Present practice for the control of biofouling on most U.S.
Navy ships is to apply copper ablative antifouling paint and perform underwater cleaning when
fouling reaches a critical level as defined by Chapter 081 of the Navy Ship Technical Manual. This
approach is reactive and results in hull conditions that are both rough and fouled. An alternative and
new strategy proposed by ONR is to use a proactive grooming schedule when the ship is in port. The
approach is to design fully autonomous underwater vehicles (AUV), HullBUG (Hull Bioinspired
Underwater Grooming), which will gently clean the hull of biofilms and immature fouling organisms at
a frequency required to keep the surface free of fouling. This will maintain the hull in a smooth and
fouling-free condition. Research funded by the Office of Naval Research (N N000141010919) has
demonstrated the feasibility of such a method (Tribou and Swain 2010) and also led to the
development of a prototype AUV to implement the method (SeaRobotics).
Biofouling Hurts Biodiversity

Biofouling kills biodiversity Hawaii proves
Fox-Strohecker, Maui Invasive Species Committee Public Relations and Education
Specialist, 13
*Lissa, 1/13/2013, Maui Invasive Species Committee, Traveling by boat? Swab those hulls and
propellers to stop invasive stowaways. http://mauiinvasive.org/2013/01/18/traveling-by-boat-swab-
those-hulls-and-propellors-to-stop-invasive-stowaways/, accessed 7/1/14 CK]

Each year over ships make over 1000 trips to Hawaii. Container ships and barges, fishing boats, cruise
ships, and sailboats, aircraft carriers and military ships come bearing cargo for Hawaii or stop over on
their way across the Pacific. Any of these boats could carry tiny stowaways from distant places, and
that has resource managers concerned. Even an interisland boating trip could translate into trouble
for your local reef. The majority of Hawaiis aquatic invasive species came in via ballast water and
hull-fouling, explains Sonia Gorgula, the state coordinator recently hired by the Hawaii Department
of Land and Natural Resources aquatic division to address the problem. Ballast water is taken by
ships at sea or in port to maintain stability, and can contain organisms or larvae that may be harmful
when released into a new environment, oftentimes thousands of miles from where they originated.
Hull-fouling, or bio-fouling refers to the plants and animals that grow on any aquatic vessel, be it ship
or yacht, dingy or dock. When these living organisms reach new waters, they can cause problems. Of
the two types of marine contamination, Gorgula says biofouling is the bigger worry in Hawaii. One
species introduced this way is snowflake coral, a fast-growing soft-coral from the Caribbean. Since
arriving in Hawaiian waterways, it has devoured the zooplankton that supports the marine food web
and destroyed numerous black coral colonies. Hypnea, the rank invasive algae that washes up on
Maui beaches, spread between the Islands attached to the underbelly of a fishing or sailboat. Hypnea
is not only stinky and expensive to deal with on the beach, it outcompetes native limu. Biofouling
happens on any type of vessel, ocean or freshwater, that remains in port or dock long enough for
organisms to become attached. Broadly speaking its mussels, algae, barnacles, says Gorgula.
When you start to see an assemblage become quite dense, you can even find crabs. Boats function
as floating reefs, transporting these aquatic aliens to Hawaii, where they may or may not find a
home. Some species arrive and establish, then fail. Yet many species become invasive here that were
not thought to be invasive until they get here, says Gorgula. Often theres not enough information to
predict what will become invasive. One way to approach the situation is to treat all biofouling as
harmful and focus on preventionkeeping boats with Hawaii on their itinerary free of small
stowaways. Biofouling is a drag, literally. Barnacles colonize the hull of a ship and reduce fuel
efficiency as well as pose a risk of becoming invasive. Most commercial ships have incentives to keep
hulls relatively free of growth; biofouling creates drag that reduces fuel economy. But other hidden
niche areas underneath the boatpropellers and intake pipes used to pull in water for cooling the
engine and fire-fightingoften house alien species. Cleaning the hull is part of regular boat
maintenance; focusing on niche areas will help prevent the spread of hitchhikers. Certain paints are
designed specifically to discourage fouling, and hidden spots can be painted as well as hulls, simple steps
that feed into regular maintenance.
Biofouling Hurts Readiness

Biofouling hampers naval readiness and increases fuel consumption- AUVs Solve
McElvany, a program officer in environmental quality in the Navys physical science
division, No Date
[Stephen PHD, No Discernable Date, Office of Naval Research. United States Department of the Navy,
Robotic Hull Bio-Mimetic Underwater Grooming http://www.onr.navy.mil/Media-Center/Fact-
Sheets/Robotic-Hull-Bio-mimetic-Underwater-Grooming.aspx, accessed 7/1/14 CK]

The Robotic Hull Bio-Mimetic Underwater Grooming system, or Hull BUG, is an autonomous
underwater hull grooming robot specifically designed to prevent the accumulation of marine fouling.
How Does It Work? The current developmental model of the Hull BUG uses four wheels and a negative
pressure alternative device assembly for attachment to the hull. A suite of onboard sensors will provide
obstacle avoidance, path planning and navigation capabilities that include detection of fouled and
groomed surfaces. What Will It Accomplish? By reducing marine fouling on ship hulls, the Hull BUG will
help ensure peak ship performance, reduce fuel consumption associated with increased drag from
accumulated biofouling and decrease the U.S. Navys carbon footprint. Risk of hull invasive species
transfer may also be reduced.
High-performance naval warships and submarines rely on critical design factors such as top speed,
acceleration and hydroacoustic stealth to achieve their mission. Biofouling of ship hulls, primarily
caused by the buildup of marine crustaceans such as barnacles, adds weight, roughness and increases
drag, reducing a vessels fuel efficiency especially for Navy ships as they move throughout the world's
oceans. The Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock, estimates that vessel speed is reduced by up to
10 percent from biofouling, which can require up to a 40 percent increase in fuel consumption to
counter the added drag. In fact, colonized barnacles and biofilms settled on the hull of a Navy ship
translates into roughly 500 million dollars annually in extra fuel and maintenance costs. ONR is
developing the robotic Hull BUG to prevent or suppress the growth of advanced biofouling. Hull BUG
is an autonomous vehicle designed to groom and maintain the hull surfaces of ships. In some ways its
mission is similar to a robotic home floor cleaner, lawn mower or some advanced pool cleaners in that it
is designed to be tether free, autonomous and run on a battery for a significant duration of its mission.
Once developed it is expected that the Hull BUG platform could also provide other capabilities such as
hull inspection or force protection.

Climate

Now Key

Now key to solve warming
Mejia, Employment Services Manager at the South Bay Workforce Investment Board,
9
*Robert T., 1/14/2009, Green Technology, Whats Old is New, http://www.green-
technology.org/green_technology_magazine/images/What'sOldisNew.pdf, page 1, accessed 6/29/14
CK]

Global warming, its immediate effects on the planet, and its long-term effects on the life-supporting
systems upon which all of Earths inhabitants depend, is creating a sense of urgency, and momentum
to take action around the world. U.S. leadership and involvement will largely determine whether
responses by the world community will be effective in defeating the greatest threat mankind has ever
faced. Collectively, we must move to more intelligent forms of design, production, consumption, and
disposal that provide value and equity for all people while preserving the sanctity of the environment
and the Earths ability to renew itself to sustain future generations.
A transformation of economic systems is underway that will fundamentally change the way we treat
our planet and all it has to offer. At the core of this transformation is a shift to the use of clean and
renewable energies that, in their development and use, will create and sustain millions of new
economic opportunities for businesses and workers worldwide.
Victory will require new energy systems, environmental technologies, and ways of thinking buttressed
by profound and unswerving investments in all aspects of the workforce. Such investments should
begin immediately and be guided by sound economic and labor market intelligence to assure that
innovation and opportunity meet to provide all workers a place in the new economy.
Around the country, public institutions are eager to launch new efforts to prepare and develop a
workforce with the knowledge, skills and abilities to fuel essential economic transformation. What has
given these institutions pause, however, is a lack of clarity in the definition, purpose and location of
green jobs caused, in part, by anachronistic methods of describing economic activity and labor market
conditions. Therefore, changes must occur in the way we approach occupations and business activities
in order to appropriately characterize and evaluate environmentally sustainable functions, activities,
and outputs that are both well intentioned and measurable. Until such changes occur, there are
interim measures the federal workforce investment system can take to implement what has become a
national imperative against global warming: creation of a green workforce fully engaged in the useful
and environmentally sustainable transformation of space, energy, effort, information, ideas, and
knowledge, resulting in value.
To this end, the following strategies are recommended for what Americas federal workforce
investment system can do now to develop green jobs for a sustainable future.

Conflict Impact

Climate change exacerbates instability, risking conflict
Conathan & Polefka, Center for American Progress Ocean Policy Director & Research
Associate, 13
*Michael Conathan and Shiva Polefka , 3/29/2013, Center for American Progress, Top 5 Ocean Priorities
for the New Secretary of State,
http://americanprogress.org/issues/green/news/2013/03/29/58266/top-5-ocean-priorities-for-the-
new-secretary-of-state/, accessed 6/30/14 CK]

On the same day as Secretary Kerrys speech, the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
published a new report predicting a link in the rise in atmospheric carbon-dioxide concentration with
a marked rise in the frequency of Hurricane Katrina-magnitude storms, underscoring a point the
secretary made in his remarks: Climate change and our oceans represent an issue of both national
security and economic security.
In referencing the national security implications of climate change, Secretary Kerry is picking up where
Secretary Panetta left off. In a 2012 speech hosted by the Environmental Defense Fund, the former
Secretary of Defense said, rising sea levels, severe droughts, the melting of the polar caps, the more
frequent and devastating natural disasters all raise demand for humanitarian assistance and disaster
relief. Sustained shifts in weather patterns have already been linked to global instability, as noted in
multiple articles that explore the connection between drought-driven increases in food prices and the
unrest that led to the Arab Spring rebellions.
A wide variety of researchers have detailed the looming security threats of climate change, including
the Quadrennial Defense Review, which called it an accelerant of instability or conflict; a 2012 report
from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence reflecting looming crises as a result of water
issues, including shortages, water quality, or floods; and the work of our colleagues at the Center for
American Progress, whose report Climate Change, Migration, and Conflict in North Africa probes
potential water- and climate-related tensions in an already precarious region.
Cultivating a deeper understanding of the link between climate change and political instability will
bolster the case for domestic and international policymakers to get serious about taking action to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and start dealing with global climate change.

Ocean Exploration Key to Climate

Insufficient funding undermines exploration bolstering exploration key to progress
on climate and environmental stewardship
(Committee on Exploration of the Seas; the operating arm of the National Academy of Sciences,
Exploration of the Seas: Voyage into the Unknown, http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10844 ,
pp. 31-32, accessed 6/25/14, BCG)

Finding: The oceans play a critical role in the maintenance of the ecosystems of the Earth. Resources
contained in the oceans currently supply much of the worlds food and fuel supply, and maintain
global climate patterns. The oceans harbor as yet undiscovered organisms new searches for life
continue to discover previously unknown organisms. Only a portion of the potential of the oceans has
been tapped.
Recommendation: As was true when the International Decade of Ocean Exploration (1971-1980) was
proposed and supported, ocean exploration remains a necessary endeavor to identify and fully
describe the resources the oceans contain and uncover processes with far ranging implications for the
study of Earth as a whole. The pace at which we discover living and nonliving resources and improve
our understanding of how the oceans respond to chemical, biological, and physical changes must
increase.
INTERDISCIPLINARY EXPLORATION IS NEEDED
Every time a scientist happens upon some completely unexpected discovery in the ocean, it is
a reminder of how little is known about this environment that is so critically important to the
sustainability of the planet.
We now recognize that different facets of the oceansmall-scale geological, biological, and
genetic diversity; chemical, geophysical, and physical oceanographic propertiesinteract in complex
ways, and our understanding of the ocean requires examination as a whole system. It is difficult to
predict what discoveries are still to come, but it is clear that ocean exploration will improve the
accuracy of our predictions of global climate change, produce new products that will benefit
humanity, inform policy choices, and allow better stewardship of the oceans and the planet. To reach
this potential, ocean research should encourage collaboration between researchers from varied
disciplines.
Finding: Currently ocean science funding in the United States is predominantly awarded to
research in specific disciplines, such as biological, physical or chemical oceanography. Proposals for
interdisciplinary work are hampered by a funding bureaucracy that is also discipline-based. Ocean
exploration is an integrative activity that will encourage and support interdisciplinary efforts that seek
to discover new contributions to the marine sciences.

Exploration increases understanding of thermohaline circulation key to
understanding emissions
downloaded from: http://www.nap.edu/catalog/10630.html,page 13-14,Accessed 6/30/14 CK]

The ocean and the atmosphere store heat derived from the sun and redistribute that heat from the
Equator toward the poles. The oceans mass may slow the transitions from one climate regime to
another, as the slow overturning of the deep-ocean limits heat absorption and release at the ocean
surface. On the other hand, there is also evidence that a reduction in surface salinity due to melting
polar ice in the North Atlantic Ocean could increase the speed of climatic transitions. Suppression of
the flow of cold, salty, dense surface water into the deep ocean (the North Atlantic Deep Water
[NADW] formation) could alter the global-scale thermohaline circulation, resulting in less intense
surface currents and less poleward transport of heat.
The formation of NADW has other effects on global climate as well because it carries greenhouse
gases to the deep ocean, out of contact with the atmosphere for hundreds of years. Finally, extraction
of fresh water from the ocean via evaporation, which produces the high salinity of the NADW, provides
water for the global hydrological cycle. A better understanding of the global climate system requires a
much more sophisticated understanding of the thermohaline circulation, its vulnerability to change,
and the processes that govern water mass formation rates (National Research Council, 1994, 2001).
Retrospective exploration of deep ocean water temperatures over time may provide new insights to
trends in global climate. Surface water temperature can be measured with limited accuracy but high
resolution, from space. New systems like the Array for Real-Time Geostrophic Oceanography can
measure the temperature of the ocean to depths of 1,000 m with an average of 300 km resolution.
Ocean thermometry using acoustic methods can resolve deep water temperature at basin scales. Our
relatively limited knowledge of the deep oceanic realm makes it another strong candidate for an
ocean exploration program to aid our understanding of the forces that shaped climate changes in the
past and may shape them in the future.

Ocean research is key to monitor anthropogenic CO2
http://nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12775, pg. 19, accessed 6/29/14, BCG)

Physical oceanography has been transformed by the numerous autonomous sampling devices
currently available (e.g., moorings, drifters, floats, autonomous underwater vehicles [AUVs], gliders),
which increased sampling in the upper ocean to a rate and density unparalleled by ships. Research
vessels are still needed to measure large-scale changes in ocean heat and freshwater fluxes, deep ocean
variability below 2000 meters, and the anthropogenic inventory of CO2 (Garzoli et al., 2009). Many
climatically important carbon and related transient tracer parameters cannot be measured from
autonomous devices with present-day technology, and few floats, gliders, and AUVs are able to
operate to the full depth of the water column. While some of these instruments will operate to greater
ocean depths in the future, there will continue to be parts of the deep ocean that cannot be reached
without ship-based equipment. High-quality, ship-based observations will also continue to be essential
for calibration of water column measurements made from autonomous devices.
The deep ocean accounts for more than half of the total natural oceanic carbon inventory. As
anthropogenic carbon begins to invade the deep oceans in nonhomogeneous ways, it will continue to
be critical to monitor changes in deep ocean carbon content. For example, observations of transient
tracers (Willey et al., 2004), particularly in the high latitudes, strongly suggest that ventilation by
atmospheric gases is more rapid than previously estimated. In addition, observations of biogeochemical
parameters show greater-than-expected variations at depth, which suggest that natural and/or climate-
induced change is having a greater effect on deep waters than was previously assumed.

Further exploration of the ocean can help better understand climate change
Ocean and Climate Change Institution, No Date
[Ocean and Climate Change Institute, No Date, part of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute,
Understanding the Role of the Ocean in Global Climate Change, http://www.whoi.edu/main/occi,
accessed 6/30/14, GNL]

Unlike the weather we experience every day, Earths climate changes relatively slowly, varying from
year to year and over centuries and millennia. Among the slow responders to climate forcing, the
ocean plays a major role in the longer-term changes in the climate system and changing patterns of
ocean circulation set up much of the regional variability in climate observed on land. It plays an
important role as a sink for the heat building up in earths systems, it acts as an important sink for the
increasing CO2 resulting from fossil fuel burning and is responding to warming and glacier melting
with a slow, inexorable rise in sea level.
The inherent complexity of Earths changing climateoccurring over short and long time frames and
affecting various regions of the globe differentlypresents a formidable challenge to any scientific
endeavor, be it an observational program, a research analysis, or a modeling effort. The large regional
variability in earths climate requires us to study the ocean on a global scale and using multiple
approaches. The long-term effects of the ocean on climate are also difficult to examine because
historical records of climate are short (about 150 years) and records of ocean circulation are even
shorter (about 50 years). While strong trends, such as those associated with global warming, can be
seen in the modern record, the record is too short to decipher the important changes in climate and
their causes that occur over multiple decades or longer.
In order to better understand the role of the oceans in climate, the Ocean and Climate Change Institute
(OCCI) identifies the climatic effects of changing ocean circulation; develops ocean-monitoring
networks to better understand and forecast climate changes; examines past records of climate from
the geological record to expand understanding of ocean behavior; studies ocean-ice dynamics that
may trigger climate shifts and accelerate sea level rise; and evaluates the oceans response to the
buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and in the oceans. Working in three main thematic
areasthe ocean in the climate system, the hydrological cycle, and carbon dioxide and the climatewe
are dedicated to understanding the oceans role in climate by devoting resources to interdiscplinary
research teams, educating the next generation of ocean and climate researchers, and communicating
the importance of ocean research to a variety of climate stakeholders including the government,
corporations and the public.
Sequestration Key to Solve Climate

Carbon sequestration key climate change management
Hruska, Freelancer for ExtremeTech, 14
*Joel, 6/26/14, Extreme Tech,Carbon neutrality has failed now our only way out of global warming is
to go carbon negative, http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/185336-carbon-neutrality-has-failed-
now-our-only-way-out-of-global-warming-is-to-go-carbon-negative, accessed 6/29/14, BCG)

With our mostly failed attempt to keep climate change below 2 Celisus, the new critical question is
how governments might hold the increase to as low a level as possible. Despite improvements, no one
seriously expects renewable energy to be ramped up in time to prevent climate change far in excess of
2C the only way to avoid this limit would be to convert to nuclear or renewable power at a
breakneck pace across the entire planet for the next few decades.. Its not going to happen. So what
can we do?
It turns out, we might be able to do rather a lot. Whenever the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC) issues its reports, a great deal of energy gets expended arguing about the reality of
climate change. Some of the IPCCs more interesting ideas go undiscussed as a result, including the
long-term potential for CCS carbon capture and storage. According to the IPCC, CCS systems are
absolutely vital to minimizing the long-term impact of greenhouse gas emissions. [Read: Nuclear
power is our only hope, or, the greatest environmentalist hypocrisy of all time.]
Going carbon negative
Many companies today tout various technologies they claim allow them to be carbon neutral, but the
only way to hold climate change below 2C in the long term is to actually go carbon negative. This can
be achieved through the use of bio-energy with carbon capture and storage, or BECCS for short. The
idea is straightforward as of last year, approximately 10% of total planetary energy was provided by
biomass. Plants absorb CO2 as they grow, but the process of turning biomass into fuel typically releases
that energy back into the atmosphere. What the IPCC proposes is using the biomass for energy, then
using some of the energy generated to sequester the carbon underground in either old oil and gas
deposits or in porous rock (known as saline formations) across the US.
Estimates of how much carbon could be stored in saline formations vary widely; the characteristics of
the rock strata and its ability to store CO2 over the long-term are barely known until recently, such
rock held little interest for the oil and gas companies that have conducted most US geological research
and therefore only a little information is available. The IPCC believes that carbon sequestration is vital
to limiting the impact of CO2 buildup if we fail to do so, we could see spiking values well in excess of
600 ppm (currently we stand a little over 400 ppm).
The long-term goal is to sequester up to two gigatons of carbon per year by 2050, though scientists at
Stanford have estimated that as much as 10 gigatons of carbon could be sequestered through this
method by that point. Carbon sequestration in geological formations isnt the only option, but its one
of the few ideas thats both achievable and reasonably well understood at this point. There are a few
technologies being developed that might help us with carbon sequestration, but really there just hasnt
been much research into it yet.
NOTE: this card later talks about how ocean sequestration is unviable but it is talking about putting carbon dioxide in the depths
of the ocean, not under the sea bed

Diseases

Exploration Solves Medicine Development

Exploration needed for deep sea medicine
Morelle, BBC Science correspondent, 14
(Rebecca, 5/8/14, BBC news, Ocean medicine hunt: A Wild West beneath the waves?,
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-27295159, accessed 7/1/14, BCG)

The oceans cover more than two thirds of Earth's surface, yet we've only dipped our toes in the water
when it comes to our understanding of this vast expanse - just 5% has so far been explored.
And it's this untapped potential that is sparking a medical gold rush.
Investment in this area is growing steadily. In the next phase of the European Union's research budget,
145m euros is heading for the seas.
Dr John Day, a marine scientist from Sams, says much of what is "findable" on land has already been
found.
But he adds: "Historically (the ocean) isn't a place that people have looked, so they haven't exploited
it.
"In addition there's a whole raft of new technologies allowing one to screen more methodically and
more scientifically and produce more useful data that can point you towards a final product.
"And of course a political will - we're looking to how can we exploit other parts of the planet to produce
new industries and technologies."
But a lack of clarity over legislation could prove a setback for this burgeoning area of research.
Within 200 nautical miles of a country's coastline is the Economic Exclusion Zone (EEZ). In these
territorial waters, there are clearly defined laws about how the sea can be exploited.
And if a country has signed up to the Nagoya Protocol, an update to the UN's Convention on Biological
Diversity, they have an additional responsibility to ensure that any exploitation in their waters is fair and
sustainable.
But beyond that boundary are the high seas: the stretch of international ocean that nobody owns. And
this area is governed by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
This regulates activities such as mineral exploitation, but it doesn't cover so-called ocean bioprospecting.
Dr Day explains: "In open waters, this is a very grey and murky area as far as I'm concerned.
"At present, as far as I'm aware, there are very few laws that would cover exploitation of that material.
"The Law of the Sea focuses on what is on the ocean floor or beneath it, and it also specifies non-mobile
organisms - and there doesn't seem to be definitive legislation with regards to what is in the water
column."
This is a concern, because this Wild West of the seas is home to an extraordinary range of creatures and
plants.
Simply to survive, they have to adapt to extremes of temperature, pressure and darkness - and it's this
hardiness that makes them so attractive to scientists.
The worry is that, without regulation, fragile habitats could be damaged beyond repair.

Deep Sea Resources Solve

Deep sea bacteria can fight diseases
Standen, KQED Reporter, 09
(Amy, 3/23/09, , radio journalist who has also reported for NPR and Environment Report, QUEST: The
Science of Sustainability Medicine from the Ocean Floor,
http://d43fweuh3sg51.cloudfront.net/media/alfresco/u/pr/KQED/QUEST%20Radio%20Medicine%20fro
m%20the%20Ocean%20Floor_b63e3342-7d12-4b3c-b454-
76c089a6d256/Radio3_24_MedicinefromOceanFloor.pdf, accessed 7/1/14, BCG)

The ocean, which covers approximately 74 percent of Earths surface, is a natural resource that
continues to give human society resources that affect our economy, health and happiness. Ocean
travel and exploration, dating back to prehistoric times, has mainly been conducted on its surface,
leaving much of the bottom of the world's oceans unexplored and unmapped.
Today scientists are mining ocean floor sediments for potential medicines for disease like cholera,
tuberculosis and malaria. By collecting samples from the ocean floor, scientists find hundreds of
bacteria they can test in the lab. Bacteria are single-celled microorganisms found in every habitat on
Earth. They are found in abundance in the ocean floor and are vital in recycling nutrients, producing
chemicals, and contributing to the overall health of the ocean. Bacteria cause many diseases; however,
certain bacteria produce distinct chemicals that have the potential help fight diseases.

Deep sea organisms may eliminate diseases
Kay, Boston Globe, 1
(Sharon, 8/7/01, Reporter for The Boston Globe, The Boston Globe, Scientists Seek New Medicine From
the Ocean, http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/08/0807_wireseamed1.html, accessed
6/30/14, BCG)

Once regarded as either dinner or a research novelty, creatures of the sea are getting increased respect
among scientists looking for the medicines and therapies of the future.
From the ancient horseshoe crab, whose blood provides a common test for bacterial contamination, to
the lowly sea urchin, which played a key role in test-tube fertilization of embryos, marine life is starting
to take its place alongside more established lab animals, such as the mouse, in medical and basic
biological research.
"I believe marine organisms can be used to eliminate disease and human suffering," said William
Speck, a pediatrician who is now director of the Marine Biological Laboratory in Woods Hole. "We now
have the technology to visit the deep ocean floor, and, because of DNA technology, to more deeply
understand life and ourselves."

Economy/Resources

Exploration Solves Economy/Jobs

Implementation of plan solves jobs and economy
Sutley & Holdren, National Ocean Council co-chairs, 13
Policy, National Ocean Council, April 2013, NATIONAL OCEAN POLICY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, pg. 7,
6/26/14, CK]

Ocean industries are a major employer. In 2010, U.S. commercial ports supported more than 13
million jobs. Similarly, in 2011, commercial fisheries supported 1.2 million jobs and $5.3 billion in
commercial fish landings, and marine recreational fisheries supported 455,000 jobs.l5 As of March
2012, energy and minerals production from offshore areas accounted for about $1 21 billion in
economic contributions to the U.S economy and supported about 734,500 American jobs. Offshore
wind energy has the potential to directly support 20.7jobs for every megawatt-hour generated.
Installing 54 gigawatts of offshore wind capacity in U.S. waters would create more than 43,000
permanent operations and maintenance jobs." There is significant potential along the Nation's
shorelines to create a large number of coastal restoration jobs that recover degraded habitats and
restore the fisheries and recreational opportunities they provide. For every million dollars invested,
coastal restoration creates between 17 and 30 new jobs for coastal regions-regions that provide key
habitat for more than 70 percent of the commercial and recreational fish catch. Marine aquaculture
in the U.S. has a farm-gate value of $320 million and supports up to 35,000 jobs.2 Supporting the
growth of sustainable marine aquaculture through the National Shellfish Initiative and building on
existing efforts such as the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council's Aquaculture Plan has the
potential to provide additional jobs.
The following actions by Federal agencies will help maintain existing jobs and promote job growth in
coastal and marine-related sectors by improving regulatory efficiency, reversing environmental
impacts that hinder economic opportunity, and providing information that supports actions to
maximize the economic value of our natural resources. The goal of these actions is to enhance both
immediate and Iong-term potentials for job creation.
Increase efficiencies in decision-making by improving permitting processes and coordinating agency
participation in planning and approval processes. A key goal of the Policy is to improve efficiency
across Federal agencies, including permitting, planning, and approval processes to save time and
money for ocean-based industries and decision makers at all levels of government while protecting
health, safety, and the environment. Interagency work already in progress includes more efficient
permitting of shellfish aquaculture activities, which will help produce additional domestic seafood and
jobs and provide a template for similar action to support other marine commercial sectors. Through
pilot projects developed in collaboration with relevant stakeholders, Federal agencies will identify
opportunities to streamline processes and reduce duplicative efforts while ensuring appropriate
environmental and other required safeguards.
Provide jobs and economic value by protecting and restoring coastal wetlands, coral reefs, and other
natural systems. Restoration activities provide direct economic opportunities, and healthy natural
systems support jobs in industries such as tourism, recreation, and commercial fishing. Agencies will
coordinate to protect, restore, and enhance wetlands, coral reefs, and other high-priority ocean,
coastal, and Great Lakes habitats. Agencies will also work through the already established a National
Shellfish Initiative with commercial and restoration aquaculture communities to identify ways to both
responsibly maximize the commercial value of shellfish aquaculture and achieve environmental benefits
such as nutrient filtration and fish habitat.
Prevent lost employment opportunities and economic losses associated with environmental
degradation. Hypoxia and harmful algal blooms have significant adverse economic, public health-
related, and ecological consequences. Invasive species are a major challenge that results in economic
losses to local communities and industries, costing the Nation more than $120 billion annually.
Federal agencies will take steps to prevent and reverse widespread economic impacts caused by
hypoxia, harmful algal blooms, invasive species, and other threats to healthy systems. They will take
action to strengthen the monitoring, science, data access, modeling, and forecasting of hypoxia and
harmful algal blooms to provide decision makers with the necessary information to minimize and
mitigate harmful impacts on coastal economies. Federal agencies will take actions to improve our
ability to detect and reduce invasive species in coastal and ocean habitats to protect commercial and
recreational fish stocks, help sustain the jobs and industries that depend upon healthy coastal aquatic
ecosystems, and save millions of dollars in lost revenue and avoided infrastructure damage.

Exploration Solves Resources

Ocean exploration bolsters the economy and national security by reducing
resource dependence
[Allie, 9/25/13, US News and World Report, Scientists Release First Plan for National Ocean

Conducting more data collection and exploration quests is also beneficial from an economic
standpoint because explorers have the potential to identify new resources, both renewable and
nonrenewable. Having access to those materials, such as oils and minerals, and being less dependent
on other nations, Schubel says, could help improve national security.
Each time explorers embark on a mission to a new part of the ocean, they bring back more detailed
information by mapping the sea floor and providing high-resolution images of what exists, says David
McKinnie, a senior advisor for NOAA's Office of Ocean Exploration and Research and a co-author of
the report. On almost every expedition, he says, the scientists discover new species. In a trip to
Indonesia in 2010, for example, McKinnie says researchers discovered more than 50 new
species of coral.
[Note Schubel = Jerry Schubel, president and CEO of the Aquarium of the Pacific]

Understanding of the oceans is key to managing resources and solving crises
exploration solves
Academies, http://explore.noaa.gov/sites/OER/Documents/national-research-council-voyage.pdf, pg.
26-31, accessed 6/29/14, GNL]

The ocean supports uswhether we live in land-locked or coastal communitiesin myriad ways.
Living resources provide food, and exploration of marine biological and chemical diversity has led to
the discovery of drugs to treat cancer and infections. Oil and natural gas extracted from the oceans
have already been used to meet much of the energy needs of our societies. With the application of new
technology to locate, extract, and exploit potential ocean resources, such as methane hydrates,
renewable ocean energy, and seafloor minerals, the value of the oceans to society will continue to
expand.
Improved understanding of the oceans is necessary to better manage our living marine resources. The
oceans provide a very large portion of Earths food supply (Figure 2.1; Food and Agriculture Organization
of the United Nations, 1998). The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations estimated
capture fisheries (primarily marine) produced 83 million metric tons of fish in 2001. Approximately 16
kg (or 36 pounds) of fish per person on Earth were either captured or produced in that year.
Appropriate fisheries management depends a great deal on knowledge of fish stocks, distribution, and
life histories. Additional information about ocean circulation patterns, chemistry, seafloor terrain and
fish distributions, for instance, should assist attempts to improve fisheries management.
Marine organisms also supply a host of unique compounds for medical uses. The ancient horseshoe
crab (Limulus polyphemus) supplies blood used in common toxin-screening tests, and its eyes
continue to provide researchers with a model of how vision works. The nerve cells of the longfinned
squid (Loligo pealei) include giant axons that are used by neurobiologists as an analogue to
understand mammalian neurobiology. These cells are approximately 100 times the diameter of a
mammal axon, allowing experimentation and analysis that would otherwise be exceedingly difficult or
impossible. Discodermolide, a compound extracted from marine sponges, has been shown to stop the
growth of cancer cells in laboratory tests. The discovery of microorganisms within deep ocean
sediments that could inhibit cancer cell growth has opened a door to the search for new compounds
for use in medicine (Figure 2.2) (Mincer et al., 2002; Feling et al., 2003). These examples are among the
hundreds of uses for marine organisms and compounds. Vast numbers of organisms remain to be
discovered, and they will yield additional important benefits for humankind. Responsible exploitation
of the genetic diversity of life in the ocean, including new and existing fisheries, requires a thorough
understanding of those resources and their variability over time.
As the human population expands, so will the need for energy and mineral resources. In 2002, the
coastal zones of the United States provided 25 percent of the countrys natural gas production and 30
percent of the U.S. oil production (Minerals Management Service, 2003). The Minerals Management
Service estimates the majority of undiscovered gas and oil is in coastal areas albeit in deeper and
deeper water on the continental slope.
The oceans sustain a large portion of Earths biodiversity in complex food webs; microbial life;
extreme, deep habitats including within the seafloor, and hydrothermal vents; and dynamic coastal
environments. Indeed, the midwater environment of oceans harbor an ecosystem whose biomass is
larger than that of the terrestrial biota. The complex biological systems both rely on and support the
global cycling of carbon and nutrients, and they are estimated to sustain half of all carbon-based life
on this planet (Figure 2.3; Field et al., 1998).
Appreciation for the role of the oceans in global climate patterns and change continues to grow
(Sutton and Allen, 1997; Rahmstorf, 2002). The oceans regulate climate by absorbing solar energy and
redistributing it via global circulation patterns resulting in identifiable systems of climate and
weather. Our knowledge of interannual climate variations has improved to the point that scientists are
now be able to forecast El Nio climate disturbances months in advance (Chen, 2001).
With all of the benefits the oceans provide come potentially harmful sometimes disastrous
hazards to human health. Tsunamis, for example, are legendary in their power to devastate coastal
communities (e.g., Satake et al., 1995). In the United States, a single hurricane can cause billions of
dollars of damage (Figure 2.4; Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2003), and coastal erosion
threatens to destroy 25 percent of dwellings within 150 m of the coast (Heinz Center, 2002). Major
earthquake faults offshore coastal states in the western United States are among the most potentially
hazardous in the world given the concentrations in population and economic productivity. Although
more difficult to estimate in monetary terms, water pollution and marine habitat degradation decrease
the aesthetic value and the biotic richness of our coastal waters. Habitat degradation also threatens
human health: viruses, bacteria, and infectious diseases that can be transmitted to human
populations contaminate coastal waters (National Research Council, 1999).
Finding: The oceans play a critical role in the maintenance of the ecosystems of the Earth. Resources
contained in the oceans currently supply much of the worlds food and fuel supply, and maintain
global climate patterns. The oceans harbor as yet undiscovered organisms new searches for life
continue to discover previously unknown organisms. Only a portion of the potential of the oceans has
been tapped.
Recommendation: As was true when the International Decade of Ocean Exploration (1971-1980) was
proposed and supported, ocean exploration remains a necessary endeavor to identify and fully
describe the resources the oceans contain and uncover processes with far-ranging implications for the
study of Earth as a whole. The pace at which we discover living and nonliving resources and improve
our understanding of how the oceans respond to chemical, biological, and physical changes must
increase.

Resources Key to the Economy

Ocean resources are key to the economy
*Emily, JD Doctor of Law, 2014, THE NATIONAL OCEAN POLICY: CAN IT REDUCE MARINE POLLUTION
AND STREAMLINE OUR OCEAN BUREAUCRACY? Issue 3, Volume:15, Page 630,
streamline-ocean-bureaucracy/, accessed 6/26/14, CK]

The United States is similarly dependent on ocean resources. According to the recent State of the
Coast report issued by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), coastal
watershed counties contribute roughly $8.3 trillion to the United States gross domestic product
(GDP), which translates to about 58% of GDP in 2010.8 In 2010, the coastal watershed counties of
the United States supported a total of 66 million jobs9 through which the employees received
collectively about $3.4 trillion in wages. As Sarah Chasis, senior attorney and Director of the Natural
Resources Defense Council (NRDC) Ocean Initiative, observed: *p+rotecting our oceans isnt only
about saving fish or whales or dolphins. Its about keeping our economy strong for decades to come.
10 Our economic dependence on ocean resources, particularly in Americas capitalistic society, is surely
a reason why Americans as a whole can benefit from making ocean conservation a priority.

Exploration Solves Rare Earth Metals

Investment in ocean exploration key to rare Earth metals mining
Conathan, Center for American Progress Ocean Policy director, 13
*Michael, 6/20/2013, Center for American Progress, Space Exploration Dollars Dwarf Ocean Spending,
http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/2013/06/20/space-exploration-dollars-dwarf-ocean-
spending/, accessed 6/29/14 CK]

This imbalance in pop culture is illustrative of what plays out in real life. We rejoiced along with the
NASA mission-control room when the Mars rover landed on the red planet late last year. One
particularly exuberant scientist, known as Mohawk Guy for his audacious hairdo, became a minor
celebrity and even fielded his share of spontaneous marriage proposals. But when Cameron bottomed
out in the Challenger Deep more than 36,000 feet below the surface of the sea, it was met with
resounding indifference from all but the dorkiest of ocean nerds such as myself.
Part of this incongruity comes from access. No matter where we live, we can go outside on a clear
night, look up into the sky, and wonder about whats out there. Were presented with a spectacular
vista of stars, planets, meteorites, and even the occasional comet or aurora. We have all been wishing
on stars since we were children. Only the lucky few can gaze out at the ocean from their doorstep, and
even those who do cannot see all that lies beneath the waves.
As a result, the facts about ocean exploration are pretty bleak. Humans have laid eyes on less than 5
percent of the ocean, and we have better maps of the surface of Mars than we do of Americas
exclusive economic zonethe undersea territory reaching out 200 miles from our shores.
Sure, space is sexy. But the oceans are too. To those intrigued by the quest for alien life, consider this:
Scientists estimate that we still have not discovered 91 percent of the species that live in our oceans.
And some of them look pretty outlandish. Go ahead and Google the deepsea hatchetfish, frill shark, or
Bathynomus giganteus.
In a time of shrinking budgets and increased scrutiny on the return for our investments, we should be
taking a long, hard look at how we are prioritizing our exploration dollars. If the goal of government
spending is to spur growth in the private sector, entrepreneurs are far more likely to find inspiration
down in the depths of the ocean than up in the heavens. The ocean already provides us with about
half the oxygen we breathe, our single largest source of protein, a wealth of mineral resources, key
ingredients for pharmaceuticals, and marine biotechnology.
Of course space exportation does have benefits beyond the cool factor of putting people on the moon
and astronaut-bards playing David Bowie covers in space. Inventions created to facilitate space travel
have become ubiquitous in our livescell-phone cameras, scratch-resistant lenses, and water-filtration
systems, just to name a fewand research conducted in outer space has led to breakthroughs here on
earth in the technological and medical fields. Yet despite far-fetched plans to mine asteroids for rare
metals, the only tangible goods brought back from space to date remain a few piles of moon rocks.
The deep seabed is a much more likely source of so-called rare-earth metals than distant asteroids.
Earlier this year the United Nations published its first plan for management of mineral resources
beneath the high seas that are outside the jurisdiction of any individual country. The United States has
not been able to participate in negotiations around this policy because we are not among the 185
nations that have ratified the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, which governs such activity.
With or without the United States on board, the potential for economic development in the most
remote places on the planet is vast and about to leap to the next level. Earlier this year Japan
announced that it has discovered a massive supply of rare earth both within its exclusive economic
zone and in international waters. This follows reports in 2011 that China sent at least one exploratory
mission to the seabed beneath international waters in the Pacific Ocean. There is a real opportunity for
our nation to lead in this area, but we must invest and join the rest of the world in creating the
governance structure for these activities.

China Rare Earth Internal Link

China currently has monopoly in rare earth metals industry- threatens future tech
development
Brennan, Institute for Security and Development Policy resource security editor and
project coordinator of research, 13
[Elliot, 1/10/2013, Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relation, The Next Oil?: Rare Earth
Metals, http://www.gatewayhouse.in/the-next-oil-rare-earth-metals/, accessed 7/1/2014 CK]

Rare earth metals (REM) are increasingly becoming a critical strategic resource. The 17 elements can
be found in most high-tech gadgets, from advanced military technology to mobile phones. China
currently holds claim to over 90 percent of the worlds production. As global demand increases,
Beijings export reductions in recent years have forced high-tech firms to relocate to China and forced
other governments to pour money into their exploration and production. An emergent India is among
those concerned about Chinas control of rare earths. In the past 12 months, the geopolitics of rare
earths has become evident. REMs are becoming a strategic resource over which the two emerging
giants are competing in Asia. Indeed, one might say rare earths are fast becoming the next oil.
The name, rare earth metal, is a misnomer. The metals are, in fact, far more abundant than many
precious minerals. Yet their dispersion means they are rarely found in economically viable quantities.
The similarity of chemical properties of the 17 REMs, demonstrated by their close proximity on the
periodic table, makes them very difficult to separate. Their extraction is capital- and skill- intensive.
End uses for REMs are varied but recent figures cited by the U.S. Geological Survey noted that in the
U.S. the end use was predominantly for battery alloys, ceramics and magnets, sectors that are
continuing to grow to cater for high-tech industry. The extent to which REMs are used in defense
technology is such that without their production modern warfarefighter jets, drones, and most
computer-controlled equipmentwould have to undertake a lengthy process of redevelopment. A
sovereign monopoly of such a resource is therefore a serious concern for any nation.
Exploration

Exploration Good Laundry List

Ocean exploration is key to advances necessary to address climate, resources, disease,
energy, conservation and ocean collapse
Cousteau, EarthEcho International Co-Founder, 12
[Philippe, also a special reporter for CNN, EarthEcho International is a non-profit organization that
empowers youth to become involved with environmental causes, 3/13/2012, CNN Light Years, Why
exploring the ocean is mankind's next giant leap http://lightyears.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/13/why-
exploring-the-ocean-is-mankinds-next-giant-leap/, accessed 6/28/14 CK]

You may think Im doing my grandfather Jacques Yves-Cousteau and my father Philippe a disservice
when I say weve only dipped our toes in the water when it comes to ocean exploration. After all, my
grandfather co-invented the modern SCUBA system and "The Undersea World of Jacques Cousteau "
introduced generations to the wonders of the ocean. In the decades since, weve only explored about
10 percent of the ocean - an essential resource and complex environment that literally supports life as
we know it, life on earth.
We now have a golden opportunity and a pressing need to recapture that pioneering spirit. A new
era of ocean exploration can yield discoveries that will help inform everything from critical medical
advances to sustainable forms of energy. Consider that AZT, an early treatment for HIV, is derived
from a Caribbean reef sponge, or that a great deal of energy - from offshore wind, to OTEC (ocean
thermal energy conservation), to wind and wave energy - is yet untapped in our oceans. Like
unopened presents under the tree, the ocean is a treasure trove of knowledge. In addition, such
discoveries will have a tremendous impact on economic growth by creating jobs as well as
technologies and goods.
In addition to new discoveries, we also have the opportunity to course correct when it comes to
stewardship of our oceans. Research and exploration can go hand in glove with resource
management and conservation.
Over the last several decades, as the United States has been exploring space, weve exploited and
polluted our oceans at an alarming rate without dedicating the needed time or resources to truly
understand the critical role they play in the future of the planet. It is not trite to say that the oceans
are the life support system of this planet, providing us with up to 70 percent of our oxygen, as well as
a primary source of protein for billions of people, not to mention the regulation of our climate.
Despite this life-giving role, the world has fished, mined and trafficked the ocean's resources to a point
where we are actually seeing dramatic changes that is seriously impacting today's generations. And
that impact will continue as the world's population approaches 7 billion people, adding strain to the
worlds resources unlike any humanity has ever had to face before.
In the long term, destroying our ocean resources is bad business with devastating consequences for
the global economy, and the health and sustainability of all creatures - including humans. Marine
spatial planning, marine sanctuaries, species conservation, sustainable fishing strategies, and more
must be a part of any ocean exploration and conservation program to provide hope of restoring
health to our oceans.
While there is still much to learn and discover through space exploration, we also need to pay attention
to our unexplored world here on earth. Our next big leap into the unknown can be every bit as exciting
and bold as our pioneering work in space. It possesses the same "wow" factor: alien worlds, dazzling
technological feats and the mystery of the unknown. The United States has the scientific muscle, the
diplomatic know-how and the entrepreneurial spirit to lead the world in exploring and protecting our
ocean frontier.

Exploration solves knowledge knowledge key internal link to solving current
problems
downloaded from: http://www.nap.edu/catalog/10630.html,page 20, Accessed 6/30/14 CK]

The global ocean is teeming with undiscovered species and resources in vast underexplored areas. Yet
even as our dependence on healthy, functioning marine ecosystems grows, our knowledge about the
ocean and its role in keeping Earths systems in balance remains constrained. Given the importance of
the global ocean in guaranteeing food security, providing resources, enabling worldwide commerce,
and reminding us of our history, it is shocking that we still know so little about the ocean and the life it
supports.
While steady progress in understanding of the ocean has been made possible by traditional hypothesis-
driven research, a new program of exploration will permit us to make quantum leaps in new
discoveries. A well-organized, adequately funded program in ocean exploration will allow us to plumb
the depths of Earths last frontier and provide the foundation for better understanding, and better
stewardship, of Earths ocean.

AT No Exploration Advantages

A new program of exploration is guaranteed to yield multiple benefits
Academies, http://explore.noaa.gov/sites/OER/Documents/national-research-council-voyage.pdf, pg 1,
accessed 6/29/14, GNL]

In the summer of 1803, Thomas Jefferson sent Meriwether Lewis and William Clark on a journey to
establish an American presence in a land of unqualified natural resources and riches. It is fitting that, on
the 200th anniversary of that expedition, the United States, together with international partners,
should embark on another journey of exploration in a vastly more extensive region of remarkable
potential for discovery. Although the oceans cover more than 70 percent of our planets surface, much
of the ocean has been investigated in only a cursory sense, and many areas have not been investigated
at all. During this journey, there is little doubt that discoveries will be made:
A spectrum of marine natural products will have profound pharmaceutical potential.
Vast new mineral and energy resources will be uncovered.
The physical factors responsible for changes in climate will be identified.
New ecosystems will alter our view of the origin of life.
Artifacts will provide new information about the history of civilization.
Surprising new species and organisms will be found.
In response to a request from the U.S. Congress to examine the feasibility and value of an ocean
exploration program, the Ocean Studies Board of the National Research Council established the
Committee on Exploration of the Seas (Box ES.1), whose findings are reported in this document. In
addition to a public meeting, the committee convened an International Global Ocean Exploration
Workshop in May 2002 to seek advice from the international community and discuss the possibilities
for, and interest in, a global ocean exploration program.

Exploration Key to Science

Exploration is a fundamental component of basic science
Colwell, former National Science Foundation Director, 1
[Dr. Rita, 7/12/01, Professor Emerita and Distinguished University Professor and Elected
Member National Academy of Sciences, NSF and Congress Testimony, Testimony before the
House Committees on Resources and Science,
http://www.nsf.gov/about/congress/107/rrc_ocean71201.jsp, accessed 6-26-14, GNL]

Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee, I appreciate the opportunity to testify today on ocean
exploration and ocean observations, activities in which the National Science Foundation plays an
important role. These are areas in which many agencies, as well as the academic community and private
sector, have a substantial interest and it is a pleasure to be here with Admiral Lautenbacher, Admiral
Cohen, and Mr. Gudes.
For generations, the search for knowledge and understanding of the oceans has captivated the human
imagination. It will continue to do so for generations to come. But it is quite clear that our generation
has a tremendous opportunity, and a keen responsibility, to fuel discovery in this realm. Technological
and computational advances, as well as fundamental breakthroughs in understanding, are transforming
the ocean sciences. At the same time, we are becoming increasingly aware of the economic, public
health, and environmental significance of our oceans. Ocean exploration and the potential
implementation of an integrated ocean observing system are two areas that can advance discovery.
NSF funds basic research and education in ocean sciences, and the facilities and instruments necessary
to gain access to the oceans, from the surface to deep in the seafloor and from pole to pole.
Exploration is a fundamental component of basic research. It is where science begins - with general
ideas or broad hypotheses that seek to characterize new areas and processes in the ocean. The
resulting knowledge provides a framework for further inquiry through subsequent, more specific
investigations.
Last fall, the President's Panel on Ocean Exploration, convened by the previous administration and
chaired by Dr. Marcia McNutt, produced a report highlighting the fact that oceans remain largely
unexplored and calling for establishment of an ocean exploration program. The report identifies many
areas offering high potential for scientific advances. NSF is currently active in and seeks to expand
activities associated with relatively unexplored areas and aspects of the oceans, incorporating both
educational and data management and dissemination components, as well as technology
development.
Exploration key to spur scientific innovation
Goldstone, MIT ocean science Ph.D., 14
*Heather, 4/28/14, WCAI, How Live Stream Video Is Catalyzing Ocean Research,
http://capeandislands.org/post/how-live-stream-video-catalyzing-ocean-research, accessed 6/29/14,
GNL]

We're often taught that a hypothesis is the first step in the scientific method. In actuality, what comes
first is an observation - a rare commodity for ocean scientists.
The NOAA ship Okeanos Explorer is nicknamed America's Ship for Ocean Exploration. Not science.
Exploration.
What's the difference? Science is about testing ideas - hypotheses - through experimentation.
Exploration is simply observing the world around us, although in the deep sea it's far from simple. It's
technically challenging and it's expensive.
That's why it's estimated only 5 percent of the world's ocean has been seen by human eyes. And since
observations are the necessary starting material for developing good, interesting questions to
investigate scientifically, that's a problem for ocean scientists.
Enter the NOAA ship Okeanos Explorer. This ship is dedicated to deep sea exploration, and it's
pioneering a new technique, known as telepresence. The ship broadcasts deep sea video from a
remotely operated vehicle to the internet in near real-time - a 10 second delay for the public (you can
check it out here), but just a 2-5 second delay for scientists participating in an expedition. Those
scientists also have the ability to talk to each other and back to the ship, enabling them to work in
collaboration to identify what's being seen and make decisions about how to proceed.
Scientists involved with the Okeanos Explorer say it's exciting and worthwhile work that's accelerating
education of young scientists and catalyzing new ocean research.

Exploration Key to Earth Science

Deep water exploration is key to understanding of the Earth and its processes
Deep Ocean Exploration Institute, No Date
*Deep Ocean Exploration Institute, No Date, part of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, Unlocking
Planetary Processes On and Within the Seafloor, http://www.whoi.edu/main/doei, accessed 6/30/14,
GNL]

Through research themes focused on deep ocean technology, dynamic processes at the seafloor and
the role of the deep Earth and ocean in elemental cycles the Deep Ocean Exploration Institute
(DOEI) seeks to understand how Earth works by promoting interdisciplinary investigations of
planetary processes occurring in the deep ocean and within the planets interior.
Many keys to unlocking Earth processes can be found deep under the ocean, on and within the
seafloor that covers two-thirds of our planets surface. The goals of the Deep Ocean Exploration
Institute are to investigate these key planetary processes. They include understanding the flow of
both magma and water within the planet; the nature and evolution of biological communities in the
deep ocean and Earths crust; and the characteristics of planetary processes that shape Earth. We also
support the development of undersea technology and the establishment of seafloor observatories in
various settings.

Coordinated Exploration Solves Science

New ocean exploration programs key to maintaining scientific advancements and
effective ocean policy
Academies, http://explore.noaa.gov/sites/OER/Documents/national-research-council-voyage.pdf, pg
39-41, accessed 6/29/14, GNL]

Systematic, or coordinated, ocean exploration is not a current practice within the United States. New
discoveries about the oceans are often the result of serendipitous circumstances, for instance, the
inadvertent discovery of entirely new ecosystems at hydrothermal vents. Exciting discoveries about
the oceans occur frequently, but the rate could be greatly enhanced by pursuing new research topics
in new regions of the oceans.
A limited national ocean exploration effort has recently begun and is operated through the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Since 2001, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administrations Office of Ocean Exploration has sought to explore and better understand our
oceans. The office supports expeditions, exploration projects, and a number of related field campaigns
for the purpose of discovery and documentation of ocean voyages (National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, 2003a). It is the committees sense that this fledgling national effort is too limited in
scope. The education and outreach efforts are laudable, and the office has made the important step
of committing 10 percent of their budget to those activities. However, uncertainty in the annual
budgeting process makes long-term planning difficult, and the funding levels to date hover at $14
million. As no future vision for the program has yet been released it is difficult for this committee to
determine whether this young program can be adapted to fill the role outlined in this report, but the
program has not capitalized on much of the scientific expertise in the United States and relies on
heavily leveraging funds and assets against other oceanographic research programs.
Currently the pursuit of ocean data is largely an independent, researcherdriven effort with only
scattered attempts at public education. As a largely publicly-funded endeavor, oceanographers have a
responsibility to communicate their findings clearly not only to the funding agencies, but to the broader
public. Large numbers of people live near oceans and many depend on it for their sustenance or
livelihood, but few understand the complexity of the ocean ecosystem or its importance to society.
Although efforts to educate the public in both formal and informal settings are increasing through
programs such as the National Science Foundations Centers for Ocean Science Education Excellence
program, outreach and education in the marine sciences is largely uncoordinated. Few members of
the public appreciate the role the oceans play in our lives, and the relationship between the oceans,
atmosphere, and land. Good public policy demands that the public engage in the excitement of ocean
research, exploit public interest through education about the wealth and limitations of the ocean, and
promote citizen and decision-makers understanding about ocean issues and policy. Chapter 7
discusses some of the outreach and education possibilities in more detail.
Finding: Oceans provide food, energy and mineral resources, products capable of treating human
disease, and affect climate and global responses to changes in climate. A new large-scale program
devoted to ocean exploration is necessary to:
coordinate efforts in ocean discovery and capitalize on the wide array of available data;
provide new resources and facilities for access by researchers;
establish support for and promote interdisciplinary approaches to ocean investigations;
develop outreach and public education tools to increase public awareness and understanding of the
oceans;
discover the living and nonliving resources of the oceans; and
provide a multidisciplinary archive of ocean data to serve as a source of basic data upon which to
develop hypotheses for further investigation.
Recommendation: A coordinated, broadly-based ocean exploration effort that meets the highest
standards of scientific excellence should be aggressively pursued. An ocean exploration program
should be initiated and exhibit the following characteristics, which can also be used to gauge its ultimate
success:
The program should be global and multidisciplinary.
The program must receive international support.
The program should consider all three spatial dimensions as well as time.
The program should seek to discover new living and nonliving resources in the ocean.
The program should include developments of new tools, probes, sensors, and systems for
multidisciplinary ocean exploration.
The program should reach out to increase literacy pertaining to ocean science and management issues
for learners of all ages to maximize the impact for research, commercial, regulatory, and educational
benefits.
The program should standardize sampling, data management, and dissemination.

Leadership

Modelling Add-on

US agency model key to effective international collaboration on exploration
Academies, http://explore.noaa.gov/sites/OER/Documents/national-research-council-voyage.pdf, pg 6-
7, accessed 6/29/14, GNL]

The involvement of many nations in ocean exploration efforts would expand an ocean exploration
programs usefulness by broadening the base of human, mechanical, and financial resources available.
In fact, international collaboration is necessary to support a truly global ocean exploration program.
And the interests of individual nations must be served to promote such participationsomething not
readily achievable by a largescale, internationally coordinated effort. The informal consensus of the
workshop attendees was that a one-program-serves-all effort would be neither effective nor efficient.
An international program could be best served by developing individual national ocean exploration
programs to suit the needs of the countries involved. National priorities would be set and then
partners sought for individual programs. Such bilateral and multilateral agreements have worked
extremely well for ocean science programs such as the Ocean Drilling Program (ODP) and should serve
well for ocean exploration.
Although many nations would likely be interested in participating in limited ocean exploration
programs, relatively few have the resources necessary to provide significant financial support to a
program. A U.S. national model should offer the example for other nations, and it should work to
incorporate people from other nations to generate interest more broadly. The development of similar
national programs elsewhere should be encouraged and anticipated. By developing distinct exploration
programs for international cooperation to seek discoveries of specific resources or investigate
regional features, the burden of international policy and agreements could be greatly reduced.
Recommendation: Given the considerations presented, it is prudent to begin an exploration effort with
a model for a U.S. national program that will encourage collaboration and capacity building and that
would be likely to lead to the development of similar programs in other countries. Once other
national programs are established, consortia of nations can voluntarily collaborate on program plans
and pool resources using multilateral international agreements to undertake regional exploration or
to pursue themes of shared interest.

Prioritization and coordination key to effective international collaboration
issues critical to global survival
Academies, http://explore.noaa.gov/sites/OER/Documents/national-research-council-voyage.pdf, pg 2-

Exciting discoveries are made in the ocean sciences every year. From the identification of ecosystems
that thrive without sunlight to the new pathways for photosynthesis recently identified in marine
microbes, discoveries in our oceans continue to revolutionize and refine our theories of the origins of
life here and the possibilities for life elsewhere in the universe. However, such discoveries are largely
serendipitous. In the United States, ocean sciences rely on relatively few large, carefully managed
assets ships, submersibles, and laboratory facilities. Research funding is relatively more available for
projects that will revisit earlier sites and discoveries and for improving current understanding than it is
to support truly exploratory oceanography. A new program to provide opportunities for investigating
new regions and that draws on research from a variety of disciplines, would speed discovery and
application of new information.
A coordinated, international ocean exploration effort is not unprecedented the International
Decade of Ocean Exploration (IDOE), 1971-1980, was established by the Marine Sciences Act of 1966
and motivated both by anticipated discoveries of useful and important marine resources and by
scientific curiosity. Questions about the health of the worlds oceans led scientists to argue for
systematic baseline surveys that were not possible from randomly spaced observations. The IDOE
program recognized that exploration of the ocean required a sustained global effort with international
participation, and justification for the program included issues of clear international interest. More
information was necessary to describe the ability of the oceans to provide food for an expanding
world population, to protect the United States and other nations from maritime threats to world
order, to assuage the deterioration of water quality and waterfronts in coastal cities, to support
expanded ocean shipping, and to locate new supplies of seabed oil, gas, and minerals. The objective of
IDOE was to achieve more comprehensive knowledge of ocean characteristics and their changes and
more profound understanding of oceanic processes for the purpose of effective utilization of the ocean
and its resources (National Academy of Sciences,1969). More specifically, it was expected that the
program would help increase the yield from ocean resources, improve predictions of and responses to
natural phenomena, and protect or improve the quality of the marine environment. IDOE was a great
successit provided observational databases on the physics, geochemistry, paleoceanography,
biology, and geophysics of the ocean that fueled hypothesis-driven research for decades.
Recommendation: As was true when IDOE was proposed and supported, ocean exploration remains a
necessary endeavor to identify and fully describe the resources the oceans contain. The pace at which
we discover living and nonliving resources and improve our understanding of how the oceans respond
to chemical, biological, and physical changes must increase.
Every time a scientist happens upon some completely unexpected discovery in the ocean, it is a
reminder of how little is known about this environment that is so critically important to the
sustainability of the planet. We now recognize that different facets of the oceansmall-scale
geological, biological, and genetic diversity; chemical, geophysical, and physical oceanographic
propertiesinteract in complex ways, and our understanding of the ocean requires its examination as
a whole system. The oceans play a critical role in the maintenance of the ecosystems of the Earth.
Resources contained in the oceans currently supply a substantial portion of the worlds food and fuel
supply, and maintain global climate patterns. The oceans harbor as yet undiscovered organismsnew
searches for life continue to discover previously unknown organisms. Only a portion of the potential of
the oceans has been tapped.
It is difficult to predict what discoveries are still to come, but it is clear that ocean exploration will
improve the accuracy of our predictions of global climate change, produce new products that will
benefit humanity, inform policy choices, and allow better stewardship of the oceans and the planet as
a whole. To reach this potential, ocean research should encourage cooperation between researchers
from varied disciplines.
Finding: Currently ocean science funding in the United States is predominantly awarded to research in
specific disciplines, such as biological, physical or chemical oceanography. Proposals for
interdisciplinary work are hampered by a funding bureaucracy that is also discipline-based. Ocean
exploration is an integrative activity that will encourage and support interdisciplinary efforts that seek
to discover new contributions to the marine sciences.
The very nature of scientific investigation leads oceanographers to seek out information to verify
hypotheses and confirm earlier findings. The infrastructure and support needed for oceanographic work
is expensive, limited, and highly scheduled to ensure efficiency in the pursuit of knowledge about the
oceans. Much of the oceanographic research currently conducted re-investigates previously visited
locations, limiting access to new regions and restricting long-term data collection. As a result, vast
portions of the oceans have not been systematically examined for geochemical or biological
characteristics. This is particularly true of the oceans in the southern hemisphere. Ground-breaking
discoveries, such as hydrothermal vents, fueled intensive investigations of those regions, but they did
not lead to investigations of new regions. As is being shown by an Australian- New Zealand expedition to
seamounts and abyssal plains, systematic biological exploration in even a small portion of the ocean can
provide a rich collection of new organisms. The one month journey collected more than 100 previously
unidentified fish species and up to 300 new species of invertebrates (National Oceans Office, 2003). A
very recent example of such an exploratory effort by the United States has been initiated by the
Department of Energy. Although the Sargasso Sea is thought to exhibit limited biodiversity and a simple
ecosystem (Holden, 2003), it is anticipated that determining the genomic structures of all organisms
within the ecosystem may reveal new pathways of carbon sequestration and hydrogen generation
(Whitfield, 2003).
Recommendation: Oceanographic research should encourage scientifically-rigorous, systematic
investigations of new sites in the oceans. Exploration through time should be included in oceanographic
research.
Oceans provide food, energy and mineral resources, products capable of treating human disease, and
affect climate and global responses to changes in climate. A new large-scale program devoted to
ocean exploration is necessary to:
coordinate efforts in ocean discovery and capitalize on the wide array of available data;
provide new resources and facilities for access by researchers;
establish support for and promote interdisciplinary approaches to ocean investigations;
develop outreach and public education tools to increase public awareness and understanding of the
oceans;
discover the living and nonliving resources of the oceans; and
provide a multidisciplinary archive of ocean data to serve as a source of basic data upon which to
develop hypotheses for further investigation.
Recommendation: A coordinated, broadly-based ocean exploration effort that meets the highest
standards of scientific excellence should be aggressively pursued. An ocean exploration program
should be initiated and contain the following characteristics, or goals, which can also be used to gauge
its ultimate success:
The program should be global and multidisciplinary.
The program must receive international support.
The program should consider all three spatial dimensions as well as time.
The program should seek to discover new living and nonliving resources in the ocean.
The program should include development of new tools, probes, sensors, and systems for
multidisciplinary ocean exploration.
The program should reach out to improve literacy pertaining to ocean science and management issues
for learners of all ages to maximize the impact for research, commercial, regulatory, and educational
benefits.
The program should standardize sampling, data management, and dissemination.
Recommendation: To achieve the recommended goals, early efforts in ocean exploration should be
selected using the following criteria:
Research is conducted in areas of international interest. Particularly salient are themes that are
amenable to international cooperation and those suggested by International Global Ocean
Exploration
Workshop participants.
Questions advance the current state of knowledge.
Characteristics of the habitat, region, or discipline suggest a potential for bold, new discoveries.
The results have a potential to benefit humanity.
Recommendation: Several promising areas were identified as having broad international interest and
are recommended as potential initial exploration themes:
marine biodiversity;
the Arctic Ocean;
the Southern Ocean and Antarctic ice shelves;
deep water and its influence on climate change;
exploring the ocean through time; and
marine archaeology.

US Environmental Leadership Decline

US has lost its leadership on international environmental problems
Knox, Wake International Law professor, 12
[John H., 1-20-12, Center for Progressive Reform, Reclaiming Global Environmental Leadership,
http://www.progressivereform.org/CPRBlog.cfm?idBlog=FB9153F2-ABFE-3CF2-8053EAF1ED929DB8,
accessed 7-10-14, AFB]
For more than a century, the United States took the lead in organizing responses to international
environmental problems. The long list of environmental agreements spearheaded by the United States
extends from early treaties with Canada and Mexico on boundary waters and migratory birds to global
agreements restricting trade in endangered species and protecting against ozone depletion. In the last
two decades, however, U.S. environmental leadership has faltered. The best-known example is the
lack of an effective response to climate change, underscored by the U.S. decision not to join the Kyoto
Protocol. But the attention climate change receives should not obscure the fact that the United States
has also failed to join a large and growing number of treaties directed at other environmental threats,
including marine pollution, the loss of biological diversity, persistent organic pollutants, and trade in
toxic substances.

Science & Tech Leadership Brink

The US is at risk of losing its science and tech edge
Akst, Scientist news editor, 12
(Jef, masters degree from Indiana University and news editor at The Scientist, 3-14-12, The Scientist,
Slipping from the Top? http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/31845/title/Slipping-
from-the-Top-/, accessed 7-10-14, AFB]

The United States is still a global leader in science and technology research, but the country must act
now to avoid losing its edge. This was the overall consensus among two panels of experts, which
included National Institutes of Health Director Francis Collins, assembled today (March 14) by
Research! America, a nonprofit public education and advocacy alliance.
I do think America continues to be a place where boldness and innovation and creativity are
encouraged, Collins said. But there are warning signs, he added, such as the facts that the country is
now ranked 6th in the world with regard to the proportion of its gross domestic product that is
invested in research and development and that young high school students score relatively poorly in
math and science compared to teens in other nations. If efforts are not taken to reverse these trends,
Collins warned, we might see America lose their commitment to supporting research at the level that
it will take to maintain that competitiveness.
Research! America today released the results of a national poll that suggests the American voting public
is skeptical about the countrys future in scientific research. More than half (58 percent) of those
polled do not believe the United States will be a world leader in science and technology in 2020, and 85
percent said they were worried about decreases in federal funding for research. The findings reveal
deep concerns among likely voters about our ability to maintain world-class status, said Mary Woolley,
president and CEO of Research! Americasomething that the vast majority (91 percent) of those polled
said was important, especially as other countries are increasingly investing in science.

Now Key Maritime Power

US exploration key to maintaining power as a maritime power plan
prerequisite to private sector engagement
Gaffney, US Commission on Ocean policy member, 13
*Paul, First Principles for a Maritime Nation, included in Ocean Exploration 2020 forum, National
http://www.aquariumofpacific.org/downloads/oe2020report.pdf, p. 22-23 , 6/28/14, GNL]

The U.S. Ex Ex, a creation of Congress (PL 24-24), a voyage of discovery 175 years ago, was a
deliberate step by a tentative nation with an eye on becoming a world power. A six Navy ship flotilla,
manned by 346 military and civilian scientists was charged by government to explore the vast Pacific,
top to bottom. Called The U.S. Exploring Expedition, it sought to discover the natural characteristics
of the great Pacific, extend U.S. presence by connecting to new peoples and collect data useful to U.S.
seaborne commerce and naval operations.
Fast forward to 21st century America, no longer a tentative nation, now the greatest maritime nation
in world history. Its place in the middle of the great ocean system enables prosperous trade and a
unique security situation.
Yet, that ocean system is still largely unexplored. A world power unavoidably dependent on the ocean
still does not understand the oceans full range of opportunities and dangers.
A world maritime powerThe World Power, The United Statescannot afford to be surprised by the
very natural features that characterize her as a maritime nation.
Exploration projects in the high Arctic have found unexpected (previously undiscovered) ocean
bottom variability and changes in water temperature structure. Now that is important to defense,
especially safe U.S. submarine operations. It also gives a hint about past climate fluctuations so we
can get a better idea of the oceans and Arctics role in climate excursions. Arctic exploration
discoveries will also help America argue for rights to minerals off its northern coast.
There are a few, scattered ocean exploration efforts within our nation. Federal agencies do make new
discoveries incidental to their separate missions. And, privately funded citizen explorers are getting
excited about the ocean. While this collection of small efforts survives, each for its own purpose, the
Congress expected more. The nation needs more to ensure maritime strength.
A broad, coordinated national program envisioned by Congress in PL 111-11 could help prioritize
cross-agency oceanographic campaigns, strain from mission and research-driven expeditions and
private excursions those bits of information that are of new-discovery-quality and guarantee that it
will be archived within government and shared with an increasingly excited group of American citizen
explorers.
It is governments role to set the nations priorities, create and maintain the information backbone,
and carry out comprehensively over the long term a program to understand the opportunity and
dangers in an ocean system in whose middle America sits. Only after it has demonstrated this
commitment to leadership can it fully leverage investments from the private sector.

Plan Solves Model/Coop

Centralized and coordinated ocean exploration boosts international cooperation;
serves as a global model for solutions to ocean crises
Pages, American Chemical Society editor & Kearney, Ocean Drive editor, 4
[Patrice, & Bill, Winter/Spring, In Focus Magazine, Exploration of the Deep Blue Sea: Unveiling the
Oceans Mysteries, vol. 4, no. 1, http://www.infocusmagazine.org/4.1/env_ocean.html, accessed 7-11-
14, AFB]

The oceans cover nearly three-quarters of the Earth's surface, regulate our weather and climate, and
sustain a large portion of the planet's biodiversity, yet we know very little about them. In fact, most of
this underwater realm remains unexplored.
Three recent reports from the National Research Council propose a significantly expanded international
infrastructure for ocean exploration and research to close this knowledge gap and unlock the many
secrets of the sea.
Already a world leader in ocean research, the United States should lead a new exploration endeavor
by example. "Given the limited resources in many other countries, it would be prudent to begin with a
U.S. exploration program that would include foreign representatives and serve as a model for other
countries," said John Orcutt, the committee chair for one of the reports and deputy director, Scripps
Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego. "Once programs are established
elsewhere, groups of nations could then collaborate on research and pool their resources under
international agreements."
Using new and existing facilities, technologies, and vehicles, proposed efforts to understand the oceans
would follow two different approaches. One component dedicated to exploration would utilize ships,
submersibles, and satellites in new ways to uncover the ocean's biodiversity, such as the ecosystems
associated with deep-sea hydrothermal vents, coral reefs, and volcanic, underwater mountains.
A second component -- a network of ocean "observatories" composed of moored buoys and a system
of telecommunication cables and nodes on the seafloor -- would complement the existing fleet of
research ships and satellites. The buoys would provide information on weather and climate as well as
ocean biology, and the cables would be used to transmit information from sensors on fixed nodes about
volcanic and tectonic activity of the seafloor, earthquakes, and life on or below the seafloor.
Also, a fleet of new manned and unmanned deep-diving vehicles would round out this research
infrastructure.
Education and outreach should be an integral part of new ocean science efforts by bringing discoveries
to the public, informing government officials, and fostering collaborations between educators and the
program's scientists, the reports say.
These activities will expand previous international programs. For example, the observatory network will
build on current attempts to understand the weather, climate, and seafloor, such as the Hawaii-2
Observatory -- which consists of marine telephone cables running between Oahu and Hawaii and the
California coast -- and the Tropical Atmosphere Ocean Array, which contains about 70 moorings in the
Pacific and was key to predicting interannual climate events such as El Nio.

Coop Solves Science Diplomacy

These partnerships boost US science diplomacy and build coalitions to preserve global
stability
Rep. Carnahan, 12
[Russ Carnahan, D-MO, Missouris Third Congressional District from 2005-2013 and serves on the House
Committees on Foreign Affairs, Transportation and Infrastructure, and Veterans Affairs. 8-2-12, Science
& Diplomacy, Science Diplomacy and Congress, AAAS center for scientific diplomacy,
http://www.sciencediplomacy.org/perspective/2012/science-diplomacy-and-congress, accessed 7-11-
14, AFB]

As a member of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and a former member of the House Committee
on Science, I believe that the coordination of international science and technology (S&T) diplomacy is
paramount to U.S. interests. The United States has the potential to build more positive relationships
with other countries through science. Our country can better advance U.S. national security and
economic interests by helping build technological capacities in other nations and working with
international partners to solve global challenges. This is why I have worked in a bipartisan manner to
lead the introduction of four bills at the intersection of science and diplomacy: the International Science
and Technology Cooperation Act; the Global Conservation Act; the Global Science Program for Security,
Competitiveness, and Diplomacy Act; and the Startup Act 2.0. International challenges are just that:
global in their scope and in their solutions. The United States cannot solve multifaceted, multinational
problems in scientific or diplomatic isolation. Forging networks with scientists and institutions abroad
helps the United States and its partners find technical solutions to key global challenges. In an era
where international skepticism about U.S. foreign policy abounds, civil societyincluding scientists
and engineersplays a critical role in reinforcing U.S. foreign policy priorities via engagement with its
counterparts

Science Diplomacy Laundry List Impacts

Science diplomacy is necessary to solve multiple scenarios for extinction
Dr. Sackett, Chief Scientist for Australia, 10
[Penny, former Chief Scientist for Australia, former Program Director at the NSF, PhD in theoretical
physics, the Director of the Australian National University (ANU) Research School of Astronomy and
Astrophysics, 8/10, Forum for European-Australian- Science and Technology Cooperation, FEAST and
the case for science diplomacy, http://content.yudu.com/Library/A1p10y/FEAST/resources/134.htm, p.
132-3, accessed 7-10-14, AFB]

Imagine for a moment that the globe is inhabited by a single individual who roams free across outback
plains, through rainforests, across pure white beaches living off the resources available. Picture the
immensity of the world surrounding this one person and ask yourself, what possible impact could this
single person have on the planet?
Now turn your attention to todays reality. Almost 7 billion people inhabit the planet and this number
increases at an average of a little over one per cent per year. Thats about 2 more mouths to feed every
second.
Do these 7 billion people have an impact on the planet? Yes. An irreversible impact? Probably. Taken
together this huge number of people has managed to change the face of the Earth and threaten the
very systems that support them. We are now embarked on a trajectory that, if unchecked, will
certainly have detrimental impacts on our way of life and to natural ecosystems. Some of these are
irreversible, including the extinction of many species.
But returning to that single individual, surely two things are true. A single person could not have caused
all of this, nor can a single person solve all the associated problems.
The message here is that the human-induced global problems that confront us cannot be solved by any
one individual, group, agency or nation. It will take a large collective effort to change the course that
we are on; nothing less will suffice.
Our planet is facing several mammoth challenges: to its atmosphere, to its resources, to its inhabitants.
Wicked problems such as climate change, over-population, disease, and food, water and energy
security require concerted efforts and worldwide collaboration to find and implement effective, ethical
and sustainable solutions. These are no longer solely scientific and technical matters. Solutions must be
viable in the larger context of the global economy, global unrest and global inequality. Common
understandings and commitment to action are required between individuals, within communities and
across international networks.
Science can play a special role in international relations. Its participants share a common language that
transcends mother tongue and borders. For centuries scientists have corresponded and collaborated
on international scales in order to arrive at a better and common understanding of the natural and
human world.
Values integral to science such as transparency, vigorous inquiry and informed debate also support
effective international relation practices. Furthermore, given the long-established global trade of
scientific information and results, many important international links are already in place at a scientific
level. These links can lead to coalition-building, trust and cooperation on sensitive scientific issues
which, when supported at a political level, can provide a soft politics route to other policy dialogues.
That is, if nations are already working together on global science issues, they may be more likely to be
open to collaboration on other global issues such as trade and security.

Science diplomacy ensures capacity-building for diffuses global conflicts
Espy, Science in the News editor, 13
[Nicole, PhD student in Biological Sciences of Public Health at Harvard University, 2-18-13, Science in the
News, Science and Diplomacy, http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2013/science-and-diplomacy/,

The daily endeavors of a scientist may seem very distinct from those of a political diplomat. The public
may imagine that scientific progress is driven by the work of scientists working methodically and in
isolation in laboratories around the world. In contrast, the idea of a political diplomat likely conjures a
different image one that involves groups of politicians forming alliances and guiding negotiations
between multiple organizations and nations. But, science is a similarly collaborative effort that often
requires coordination between different groups to improve available tools and advance knowledge.
Science and diplomacy can even benefit one another. Science can provide the data and frameworks
necessary to initiate and inform diplomatic talks while at the same time, diplomacy can create
opportunities that improve the way we do science.
Science as a topic of Diplomacy
Science is at the heart of many international diplomatic discussions. For example, nuclear research has
been a hot topic in international politics for the past 60 years. Nuclear research has enabled us to
harness the power of nuclear fission for nuclear energy, but it has also resulted in the creation of
nuclear arms that have led to a great deal of destruction. To ensure nuclear research continues in a safe
and responsible manner, nations have worked together to develop a system of oversight and
accountability. These diplomatic efforts have resulted in the establishment of the International Atomic
Energy Agency, whose early slogan was Atoms for Peace. This agency provides technical guidelines
and assistance to countries for safe use of tools and techniques involving nuclear and radioactive
materials. It also attempts to make public the development of nuclear arms programs in countries
around the world so that other world leaders can take appropriate action. The International Atomic
Energy Agency is a model for how scientists and policy makers can share information and work toward
shared interests.
Climate change is another major driver of international diplomatic negotiations. The impact of climate
change on peoples lives is largely unpredictable and non-uniform across different regions. In response,
national leaders similarly vary in their willingness to consent to international agreements concerning
means to cut green house gas emissions. While the scientific consensus is that greenhouse-gas
emissions are a major cause of global warming, the debate surrounding climate change at the global
diplomatic level concerns the methods that should be employed to slow global warming and which
countries should carry the brunt of the socioeconomic responsibility.
The Kyoto Protocol, written in 1997, was an international agreement that required participating
countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The greatest responsibility for these reductions fell on
developed countries, like the United States and those in Europe, who emitted much of the greenhouse
gas during the 19th and 20th centuries. However, in 2001, the United States withdrew its support of the
Protocol, in objection to the quality of the Protocols goals, recognizing that rapidly industrializing
countries like China and India now emit more greenhouse gases from fossil fuels than high-income
countries. Meanwhile, low-income countries, including many island nations soon to be overcome by
rising sea levels, want immediate action that will stop climate change and help these countries adapt to
future changes. Last November, the United Nations held the Doha Climate Change conference, one of a
series of conferences held to devise an internationally supported plan of action to reduce greenhouse-
gas emissions. The result was not a consensus on the means and measurements of reducing emissions
per country. Instead, the Kyoto Protocol was extended through 2020 and participating countries
discussed the right of island nations to be compensated for adaptation costs. Since all 196 countries in
the world are a part of this conversation, climate change negotiations are difficult but imperative in the
face of the impending effects of climate change.
Ultimately, science can help provide the data models forecasting future climate changes, predicted
outcomes of different strategies that help frame climate change discussions, but decisions on what
policy to pursue will require frank and democratic deliberations that balance the needs and interests of
all stakeholders.
Diplomacy to improve science
Sometimes diplomacy is used to make new scientific tools available and to facilitate intellectual
exchange. After the Second World War, European scientists in the field of nuclear physics imagined an
organization that would increase collaboration across Europe and coordinate cost sharing for the
building and maintenance of the facilities this research required. This idea resulted in the formation of
the European Organization for Nuclear Research, or CERN. The political negotiations to manage the
shared operating costs and the use of CERN facilities, like the Large Hadron Collider, by over half of the
worlds physicists from many different nations and academic institutions are now carried out within the
CERN framework to manage the shared operating costs and the use of the facilities, like the Large
Hadron Collider, by over half of the worlds physicists. This use of diplomacy has enabled many
important discoveries, including the most recent discovery of the Higgs Boson. Other organizations that
are the result of global collaboration include ITER, former known as the International Thermonuclear
Experimental Reactor, for the development of nuclear fusion for energy production, the Square
Kilometre Array for the design of the worlds largest radio telescope, and the International Space Station
for space exploration. All of the above organizations have helped scientists overcome technical (and
financial) challenges in their respective fields that they would not have surmounted on their own.
Science to improve Diplomacy
Beyond the contentious subjects of nuclear proliferation and climate change, science can be a tool to
improve diplomatic relations between conflicting nations. The former Dean of the Kennedy School of
Government at Harvard University Dr. Joseph Nye, Jr., noted that soft power, such as international
cultural and intellectual collaborations between international groups, helps maintain a positive global
attitude between participating nations and can result in favorable political alliances. Scientific
collaborations are a powerful example of soft power, since science is internationally respected as an
impartial endeavor.

Science diplomacy key to relations necessary to solve global crises
Hormats, Under Secretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy & the Environment,
12
[Robert D., 3-9-12, Science Diplomacy, Science Diplomacy and Twenty-First Century Statecraft, AAAS,
http://www.sciencediplomacy.org/perspective/2012/science-diplomacy-and-twenty-first-century-
statecraft, accessed 7-10-14, AFB]

Science diplomacy is a central component of Americas twenty-first century statecraft agenda. The
United States must increasingly recognize the vital role science and technology can play in addressing
major challenges, such as making our economy more competitive, tackling global health issues, and
dealing with climate change. American leadership in global technological advances and scientific
research, and the dynamism of our companies and universities in these areas, is a major source of our
economic, foreign policy, and national security strength. Additionally, it is a hallmark of the success of
the American system. While some seek to delegitimize scientific ideas, we believe the United States
should celebrate science and see itas was the case since the time of Benjamin Franklinas an
opportunity to advance the prosperity, health, and overall wellbeing of Americans and the global
community.
Innovation policy is part of our science diplomacy engagement. More than ever before, modern
economies are rooted in science and technology. It is estimated that Americas knowledge-based
industries represent 40 percent of our economic growth and 60 percent of our exports. Sustaining a
vibrant knowledge-based economy, as well as a strong commitment to educational excellence and
advanced research, provides an opportunity for our citizens to prosper and enjoy upward mobility.
America attracts people from all over the worldscientists, engineers, inventors, and entrepreneurs
who want the opportunity to participate in, and contribute to, our innovation economy.
At the same time, our bilateral and multilateral dialogues support science, technology, and innovation
abroad by promoting improved education; research and development funding; good governance and
transparent regulatory policies; markets that are open and competitive; and policies that allow
researchers and companies to succeed, and, if they fail, to have the opportunity to try again. We
advocate for governments to embrace and enforce an intellectual property system that allows
innovators to reap the benefits of their ideas and also rewards their risk taking. Abraham Lincoln himself
held a patent on an invention, a device for preventing ships from being grounded on shoals. He said in
his Second Lecture on Discoveries and Inventions in 1859 that patents added the fuel of interest to
the fire of genius, in the discovery and production of new and useful things.
The practice of science is increasingly expanding from individuals to groups, from single disciplines to
interdisciplinary, and from a national to an international scope. The Organisation for Economic Co-
operation and Development reported that from 1985 to 2007, the number of scientific articles published
by a single author decreased by 45 percent. During that same period, the number of scientific articles
published with domestic co-authorship increased by 136 percent, and those with international co-
authorship increased by 409 percent. The same trend holds for patents. Science collaboration is exciting
because it takes advantage of expertise that exists around the country and around the globe.
American researchers, innovators, and institutions, as well as their foreign counterparts, benefit through
these international collaborations. Governments that restrict the flow of scientific expertise and data
will find themselves isolated, cut off from the global networks that drive scientific and economic
innovation.
While the scientific partnerships that the United States builds with other nations, and international
ties among universities and research labs, are a means to address shared challenges, they also
contribute to broadening and strengthening our diplomatic relationships. Scientific partnerships are
based on disciplines and values that transcend politics, languages, borders, and cultures. Processes
that define the scientific communitysuch as merit review, critical thinking, diversity of thought, and
transparencyare fundamental values from which the global community can reap benefits.
History provides many examples of how scientific cooperation can bolster diplomatic ties and cultural
exchange. American scientists collaborated with Russian and Chinese counterparts for decades, even
as other aspects of our relationship proved more challenging. Similarly, the science and technology
behind the agricultural Green Revolution of the 1960s and 70s was the product of American, Mexican,
and Indian researchers working toward a common goal. Today, the United States has formal science and
technology agreements with over fifty countries. We are committed to finding new ways to work with
other countries in science and technology, to conduct mutually beneficial joint research activities, and to
advance the interests of the U.S. science and technology community.
Twenty-first century statecraft also requires that we build greater people-to-people relationships.
Science and technology cooperation makes that possible. For example, through the Science Envoy
program, announced by President Obama in 2009 in Cairo, Egypt, eminent U.S. scientists have met with
counterparts throughout Asia, Africa, and the Middle East to build relationships and identify
opportunities for sustained cooperation. With over half of the worlds population under the age of
thirty, we are developing new ways to inspire the next generation of science and technology leaders.
Over the past five years, the Department of States International Fulbright Science & Technology Award
has brought more than two hundred exceptional students from seventy-three different countries to the
United States to pursue graduate studies. Through the Global Innovation through Science and
Technology Initiative, the United States recently invited young innovators from North Africa, the Middle
East, and Asia to post YouTube videos describing solutions to problems they face at home. The top
submissions will receive financial support, business mentorship, and networking opportunities.
Advancing the rights of women and girls is a central focus of U.S. foreign policy and science diplomacy.
As we work to empower women and girls worldwide, we must ensure that they have access to science
education and are able to participate and contribute fully during every stage of their lives. Recently, we
partnered with Google, Intel, Microsoft, and many other high-tech businesses to launch TechWomen, a
program that brings promising women leaders from the Middle East to Silicon Valley to meet industry
thought-leaders, share knowledge and experiences, and bolster cultural understanding.
Science diplomacy is not new. It is, however, broader, deeper, and more visible than ever before and
its importance will continue to grow. The Department of States first Quadrennial Diplomacy and
Development Review highlights that science, engineering, technology, and innovation are the engines
of modern society and a dominant force in globalization and international economic development.
These interrelated issues are priorities for the United States and, increasingly, the world.

Science Diplomacy Solves Conflict

Science diplomacy key to bolstering relations and foster economic and democratic
growth
Dr. Colglazier, Science and Technology Adviser to the Secretary of State, 13
[E. William, From 1994 to 2011, Dr. Colglazier served as Executive Officer of the National Academy of
Sciences (NAS) and the National Research Council (NRC). , 8-20-13, Remarks on Science and Diplomacy
in the 21st Century, http://www.state.gov/e/stas/2013/213741.htm, accessed 7-10-14, AFB]

Science diplomacy helps other countries to become more capable in science and technology. One
might worry that this creates more capable competitors, but I believe that it is in the interest of
technologically advanced societies like in the U.S. and Europe to encourage more knowledge-based
societies worldwide that rely upon science. The only way to stay in the forefront of the scientific and
technological revolution, which is where I want the U.S. to be, is to run faster and to work with the best
scientists and engineers wherever they reside in the world. That is why I support more global scientific
engagement by the U.S. with leading scientists and engineers around the world. The approach that I
favor was captured well in the title of an article in the October 2012 issue of Scientific American: A
measure of the creativity of a nation is how well it works with those beyond its borders.
I believe that the world has a special opportunity in this decade since so many countries are focusing
on improving their capabilities in science and technology and are willing to make fundamental
changes in investments and policies so they can build more innovative societies. If we can minimize
wars and conflicts with skillful diplomacy, the potential is there for more rapid economic growth,
faster expansion of the middle class, and increased democratic governance in many countries as well
as increased trade between countries. This is an optimistic scenario. A range of future scenarios,
including some that are quite pessimistic, are laid out in the fascinating report Global Trends 2030,
published by the U.S. National Intelligence Council in 2012.(8) I believe that we can make the hopeful
scenario a reality. Science diplomacy is one of our most important tools in achieving the desired
outcome.

Science diplomacy can prevent conflict and diffuse existing tensions
Wallin, 10
USC Annenberg School Center on Public Diplomacy, 10
[
2-4-10, Science Diplomacy and the Prevention of Conflict, Proceedings of the USC Center on Public
Diplomacy Conference February 4-5, 2010,
http://uscpublicdiplomacy.org/sites/uscpublicdiplomacy.org/files/useruploads/u22281/Science%20Dipl
omacy%20Proceedings.pdf, p. 17-8, accessed 7-10-14, AFB]
Ernest J. Wilson III, Dean, USC Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism
In his introductory remarks, Dean Ernest Wilson pointed out that although science diplomacy can be
utilized to prevent conflict, it tends to be neglected as an important aspect of diplomacy. Science
diplomacy takes place at the intersection of events and trends, and so it doesnt neatly fit into
traditional analytic categories, nor does it fit into the standard and familiar organizational silos.
Proposing three areas of analysis for science diplomacy, Wilson outlined the concepts of Context,
Curves, and Caution. Contextually, science and technologys ability to play a larger role in the foreign
policy of states is an area that requires careful scrutiny. This field is becoming more pertinent, as can be
seen from recent conflicts between Google, Inc. and the Peoples Republic of China over Internet access.
This example highlights technology companies attempts to gain political influence that they believe is
commensurate with their economic weight, demonstrating the possible emergence of a new political
context where science and technology (S&T) may be augmenting companies audiences and
constituencies.
To demonstrate the concept of Curves, Wilson brought up the previous nights question about the
disaggregation of science. As with science, conflict can be subdivided into different categories, many of
which require different tools to achieve lasting and successful resolution. Conflict cannot be modeled
as a steady state, but rather as a bell-shaped curve. On the left side, conflict is either non-existent or in
a pre-conflict state. Accelerators act to raise the level of conflict to a peak or plateau, and on the right
side of the curve, conflict declines. It is subsequently important to understand at which points on the
curve science and technology can intervene. On the left side, S&T can help prevent conflict, whereas at
the peak it can help reduce it. On the right side, the question remains of how exactly S&T can help
sustain the reduction in conflict.

Science Leadership Impact

The race for scientific leadership is on innovative science is vital to solving global
impacts
Dr. Colglazier, Science and Technology Adviser to the Secretary of State, 13
[E. William, From 1994 to 2011, Dr. Colglazier served as Executive Officer of the National Academy of
Sciences (NAS) and the National Research Council (NRC). , 8-20-13, Remarks on Science and Diplomacy
in the 21st Century, http://www.state.gov/e/stas/2013/213741.htm, accessed 7-10-14, AFB]

In 2010 the U.S. Department of State and the U.S. Agency for International Development released a
strategic blueprint to chart the course of the next four years. In this first Quadrennial Diplomacy and
Development Review, it was stated:
Science, engineering, technology, and innovation are the engines of modern society and a dominant
force in globalization and international economic development.
The significance of this observation has been emphasized repeatedly to me over the past two years in
conversations with representatives of many countries about science and technology. I have been struck
by the fact that nearly every country has put at the very top of its agenda the role of science and
technology for supporting innovation and economic development. This observation has been true for
countries at every level of development not only for countries like Germany, Japan, China, India,
Brazil, South Korea, and Singapore, but also for countries like Mexico, Colombia, Chile, South Africa,
Indonesia, Czech Republic, Malaysia, and Vietnam. They are all seeking insights regarding the right
policies and investments to help their societies to become more innovative and competitive to ensure
a more prosperous future for their citizens.
Why does nearly every country now have a laser-like focus on improving its capabilities in science,
technology, and innovation in order to be more competitive in this globalized, interconnected world?
My guess is that most countries see two trends clearly: (1) science and technology have a major
impact on the economic success of leading companies and countries and (2) the scientific and
technological revolution has been accelerating. If countries do not become more capable in science
and technology, they will be left behind. The upside is great if they can capitalize on the transformative
potential of new and emerging technologies. As one example, the information and communication
technology (ICT) revolution has shown the potential for developing countries to use new technologies to
leapfrog over the development paths taken by developed countries, such as with mobile phones in
Africa.
Countries also recognize that almost every issue with which they are confronted on the national,
regional, and global level has an important scientific and technological component. This is true
whether the issue concerns health, environment, national security, homeland security, energy,
communication, food, water, climate change, disaster preparedness, or education. Countries know
they have smart, creative, entrepreneurial people. They believe their people can compete, even from a
distance, if the right investments are made and the right policies are implemented. And they know that
to become more capable in science and technology and to create innovation and knowledge-based
societies, they must collaborate with the world leaders in science and technology.
New and emerging technologies have also affected the trajectory of fundamental science and
engineering research by creating new capabilities for exploring and understanding the natural world.
We are only at the beginning of exploiting the potential of these new capabilities. This is another reason
for the acceleration of the scientific and technological revolution, progressing at such an incredibly rapid
pace that it is hard to imagine, much less predict, what new transformative possibilities will emerge
within a decade. Scientists are not much better at predicting the future than anyone else. I am very
envious of young people who will see amazing developments in their lifetimes. As renowned computer
scientist Alan Kay said, The best way to predict the future is to invent it.

Exploration Key to Ocean Leadership

Ocean exploration key to US leadership
McNutt, Presidents Panel on Ocean Exploration chair, 2K*
*Marcia, *last date referenced was 2000, PRESIDENTS PANEL ON OCEAN EXPLORATION, Executive
Summary, http://explore.noaa.gov/sites/OER/Documents/about-oer/program-review/presidents-
panel-on-ocean-exploration-report.pdf, page 2, accessed 6/29/14 CK]

The Panel notes that the United States currently does not support a program in ocean exploration,
despite our inadequate understanding of the ocean and the living and nonliving resources it contains,
and its undeniable importance to the health of the planet and the wealth of our nation. Furthermore, in
a number of areas, the U.S. has fallen behind other nations in our capabilities for undertaking ocean
exploration. American leadership in ocean exploration can be achieved through the following
recommendations.
The U.S. government should establish an Ocean Exploration Program for an initial period of 10 years,
with new funding at the level of $75M / year, excluding capitalization costs. The program should include:
Interdisciplinary voyages of discovery within high-priority areas, including the U.S. Exclusive Economic
Zone (EEZ) and the continental margin, the Arctic, and poorly known areas of the southern oceans and
inland seas. The U.S. inventory of the living and nonliving resources in the ocean should be second to
none, particularly within our own EEZ and continental margins. Platform, communication, navigation
and instrument development efforts, including the capitalization of major new assets for ocean
exploration, in order to equip our explorers with the very best in marine research technology. Data
management and dissemination, so that discoveries can have maximum impact for research,
commercial, regulatory, and educational benefit. Educational outreach, in both formal and informal
settings, to improve the science competency of Americas schoolchildren and to realize the full
potential of a citizenry aware and informed of ocean issues.
Exploration Key to Maritime Power

US exploration key to maintaining power as a maritime power plan prerequisite to
private sector engagement
Gaffney, US Commission on Ocean policy member, 13
*Paul, First Principles for a Maritime Nation, included in Ocean Exploration 2020 forum, National
http://www.aquariumofpacific.org/downloads/oe2020report.pdf, p. 22-23 , 6/28/14, GNL]
The U.S. Ex Ex, a creation of Congress (PL 24-24), a voyage of discovery 175 years ago, was a
deliberate step by a tentative nation with an eye on becoming a world power. A six Navy ship flotilla,
manned by 346 military and civilian scientists was charged by government to explore the vast Pacific,
top to bottom. Called The U.S. Exploring Expedition, it sought to discover the natural characteristics
of the great Pacific, extend U.S. presence by connecting to new peoples and collect data useful to U.S.
seaborne commerce and naval operations.
Fast forward to 21st century America, no longer a tentative nation, now the greatest maritime nation
in world history. Its place in the middle of the great ocean system enables prosperous trade and a
unique security situation.
Yet, that ocean system is still largely unexplored. A world power unavoidably dependent on the ocean
still does not understand the oceans full range of opportunities and dangers.
A world maritime powerThe World Power, The United Statescannot afford to be surprised by the
very natural features that characterize her as a maritime nation.
Exploration projects in the high Arctic have found unexpected (previously undiscovered) ocean
bottom variability and changes in water temperature structure. Now that is important to defense,
especially safe U.S. submarine operations. It also gives a hint about past climate fluctuations so we
can get a better idea of the oceans and Arctics role in climate excursions. Arctic exploration
discoveries will also help America argue for rights to minerals off its northern coast.
There are a few, scattered ocean exploration efforts within our nation. Federal agencies do make new
discoveries incidental to their separate missions. And, privately funded citizen explorers are getting
excited about the ocean. While this collection of small efforts survives, each for its own purpose, the
Congress expected more. The nation needs more to ensure maritime strength.
A broad, coordinated national program envisioned by Congress in PL 111-11 could help prioritize
cross-agency oceanographic campaigns, strain from mission and research-driven expeditions and
private excursions those bits of information that are of new-discovery-quality and guarantee that it
will be archived within government and shared with an increasingly excited group of American citizen
explorers.
It is governments role to set the nations priorities, create and maintain the information backbone,
and carry out comprehensively over the long term a program to understand the opportunity and
dangers in an ocean system in whose middle America sits. Only after it has demonstrated this
commitment to leadership can it fully leverage investments from the private sector.

Marine Archaeology

Exploration Solves Marine Archaeology

Exploration facilitates marine archaeology
downloaded from: http://www.nap.edu/catalog/10630.html,pages 12-13. Accessed 6/30/14 CK]

One cannot imagine a history of our globe without watercraft. From the primitive floats or rafts that
carried the first people to Australia 50,000 years ago to the giant oil tankers and aircraft carriers of
today, boats and ships have allowed the discovery, colonization, supply, and defense of entire
continents. The study of the history of ships is therefore important in itself. But just as important,
virtually everything ever made by humans, from tiny obsidian blades and bits of jewelry to the huge
marble elements of entire temples and churches, has been transported at one time or another over
water. Thus, the exploration of shipwrecks of all periods will write definitive histories of weapons,
tools and other utensils, glass, ceramics, games, sculpture, weights and measures, metallurgy, and,
especially in later times, instruments and machines of all types (Figure 6). Equally important,
shipwrecks can teach us about economic history. Marine archaeology can also uncover inundated
coastal habitation sites that teach us about our early ancestors. Exploration of the Earths blue
museum will rewrite whole chapters in history and could reveal the most startling archaeological
discoveries of the 21st century.

Government role key to creating exploration framework
Selkirk, Current Archaeology Founder, 97*
*Andrew, *1997 is last referenced date, Adam Smith.org, Who owns the past?,
http://www.adamsmith.org/sites/default/files/images/uploads/publications/who-owns-the-past.pdf,
accessed 7/1/2014 CK]
Nautical archaeology is the one aspect of archaeology where legislation is probably desirable.
However the current proposals largely ignore the amateurs, and will therefore be very expensive to
the government: this is a case where fresh thinking is needed.
Nautical archaeology is something comparatively new. It depends on the invention of the aqua-lung,
which only took place after the war, and thus in many ways nautical archaeology is in the position where
land archaeology was a century ago.
At present, the main legislation regarding historic wrecks is the Merchant Shipping Act of 1894, which is
disastrous. This lays down what might be called the principle of "Finders Keepers" whoever finds a
wreck and can tear a bit off it and take it to the Receiver of Wrecks, and the finder is then awarded
the whole wreck. There could be no worse law from the archaeological point of view the law
positively encourages and rewards looters. The situation was substantially improved by the first
archaeological legislation, the Protection of Wrecks Act 1973. This established a system of designating
historic wrecks similar to the listing of historic buildings or the scheduling of ancient monuments.
Basically this is the right principle. The Joint Nautical Archaeology Policy Committee is now pressing for
better protection of archaeological sites underwater. However their proposals apparently involve
squeezing out the established underwater 'hobby-divers', many of whom are only too keen to
investigate the sea-bed, and to replace them by professional archaeologists, at the taxpayer's expense.
The British Sub Aqua Club, which is the main co-ordinating body for amateur underwater divers, has
some 35,000 members in its constituent bodies, and these form a ready made workforce for under-
water archaeology.
Impact

Knowledge of the past is shaping our cultural values
Ostermann, Cold War International History Project Director, 14
*Christian F., 6/27/2014, The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Call for Papers: Trans-
Atlantic Dialogues on Cultural Heritage - Heritage, Tourism and Traditions,
http://www.wilsoncenter.org/article/call-for-papers-trans-atlantic-dialogues-cultural-heritage-heritage-
tourism-and-traditions, accessed 7/1/2014 CK]
Trans-Atlantic dialogues on cultural heritage began as early as the voyages of Leif Ericson and
Christopher Columbus and continue through the present day. Each side of the Atlantic offers its own
geographical and historical specificities expressed and projected through material and immaterial
heritage. However, in geopolitical terms and through everyday mobilities, people, objects and ideas
flow backward and forward across the ocean, each shaping the heritage of the other, for better or
worse, and each shaping the meanings and values that heritage conveys. Where, and in what ways are
these trans-Atlantic heritages connected? Where, and in what ways are they not? What can we learn by
reflecting on how the different societies and cultures on each side of the Atlantic Ocean produce,
consume, mediate, filter, absorb, resist, and experience the heritage of the other?

Overfishing

Solvency Ocean Health Prioritization

Prioritizing ocean health builds capacity to prevent overfishing
Conathan, American Progress Ocean Policy Director, 13
*Michael, November 19, 2013, Center For American Progress, Establish the National Endowment for
the Oceans, http://americanprogress.org/issues/green/news/2013/11/19/79615/establish-the-
national-endowment-for-the-oceans/, accessed 6/27/14 CK]

The National Endowment for the Oceans, introduced by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), would also
give states more of a say in how they prioritize the ocean issues they consider to be most critical, but
thats about where the similarities between it and the National Ocean Policy end. The endowment
would create a congressionally authorized fund dedicated to ocean health. Roughly two-thirds of its
annual disbursement would go directly to coastal states in proportion to the length of their shorelines
and size of their coastal populations, while a second, national-scale grant program with similar goals
would be administered by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation.
In the past, despite its potential benefits to their industry, some fishermen have been slow to warm up
to the National Ocean Policy. For starters, they felt their voices were not adequately represented during
the early stages of the policys development, and that initial snub has proven difficult for the industry to
forget. While their concerns were not without merit, the Obama administration and the National Ocean
Council have taken great pains to address them.
Regardless of how fishermen feel about the National Ocean Policy, they would be wise to embrace the
effort to establish the National Endowment for the Oceans. There is a general consensus that the
biggest problem facing Americas fishing industry is a lack of funding for science and monitoring, a
shortfall that directly affects fishermens bottom lines. The law requires regulators to set fishermens
catch limits based on the best science available. Better data means more certainty to assessments. In
turn, that would allow fishery managers to set catch limits that more accurately reflect the true health
of fish populations. This would then either give fishermen more fish to catch in the short term or
increase the likelihood that todays restrictions will lead to healthier fish populations and higher
future quotas.
A robust, well-funded National Endowment for the Oceans would give states the option to invest in
additional or supplemental assessments for fisheries that drive their economies. It would also allow
the quasi-governmental regional fishery management councils, which develop and recommend fishery
management plans to government regulators, to apply for money to serve their most pressing research
needs without having to fight for their inclusion in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration budget.
In a legislative climate where virtually every potential achievement is stonewalled by partisan bickering,
ocean industries and advocates suddenly find themselves with a rare opportunity to lead Congress to
a positive decision. The establishment of the National Endowment for the Oceans is a long-overdue
nod to the economic potential of our nations oceans and coasts.

Solving Overfishing Key to Ocean Biodiversity

Preventing overfishing key to solve ocean biodiversity
Mitchell, Insight Magazine senior writer, 14
*Julie, 2014, Ocean under threat, Insight Magazine, Issue 1, Page 4 CK+

Destructive fishing But the rich biodiversity that is only just being discovered is in danger from
destructive fishing methods, pollution and climate change. The GOC report warns: Illegal fishing
vessels are an increasing threat to the security of nations and a commonplace scene of human rights
abuses. Combating illegal fishing would improve prospects for nature, for the ecosystem services that
we need, and for responsible businesses. It could also ensure that the benefits from the exploitation of
ocean resources can be sustainably managed and equitably shared.
The combined impact of destructive fishing, pollution, climate change and other factors were recently
analysed by leading marine scientists with the International Programme on the State of the Ocean
(IPSO) and International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN).
Among the main findings were: that overfishing is depleting economically important species and
altering marine food webs; climate change and ocean acidification are seriously damaging coral reefs
and other ecosystems; and climate change and pollution are increasing the number of dead zones. It
was also clear that these threats are greater in combination than they are individually.
The IPSO/IUCN report suggests a raft of measures, including banning bottom trawling and other
destructive fishing practices and ending illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing. It also advocates
community-run fisheries, setting international climate targets and reforming governance of the high
seas.
This report and its findings are being considered by the GOC as it develops its own recommendations. To
this end the commissioners have been closely examining the legal framework and management rules
governing the high seas.
Although there are separate organisations for managing industries such as fishing, shipping and
seabed mining, no one has overall responsibility for protecting nature and there is no clear legal
mechanism for establishing protected areas. This is in sharp contrast to the efforts made to protect the
land environment.
In July last year the GOC recommended that, in the interests of national security, safety at sea and
effective fisheries regulation, all high seas vessels should be required to carry International Maritime
Organization (IMO) numbers and tracking equipment.
[Note: GOC= Global Ocean Commission]

Overfishing Impacts

Overfishing leads to ecosystem collapse
Bascompte & Melin, Integrative Ecology Group Seville Spain, and Sala, Center for
Marine Biodiversity and Conservation, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University
of California at San Diego, 5
[Jordi, Carlos J., Enric, Communicated by Robert T. Paine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA,
February 25, 2005 Published 3/31/2005, PNAS Online, Interaction strength combinations and the
overfishing of a marine food web, http://www.pnas.org/content/102/15/5443.full, accessed 6/30/2014
CK]

The stability of ecological communities largely depends on the strength of interactions between
predators and their prey. Here we show that these interaction strengths are structured nonrandomly
in a large Caribbean marine food web. Specifically, the cooccurrence of strong interactions on two
consecutive levels of food chains occurs less frequently than expected by chance. Even when they
occur, these strongly interacting chains are accompanied by strong omnivory more often than expected
by chance. By using a food web model, we show that these interaction strength combinations reduce
the likelihood of trophic cascades after the overfishing of top predators. However, fishing selectively
removes predators that are overrepresented in strongly interacting chains. Hence, the potential for
strong community-wide effects remains a threat.

Overfishing is reaching the tipping point, and destroys ecosystems
Dartmouth Undergraduate Journal of Science, 12
[Dartmouth Undergraduate Journal of Science, March 11, 2012, DUJS Online, The Threats of
Overfishing: Consequences at the Commercial Level http://dujs.dartmouth.edu/winter-2012/the-
threats-of-overfishing-consequences-at-the-commercial-level#.U7Ja2PldWrx, accessed 6/30/2014 CK]

According to marine ecologists, overfishing is the greatest threat to ocean ecosystems today (1).
Overfishing occurs because fish are captured at a faster rate than they can reproduce (2). Advanced
fishing technology and an increased demand for fish have led to overfishing, causing several marine
species to become extinct or endangered as a result (3, 4). In the long-term, overfishing can have a
devastating impact on ocean communities as it destabilizes the food chain and destroys the natural
habitats of many aquatic species (2).
In the past, fishing was more sustainable because fishermen could not access every location and
because they had a limited capacity for fish aboard their vessels. Today, however, small trawlers and
fishing boats have been replaced by giant factory ships that can capture and process extremely large
amounts of prey at a given time (2). These ships use sonar instruments and global positioning systems
(GPS) to rapidly locate large schools of fish (1). Fishing lines are deployed with thousands of large
hooks that can reach areas up to 120 kilometers deep. The trawling vessels and machines can even
reach depths of 170 kilometers and can store an extraordinarily large volume of fish. Each year, these
huge trawling ships comb an area twice the size of the United States. They use massive nets 50 meters
wide with the capacity to pull the weight of a medium-sized plane (2). They also have several plants
for processing and packing fish, large freezing systems, fishmeal processing plants, and powerful
engines that can carry this enormous fishing gear around the ocean. Because these ships have all the
equipment necessary to freeze and tin fish, they only need to return to their base once they are full.
Even when the ships are filled, however, the fish are often transferred to refrigerated vessels in the
middle of the ocean and are processed for consumption later (4). As such, industrial fishing has
expanded considerably and fishermen can now explore new shores and deeper waters to keep up
with the increased demand for seafood. In fact, it has been reported by the United Nations Food and
Agricultural Organization (FAO) that over 70 percent of the worlds fisheries are either fully exploited,
over exploited or significantly depleted (5). The annual total global catch of fish is 124 million metric
tons, which is equivalent in weight to 378 Empire State Buildings (2).

Ocean Collapse/Biodiversity

Now Key

Must invest in ocean exploration now to stop ocean collapse
Terdiman, CNET News Senior Writer, 10
*Daniel, 4/15/10, CNET, Oceans Salvation may lie in exploration, http://www.cnet.com/news/oceans-
salvation-may-lie-in-exploration/, accessed 6/29/14, BCG)

Indeed, the fact that humans haven't returned to the bottom of the Mariana Trench highlights a
disturbing fact: while we have spent billions putting men on the moon and building space stations, we
have, by comparison at least, neglected the most significant environments on Earth, our oceans. And
that has, to some experts, forced our hand. Either we turn things around and make the future of ocean
exploration a very high priority, they say, or we face some sobering realities.
"To paraphrase [author] Tom Wolfe, we had the right stuff, but [went in] the wrong direction," Walsh
said. "In the oceanographic community globally, not just in the United States, we have really failed to
make the necessary investments to learn about the world's oceans, which cover 70 percent of our
planet."
'Far behind the curve'
If there's anyone who has gravitas in the field of ocean exploration, it's National Geographic Society
explorer-in-residence Sylvia Earle. A longtime ocean explorer, author, lecturer, and former chief
scientist of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Earle was awarded the 2009
TED Prize for her work and created Mission Blue, which aims to "heal and protect the Earth's oceans
through the creation and management of essential marine protected areas."
"We're far behind the curve from where we need to be," Earle told CNET. "People look at the surface,
and they think that's the ocean, and because they can't see what's going on below, they think
everything's just fine. But those of us with decades of exploration [experience know that] the ocean is in
trouble, and therefore so are we."
That's because, she said, it's the world's oceans that drive climate and weather and which generate
most of our oxygen. Indeed, she said, fully one-fifth of the planet's oxygen comes from a single
marine-based, blue-green bacterium: the prochlorococcus. Yet, before our eyes, she said, the marine
ecosystems are dying out or struggling from a wide variety of factors including over-fishing, pollution,
changes in chemistry, and more.
So why have we, as a people, spent so little energy exploring the seas, even though 50 years ago, it was
considered a great national triumph to have conquered the Mariana Trench?
Earle recalled a lunch she once had with Clare Boothe Luce, the famous playwright and former U.S.
ambassador to Italy and congresswoman. "[Boothe] was musing about the disparity [between space and
ocean exploration] and she looked up at the puffy clouds, and she said, 'You know, heaven is up there.
And you know what's down there.'"
Deep-sea technology
Today, there are not nearly enough ships, sonars, or submarines of any kind to do ocean exploration
justice, said Stephen Hammond, the chief scientist for NOAA's office of ocean exploration and
research. But at least some things are moving in the right direction, he added.
The urgent goal, Hammond said, is to make a dent in the 90 percent of the world's oceans that humans
know nothing about. And that's where NOAA is putting its money where its mouth is: by taking a former
Department of Defense acoustic surveillance vessel that it acquired in 2005 and retrofitting it as a world-
class "global range ship of discovery."
[Note Walsh = Navy Lt. Don Walsh]

Exploration Key to Ocean Ecosystems

Expanding exploration key to safeguard ocean resources and biodiversity
downloaded from: http://www.nap.edu/catalog/10630.html,pages 8-10, Accessed 6/30/14 CK]

Only a fraction of the worlds marine species have been discovered and even fewer have been
scientifically identified and named (Winston, 1992; World Resources Institute, 2001). New species are
discovered on virtually every expedition that seeks to uncover them, including corals, fishes, plants,
and even microorganisms like Archaea, which represent an entirely new domain of life (Norse, 1993).
If little is known about the overall biodiversity in the ocean, even less is known about the abundance
of organisms, their ecological roles, how food webs are structured, and how vast areas of the ocean
are connected through biological interactions. Since we now know that even remote areas of the ocean
contain detectable levels of human contaminants (Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine
Environmental Protection, 2001), we can surmise, but not yet quantify, the extent to which humans
directly and indirectly affect marine ecosystem health and productivity. Ultimately, better
understanding of marine systems and our impacts on those systems will enable us to more wisely
utilize the vast resources the ocean has to offer, and help us safeguard the wondrous web of life the
ocean supports.
A few particularly exciting areas for exploration into marine biodiversity include the following:
The microbial ocean. Although we know that thousands of organisms may live in a single drop of
seawater, the vast majority of these organisms cannot be cultured in the lab. New genetic tools are
allowing researchers to unlock the secrets of their identities, taxonomy, spatial diversity, and role in
the ecosystem using their genetic code.
The oceans extreme environments. The ocean floor harbors some of Earths most extreme
environments, with crushingly high pressures, temperatures from below freezing to almost boiling,
and surprising chemical compositions. Up until a quarter of a century ago, the deep sea was viewed as a
hostile environment with a limited supply of food descending from surface waters and low biomass. The
discovery in 1977 of luxuriant ecosystems associated with deep-sea hydrothermal vents dramatically
altered this view. These ecosystems exist in the deep sea and are not dependent on organic matter
sinking from the sunlit surface ocean. Rather, the micro-organisms at the base of this ecosystem support
it through extracting energy from chemicals in the high-temperature fluids at the vents. Equally
sensational discoveries may be waiting in other unusual ocean environments including other planets and
moons.
The subsurface biosphere. In 1991, scientists working on the mid-ocean ridge in the eastern Pacific
witnessed a snow blizzard of microbes and microbial debris being spewed out of the seafloor (Haymon
et al., 1993). The material rose more than 100 feet above the ocean bottom and settled into a thin,
white layer on the seafloor. Microbes have also been detected in cores recovered by the Ocean Drilling
Program (ODP) down to depths of several hundred meters, and have been demonstrated to play an
important role in crustal alteration.
Coral reefs (Figure 3). Although coral reefs are spectacularly rich in species, complex in their
functioning, and high in recreational, fisheries, and socio-economic values, no comprehensive global
map of the reefs exists. Coral reef biologists and conservationists often must rely on naval charts and
centuries-old ship logs to guess where reefs lie. Corals have been identified in cold water regions, such
as the northeast Atlantic, exemplifying how little is known of their distribution, condition, or relative
health. Many of the worlds coral reefs lie within the territorial waters of nations struggling to maintain
environmental quality in the face of economic pressures. An international coral reef exploration
program is needed to locate, understand, and protect these fragile ecosystems.
Seamounts. These underwater mountains are another rich and functionally important marine
ecosystem ripe for discovery. While the major seamounts are known from topographic mapping, many
small but ecologically critical seamounts remain unknown. A recent survey of fish aggregation and
spawning areas of the western Pacific has revealed an extensive array of seamounts in that portion of
the world ocean, providing a good foundation for future efforts to choose sites for marine protected
areas that will serve to maintain fisheries production and safeguard biodiversity.
Continental shelves. The organisms that live within the sediments on continental shelves, especially
temperate banks and intertidal areas, include numbers of species rivaling those of insects found in
tropical forests. These sediment-dwelling organisms are thought to play an important role in linking
the seafloor ecosystem with the water column above, and ultimately in supporting the marine food
web. Unfortunately, the seafloor in many of these coastal areas has been degraded or destroyed
through uncontrolled trawling, dredging (National Research Council, 2002), and coastal construction.
Ocean exploration can take scientists to areas that are still relatively pristine to discover how these
systems function and better understand the effects of human intervention.

Exploration is key to preservation framework helps find effective ways to protect
biodiversity
43-45, accessed 6/29/14, GNL]

Exploitation of the genetic diversity of ocean life and long-term management of commercial fisheries
will require a thorough knowledge and cataloging of resources. To date, just a fraction of the worlds
marine species have been scientifically named or taxonomically identified (Winston, 1992; World
Resources Institute, 2001). New species, including corals, fishes, and plants, are discovered on virtually
every expedition that seeks to uncover them. Even microorganisms, such as Archaea, a primitive form
of life, have been discovered by happenstance in places where conditions of temperature and pressure
are so extreme, no life would be expected (National Research Council, 1995). The recent realization of
the abundance and distribution of deep, cold-water corals (Box 3.1, Figure 3.1) is another example.
Ocean exploration offers the opportunity to make such discoveries in a coordinated and systematic
way.
If little is known about the biodiversity in the oceans, even less is known about the abundance of
organisms, their ecological functions, how food webs are structured, and how vast areas of the oceans
are interconnected through biological interactions. A reliable, well-organized, and accessible
inventory of existing and newly discovered marine species will promote scientific and public
understanding of marine ecosystems. The Census of Marine Life is an exciting program of
international research for assessing and explaining the diversity, distribution, and abundance of
marine organisms throughout the worlds oceans (Consortium for Oceanographic Research and
Education, 2002). Collaborative projects involving more than 60 institutions from 15 countries began the
Census of Marine Life in 2000 with funding from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation and the National
Oceanographic Partnership Program member agencies. The Ocean Biogeographic Information System,
the information component of the Census of Marine Life, will be a critical component of an integrated
ocean observing system. Currently managed as a federation of database sources, the Ocean
Biogeographic Information System is expected to develop into a globally distributed network of species-
based, geographically referenced databases that will be available to a variety of users, including
ecosystem managers, fisheries organizations, and coral-reef-monitoring programs.
Because even remote areas of the ocean contain detectable amounts of contaminants (Group of Experts
on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection, 2001), the extent to which humans
directly and indirectly affect marine ecosystem health and productivity can be observed, if not yet
quantified. Ultimately, a better understanding of marine systems and the effects of human activities
on them will enable wiser stewardship of the oceans vast resources. The marine biodiversity theme
area highlights the interdisciplinary nature of the proposed ocean exploration program, the proposal
and funding selection process, and the utility of such a program. A few particularly exciting areas for
exploration of marine biodiversity include microbial life within the ocean, extreme environments such
as hydrothermal vents, the subseafloor biosphere, coral reefs, seamounts, and continental shelves.

Lack of exploration compromises understanding of ocean ecosystems
Schectman, Wall Street Journal Risk & Compliance Journal, 13
(Joel, Risk & Compliance Journal Reporter, 7/19/13, Wall Street Journal Risk and Compliance Journal blog,
Government and Tech Companies Plan Exploration of Oceans,
http://blogs.wsj.com/cio/2013/07/19/government-and-tech-companies-plan-exploration-of-oceans/,

The complexity of ocean systems, with their interplay of tidal forces, animal species, and underwater
geography, has frustrated previous efforts at understanding the ecology below 75% of the worlds
surface.
The sciences involved in ocean exploration have been stove-piped, with researchers specializing in
the migration of whales or ocean currents and not working together towards an interconnected
understanding of the system, said Larry Mayer, a University of New Hampshire oceanographer, who is
participating in the planning session.
For example, scientists were unable to fully understand the effect of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon spill
on the Gulfs sea creatures, Mr. Mayer said. Were not yet at the point where we have this overall
view of the complete ecosystem model for a system as complex as Gulf of Mexico, said Mr. Mayer,
who sat on a National Academy of Sciences committee that advised government on the issue. What we
have are little models of subcomponents. But we dont have comprehensive models of how the
ecosystems interact particularly in the deep sea.
Advances in data tools, which allow scientists to layer maps with thousands of separate information
sources, now make that three-dimensional understanding possible, Mr. Mayer said. We are just now
at the point where where we can use these tools to look at the system in its entirety, Mr. Mayer said.

Expanding exploration key to understanding ocean ecosystems
Helvarg, Blue Frontier executive director, 14
(David, executive director of Blue Frontier; a marine conservation and policy group, 4/1/14, Mysteries
of the deep; No wonder Flight 370 can't be found: We know so little about the ocean, Lexis, accessed
6/25/14, BCG)

Jet aircraft are large, but not compared with the ocean. The weeks-long search for some physical sign
of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 is not something we should wonder at, considering the frontier nature
of our blue planet.
The 29% of our planet that is land is inhabited by more than 7 billion people, at least a few of whom
would have reported a crash or hijacked aircraft. By contrast, the ocean that covers 71% of the Earth's
surface and 97% of its living habitat rarely has more than a few million people on or about its surface.
These include commercial mariners, fishermen, cruise ship passengers, sailors aboard the world's
military fleets, offshore oil and gas workers, research scientists and the odd sea gypsy.
One reason we've not colonized the ocean, as science-fiction writers (and at least one senator, the late
Claiborne Pell, of Rhode Island) once imagined, is that the ocean is a far rougher and more difficult
wilderness than any encountered by terrestrial explorers, or even astronauts traveling in the consistent
vacuum of space, with its occasional meteorites and space junk to avoid.
The sea pummels us with an unbreathable and corrosive liquid medium; altered visual and acoustic
characteristics; changing temperatures, depths and pressures; upwellings; tides; currents; gyres;
obscuring marine layers; sudden storms and giant rouge waves; and life forms than can sting, poison or
bite.
Even accounting for more than 70 years of classified military hydrographic surveys, we've still mapped
less than 10% of the ocean with the resolution we've used to map all of the moon, Mars or even
several moons of Jupiter.
Obviously, our ability to search for a missing aircraft at sea has come a long way since Amelia Earhart
disappeared while trying to cross the Pacific in 1937. But the patched-together satellite data and
electronic-signals processing that has led Flight 370 searchers to an area 1,100 miles west of Perth,
Australia, is no more than a crisis-mode, jury-rigged effort at ocean observation. Consider this: If you're
a drug smuggler and you enter U.S. coastal waters in a speedboat at night, and then go dead in the
water during the day, with a blue tarp thrown over your vessel, odds are that you'll successfully deliver
your contraband.
Our investment in ocean exploration, monitoring and law enforcement efforts is at a 20-year low in the
United States and not much better elsewhere. Our chances of quickly finding the missing Malaysian
flight would have been improved if we had invested more money and effort on our planet's last great
commons, with observational tools such as in-situ labs and wired benthic observatories, remote and
autonomous underwater vehicles and gliders, forward-looking infrared cameras and multi-beam
shipboard, airborne (and space-deployed) scanning systems, and other smart but woefully underfunded
sea technologies.
The fact remains that while hundreds of people have gone into space, only three humans have
ventured to the lowest point on our planet seven miles down in the Mariana Trench, and the latest of
these -- filmmaker explorer engineer James Cameron -- had to self-fund his 2012 mission.
Meanwhile, when it comes to exploring the cosmos, NASA -- even in its diminished state -- outspends
NOAA's ocean exploration program roughly 1,000 to 1. Yet when we get to Mars, the first thing we
seek as proof of life is water. Meanwhile, we have a whole water planet that remains a challenge we've
once again discovered to be far greater than we thought.
Whatever the final resolution of the Flight 370 tragedy, that challenge is bound to become greater as
our food and coastal security, marine transportation systems, even our basic ecosystem processes
such as the oxygen generated by ocean plankton, are increasingly stressed through overfishing,
pollution, loss of coastal habitat and ocean impacts from climate change.
Investing in the exploration and understanding of our planet's largest habitat should be a given.
Perhaps that will be a lesson learned from our latest human disaster. Unfortunately, while the sea is still
vast, our ability to act wisely in our own interests is often limited.

Coordinated Policy Solvency

Coordinated ocean policy ensures optimal framework for preserving ocean
ecosystems
Sutley and Holdren, National Ocean Council co-chairs, 13
[Nancy H. Chair: Council on Environmental Quality, John P: Director, Office of Science and Technology
http://www.oceanchampions.org/pdfs/national_ocean_policy_implementation_plan.pdf, pages 15-16
accessed 6/26/14, CK]

Through National Ocean Policy actions, thousands of acres of wetlands and priority habitat will be
protected, restored, or enhanced. Our Nation's coral reefs will be improved by better coordinating
existing authorities and implementing projects to prevent or mitigate harmful impacts. Actions to
support partnerships and efforts to locate, monitor, control, and eradicate invasive species will
protect native aquatic populations and their habitats. Collaborative watershed restoration efforts are
important to the overall success of coastal and marine habitat conservation. Restoration efforts in the
Gulf Coast, Mississippi River Basin, and Great Lakes, and for Pacific Northwest salmon are excellent
examples of collaborative, voluntary upland watershed conservation and restoration.
Reduce coastal wetland loss. Federal agencies will work together and in cooperation with States and
tribes to identify the underlying causes of wetland loss in coastal watersheds, and opportunities to
more effectively protect and restore the important functions and values they provide. Agencies will
conduct pilot studies to identify the most common underlying factors responsible for coastal wetland
loss and the most successful tools for addressing it. These actions will complement ongoing State,
local, and tribal government projects seeking to protect and restore coastal wetland ecosystems such
as the Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council and the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task
Force.
Protect, conserve and restore coastal and ocean habitats. Agencies will coordinate to use and provide
scientifically sound, ecosystem-based approaches to achieving healthy coastal and ocean habitats. For
example, working through the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force, agencies will coordinate to address key threats
to coral reef ecosystems, including impacts from land-based sources of pollution, climate change, ocean
acidification, planned activities (authorized activities), and unplanned activities (such as vessel
groundings and spills).
Locate, control, prevent, and eradicate invasive species populations. Federal agencies will improve our
ability to prevent and reduce impacts from invasive species, focusing on early detection and response,
to protect ecologically, commercially, recreationally, and culturally, important marine species and
their habitats.
Improve and preserve our Nation's coastal and estuarine water quality to provide clean water for
healthier waterways, communities, and ecosystems. Through more effective use of voluntary
programs, partnerships, and pilot projects, agencies will work to reduce excessive nutrients,
sediments, and other pollutants. Agencies will also help protect, conserve, and maintain high-quality
coastal waters by identifying priority areas for water quality monitoring and assessment and
providing financial assistance to private landowners seeking to apply voluntary conservation
practices. Other actions will reduce the impacts of hypoxia and harmful algal blooms faced by many
coastal and inland States.

Coral Reef Impact

Coral reefs key to biodiversity and the economy

Coral reefs are among the most productive, diverse, and economically important ecosystems on the
planet. Although they cover only 0.2 percent of ocean area, they provide habitat for one-third of
marine fishes. The systems provide ecological servicesincluding shoreline protection and habitat
that support an estimated one million different species. Economically, healthy coral reefs are essential
to sustainable fisheries and income from tourism (e.g., Cesar, 2000). Tourism at coral reef sites
contributes about $1.6 billion annually to Floridas economy alone, and globally coral reefs are
especially critical to the economic well-being of developing nations, providing fisheries resources and
social and cultural benefits. The declining health of coral reef ecosystems (Figure 3.4) has been widely
reported for tropical oceans around the worldlikely the result of overfishing, eutrophication, and
pollution from land runoff; increased disease susceptibility; and harvesting of corals for international
trade (World Resources Institute, 1998; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2002a).
Global warming has been suggested as the largest long-term threat to coral reefs, as evidenced by the
bleaching of vast tracts of coral coinciding with ocean warming during El Nio events. Although much is
understood regionally about the declining health of coral reefs, it is clear that there is much to be
investigated and learned.

Ocean Collapse Impact

Ocean collapse threatens human survival
Sielen, International Environmental Policy Senior Fellow, 13
(Alan, November-December 2013, non-resident Senior Fellow for International Environmental Policy,
The Devolution of the Seas The Consequences of Oceanic Destruction,
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/140164/alan-b-sielen/the-devolution-of-the-seas, accessed
6/28/14, BCG)

Of all the threats looming over the planet today, one of the most alarming is the seemingly inexorable
descent of the worlds oceans into ecological perdition. Over the last several decades, human
activities have so altered the basic chemistry of the seas that they are now experiencing evolution in
reverse: a return to the barren primeval waters of hundreds of millions of years ago.
A visitor to the oceans at the dawn of time would have found an underwater world that was mostly
lifeless. Eventually, around 3.5 billion years ago, basic organisms began to emerge from the primordial
ooze. This microbial soup of algae and bacteria needed little oxygen to survive. Worms, jellyfish, and
toxic fireweed ruled the deep. In time, these simple organisms began to evolve into higher life forms,
resulting in the wondrously rich diversity of fish, corals, whales, and other sea life one associates with
the oceans today.
Yet that sea life is now in peril. Over the last 50 years -- a mere blink in geologic time -- humanity has
come perilously close to reversing the almost miraculous biological abundance of the deep. Pollution,
overfishing, the destruction of habitats, and climate change are emptying the oceans and enabling the
lowest forms of life to regain their dominance. The oceanographer Jeremy Jackson calls it the rise of
slime: the transformation of once complex oceanic ecosystems featuring intricate food webs with
large animals into simplistic systems dominated by microbes, jellyfish, and disease. In effect, humans
are eliminating the lions and tigers of the seas to make room for the cockroaches and rats.
The prospect of vanishing whales, polar bears, bluefin tuna, sea turtles, and wild coasts should be
worrying enough on its own. But the disruption of entire ecosystems threatens our very survival, since
it is the healthy functioning of these diverse systems that sustains life on earth. Destruction on this
level will cost humans dearly in terms of food, jobs, health, and quality of life. It also violates the
unspoken promise passed from one generation to the next of a better future.

Loss of ocean biodiversity leads to extinction
Black, Global Ocean Commission Communications Director, 11
*Richard, 6/20/11, Director of Comms with Global Ocean Commission, BBC News,Worlds oceans in
shocking decline, http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-13796479, accessed 6/28/14,
BCG)

In a new report, they warn that ocean life is "at high risk of entering a phase of extinction of marine
species unprecedented in human history".
They conclude that issues such as over-fishing, pollution and climate change are acting together in
ways that have not previously been recognised.
The impacts, they say, are already affecting humanity.
The panel was convened by the International Programme on the State of the Ocean (IPSO), and brought
together experts from different disciplines, including coral reef ecologists, toxicologists, and fisheries
scientists.
Its report will be formally released later this week.
"The findings are shocking," said Alex Rogers, IPSO's scientific director and professor of conservation
biology at Oxford University.
"As we considered the cumulative effect of what humankind does to the oceans, the implications
became far worse than we had individually realised.
"We've sat in one forum and spoken to each other about what we're seeing, and we've ended up with a
picture showing that almost right across the board we're seeing changes that are happening faster than
we'd thought, or in ways that we didn't expect to see for hundreds of years."
These "accelerated" changes include melting of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, sea level rise,
and release of methane trapped in the sea bed.
Fast changes
"The rate of change is vastly exceeding what we were expecting even a couple of years ago," said Ove
Hoegh-Guldberg, a coral specialist from the University of Queensland in Australia.
"So if you look at almost everything, whether it's fisheries in temperate zones or coral reefs or Arctic sea
ice, all of this is undergoing changes, but at a much faster rate than we had thought."
But more worrying than this, the team noted, are the ways in which different issues act synergistically
to increase threats to marine life.
Some pollutants, for example, stick to the surfaces of tiny plastic particles that are now found in the
ocean bed.
This increases the amounts of these pollutants that are consumed by bottom-feeding fish.
Plastic particles also assist the transport of algae from place to place, increasing the occurrence of toxic
algal blooms - which are also caused by the influx of nutrient-rich pollution from agricultural land.
In a wider sense, ocean acidification, warming, local pollution and overfishing are acting together to
increase the threat to coral reefs - so much so that three-quarters of the world's reefs are at risk of
severe decline.
Carbon deposits
Life on Earth has gone through five "mass extinction events" caused by events such as asteroid
impacts; and it is often said that humanity's combined impact is causing a sixth such event.
The IPSO report concludes that it is too early to say definitively.
But the trends are such that it is likely to happen, they say - and far faster than any of the previous five.
"What we're seeing at the moment is unprecedented in the fossil record - the environmental changes
are much more rapid," Professor Rogers told BBC News.
"We've still got most of the world's biodiversity, but the actual rate of extinction is much higher [than
in past events] - and what we face is certainly a globally significant extinction event."
The report also notes that previous mass extinction events have been associated with trends being
observed now - disturbances of the carbon cycle, and acidification and hypoxia (depletion of oxygen)
of seawater.
Levels of CO2 being absorbed by the oceans are already far greater than during the great extinction of
marine species 55 million years ago (during the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum), it concludes.

Ecosystem changes result in ocean warming, acidification, and deoxygenation three
independent extinction scenarios
Butler, co-author of Too Many People? Population, Immigration, and the
Environmental Crisis, 13
*Simon,11/14/2013, Climate and Capitalism, Oceans on the brink of ecological collapse,
http://climateandcapitalism.com/2013/10/14/oceans-brink-ecological-collapse/, accessed 7/1/2014 CK]

The ocean is by far the Earths largest carbon sink and has absorbed most of the excess carbon
pollution put into the atmosphere from burning fossil fuels. The State of the Ocean 2013 report
warned that this is making decisive changes to the ocean itself, causing a deadly trio of impacts
acidification, ocean warming and deoxygenation (a fall in ocean oxygen levels).
The report said: Most, if not all, of the Earths five past mass extinction events have involved at least
one of these three main symptoms of global carbon perturbations [or disruptions], all of which are
present in the ocean today.
Fossil records indicate five mass extinction events have taken place in the Earths history. The biggest of
these the end Permian mass extinction wiped out as much as 95% of marine life about 250 million
years ago. Another, far better known mass extinction event wiped out the dinosaurs about 66 million
years ago and is thought to have been caused by a huge meteor strike.
A further big species extinction took place 55 million years ago. Known as the Paleocene/Eocene
thermal maximum (PETM), it was a period of rapid global warming associated with a huge release of
greenhouse gases. Todays rate of carbon release, said the State of the Ocean 2013, is at least 10
times faster than that which preceded the *PETM+.*1+
Ocean acidification is a sign that the increase in CO2 is surpassing the oceans capacity to absorb it.
The more acid the ocean becomes, the bigger threat it poses to marine life especially sea creatures
that form their skeletons or shells from calcium carbonate such as crustaceans, molluscs, corals and
plankton.
The report predicts extremely serious consequences for ocean life if the release of CO2 does not fall,
including the extinction of some species and decline in biodiversity overall.
Acidification is taking place fastest at higher latitudes, but overall the report says geological records
indicate that the current acidification is unparalleled in at least the last 300 million years.
Ocean warming is the second element in the deadly trio. Average ocean temperatures have risen by
0.6C in the past 100 years. As the ocean gets warmer still, it will help trigger critical climate tipping
points that will warm the entire planet even faster, hurtling it far beyond the climate in which todays
life has evolved. Ocean warming will accelerate the death spiral of polar sea ice and risks the
increased venting of the greenhouse gas methane from the Arctic seabed, the report says.
Ongoing ocean warming will also wreak havoc on marine life. The report projects the loss of 60% of
present biodiversity of exploited marine life and invertebrates, including numerous local extinctions.
Each decade, fish are expected to migrate between 30 kilometres to 130 kilometres towards the poles,
and live 3.5 metres deeper underwater, leading to a 40% fall in fish catch potential in tropical regions.
The report says: All these changes will have massive economic and food security consequences, not
least for the fishing industry and those who depend on it.
The combined effects of acidification and ocean warming will also seal the fate of the worlds coral
reefs, leading to their terminal and rapid decline by 2050. Australias Great Barrier Reef and
Caribbean Sea reefs will likely shift from coral domination to algal domination. The report says the
global target to limit the average temperature rise to 2C, which was adopted at the Copenhagen UN
climate conference in 2009, is not sufficient for coral reefs to survive. Lower targets should be urgently
pursued.
Deoxygenation the third component of the deadly trio is related to ocean warming and to high
levels of nutrient run-off into the ocean from sewerage and agriculture. The report says overall ocean
oxygen levels, which have declined consistently for the past five decades, could fall by 1% to 7% by
2100. But this figure does not indicate the big rise in the number of low oxygen dead zones, which has
doubled every decade since the 1960s.
Whereas acidification most impacts upon smaller marine life, deoxygenation hits larger animals, such
as Marlin and Tuna, hardest.
The report cautions that the combined impact of this deadly trio will have cascading consequences for
marine biology, including altered food webs dynamics and the expansion of pathogens [causing
disease+. It also warns that it adds to other big problems affecting the ocean, such as chemical
pollution and overfishing (up to 70% of the worlds fish stock is overfished).

Survival relies on ocean biodiversity
Fautin, et al., University of Kansas Ecology & Evolutionary Biology professor, 10
(Daphne Fautin, Penelope Dalton, Lewis S. Incze, Jo-Ann C. Leong, Clarence Pautzke, Andrew Rosenberg,
Paul Sandifer, George Sedberry, John W. Tunnell Jr., Isabella Abbott10, Russell E. Brainard, Melissa
Brodeur, Lucius G. Eldredge, Michael Feldman, Fabio Moretzsohn, Peter S. Vroom, Michelle Wainstein,
Nicholas Wolff, 8/1/2010, PLoS ONE, An Overview of Marine Biodiversity in United States Waters,
http://proxy.foley.gonzaga.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h
&AN=56576449&site=ehost-live, accessed 6/27/14, BCG)

Meetings organized by the Census U.S. National Committee for members of academic, government,
and not-for-profit organizations have addressed topics concerned with how biodiversity can be
assessed. A major premise of Census activities in the U.S., that maintaining biodiversity is a worthy
goal, accepts the assertion [3] that the survival and well-being of humans depend on intact, fully
functioning ecosystems. Further, conservation of biodiversity for its own intrinsic value, above and
beyond consideration of human needs, should be a significant and recognized goal of global society
[4].
In the marine environment and elsewhere, a growing body of evidence relates the maintenance of
healthy, natural biodiversity to provision of a broad spectrum of ecosystem services, including those
that humans rely upon and value, such as food, medicines, recreation, climate modulation, and
protection from extreme weather [2,3]. However, at a global scale, 60% of ecosystem services are
degraded [3]. Along U.S. coasts, loss or impairment of biodiversity correlates with degraded ecosystem
services important to humans [5]. Specifically, there are impacts to tourism, loss of aesthetic and other
cultural attributes, lowered property values, and increased health risks to humans and animals from
harmful algal blooms and their toxins, infectious disease organisms, and chemical contaminants [6,7].
Efforts to develop national marine spatial planning as a component of national ocean policy will be an
important advance in the efforts to conserve marine biodiversity [8].

Biodiversity Impact

Loss of biodiversity risks extinction by disease
Platt, freelance environmental writer, 10
(John, 12/7/10, Freelance writer specializing in environmental issues, Scientific American, Humans are
more at risk from diseases as biodiversity disappears, http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/extinction-
countdown/2010/12/07/humans-are-more-at-risk-from-diseases-as-biodiversity-disappears/, accessed
7/1/10, BCG)

Well, according to new research published December 2 in Nature, the answer is yeshealthy
biodiversity is essential to human health. As species disappear, infectious diseases rise in humans and
throughout the animal kingdom, so extinctions directly affect our health and chances for survival as a
species. (Scientific American is part of Nature Publishing Group.)
"Biodiversity loss tends to increase pathogen transmission across a wide range of infectious disease
systems," the studys first author, Bard College ecologist Felicia Keesing, said in a prepared statement.
These pathogens can include viruses, bacteria and fungi. And humans are not the only ones at risk: all
manner of other animal and plant species could be affected.
The rise in diseases and other pathogens seems to occur when so-called "buffer" species disappear.
Co-author Richard Ostfeld of the Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies points to the growing number of
cases of Lyme disease in humans as an example of how this happens. Opossum populations in the U.S.
are down due to the fragmentation of their forest habitats. The marsupials make poor hosts for the
pathogen that causes Lyme disease; they can also better defend themselves from the black-legged ticks
that carry the affliction to humans than can white-footed mice, which, on the other hand, are thriving in
the altered habitatand along with them disease-carrying ticks. "The mice increase numbers of both
the black-legged tick vector and the pathogen that causes Lyme disease," Ostfeld said.

Ocean Acidification Impact

Ocean acidification collapses ecosystems, risking extinction
Senator Rockefeller, Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
Chair, 10
*John D., IV, 4/22/2010, American Geosciences Institute, Senate Commerce, Science and
Transportation Committee Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, and Coast Guard Subcommittee Hearing on
the Environmental and Economic Impacts of Ocean Acidification
http://www.agiweb.org/gap/legis111/wateroceans_hearings.html#apr22, 6/27/14, CK]

The Subcommittee Chairman Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Ranking Member Olympia Snowe (R-ME) felt
that ocean acidification was a real threatnot only to sea life, but to U.S. and global economies as
well. Snowe, who felt increased oceanic monitoring would be critical to assessing acidification
impacts, questioned the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administrations (NOAA) ability to
adequately implement and maintain monitoring programs.
Barbara Boxer (D-CA) shared that she and her staff conducted their own acidification experiment by
dropping chalk into drinking water and sparkling water. The chalk in the sparkling water started to
dissolve almost instantly! Boxer exclaimed. She explained, using the sparkling water as an analogue
for a more acidic ocean, acidic seawater increases stress on calcium carbonate bearing organisms.
She used this moment as a platform to encourage passage of a comprehensive climate change bill,
emphasizing that success needed to be tripartisan between Democrat, Republican and Independent
members. Frank Lautenburg (D-NJ), who sponsored the Federal Ocean Acidification Research And
Monitoring (FOARAM) Act of 2009 (S.173) passed as part of the 2009 Public Lands Omnibus, emphasized
a large portion of the U.S. economy depended on the ocean as a natural resource. His grandchildrens
safety motivated him to protect the oceans and current legislative efforts were a good start, but he
questioned if it was really enough.
Sigourney Weaver is promoting awareness about ocean acidification a topic she was unaware of only a
few year ago. Although not an expert, she shared she was testifying as a concerned American and
earthling, referencing her extensive science-fiction film career. Nevertheless, she explained her love for
the ocean stemmed from her fathers insistence on living near open bodies of water. She feared for the
ocean, which despite its vastness was finite and vulnerable. She implored the senators to save it from
our own lack of vision.
Tom Ingram, a representative of the diving industry, discussed how the aesthetic of the oceans coral
reefs drove his industry. Acidification, he argued, not only threatened coral reef health but also an
estimated 340,000 U.S. jobs in the diving industry. Donny Waters, a commercial fisherman and past
president of the Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish Shareholders Alliance, gave an impassioned testimony that
even garnered applause. He described acidification as a ghost lurking in the shadows and his
anecdotes of the negative impacts were described through tears of frustration and concern.
Dr. James Barry of the Monterrey Bay Aquarium and Research Institution, in an effort to assuage the
bleak outlook, cautioned that how these frightening scientific predictions actually affect ecosystems
can vary greatly and that even science can be incorrect. He did argue that research clearly
demonstrates oceanic systems are under increasing stress from decreasing pH. He presented research
showing this could negatively impact organism growth and reproduction of calcium carbonate bearing
organisms, and ultimately energy flow through food webs. He correlated the high-stress times with
geologically punctuated mass extinctions.

Ocean Impact Magnifier

Ocean crisis outweighs on magnitude oceans are intrinsic to planetary survival
Mitchell, Insight Magazine senior writer, 14
*Julie, 2014, Insight Magazine, Ocean under threat, http://www.lr.org/en/news/articles/global-ocean-
threat.aspx accessed 6/27/2014 CK]

The ocean crisis could make the financial crisis look like a peanut, and the time to act is now before
the crisis becomes acute. Underlining the importance of the sea to the planets survival, he said: If
you think of the earth as a clock, then the ocean is the mainspring that keeps it ticking over.
The high seas account for two-thirds of the Earths 361 million square kilometres of ocean the
remaining third is controlled and managed by individual governments and extends up to 200 nautical
miles from the shore yet, according to the GOCs Oceans Under Threat report: there is little
monitoring and little policing for this vast area of the planet. Most fundamentally, the high seas sit
under a legal system that has not evolved in response to modern practices, technologies or scientific
understanding.
Currently the ocean provides food for more than three billion people and the oxygen it produces
accounts for every second breath we take. But with the population set to grow from seven to nine
billion in the next few decades, and as scientists unlock more of its secrets, the oceans resources will
be in demand like never before.
The sea will become a major source of minerals and genetic materials. Other uses include electricity
generation and geo-engineering to increase absorption of carbon dioxide.

[NOTE *he reference (1
st
paragraph) is Paul Martin Global Ocean Commissioner and former Canadian
Prime Minister Paul Martin]

Ocean Policy
Plan Solves Effective Ocean Policy

Coordinated and prioritized ocean exploration strategy bolsters policymaking
capacity, ensure effective ocean decision-making
6/26/14, CK]

In addition, a growing population of ocean users is increasingly competing for ocean space both for
established uses such as fishing, shipping, military activities, and conventional energy development,
and for emerging uses such as renewable energy development and aquaculture. This competition
creates conflicts between users and presents new challenges for decision-makers. Inefficient
government decision-making can compound the problem, hampering economic opportunities and
impeding the entrepreneurial, problem-solving efforts of commercial and conservation interests alike.
At the same time, the Nation is encountering new opportunities to improve our understanding of the
ocean, how it works, and how we can expand our use of the ocean while maintaining its health and
resilience. Advances in research, science, and technology are necessary to help us better understand
how marine environments function, and how they influence and are influenced by human activities.
Application of this knowledge will inform locally-driven management practices and will improve and
maintain the health of the ocean, support employment and new economic opportunities, enhance the
Nation's safety and security, and help preserve the ocean as a valuable resource.
Recognizing these challenges and opportunities, and building on the recommendations of two bipartisan
commissions, President Obama established the National Policy for the Stewardship of the Ocean, Our
Coasts, and the Great Lakes by Executive Order 13547 on July 19, 2010.The National Ocean Policy
(Policy) highlights our responsibility to improve and maintain the health of the ocean, coasts, and
Great Lakes and recognizes the importance of working with States, tribes,2 and other partners to
tackle key challenges through common sense, science-based solutions. The Policy aims to ensure that
our valuable ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes resources will continue to provide a wealth of benefits
that support the Nation's well-being, safety, and prosperity.
Fundamentally, the National Ocean Policy coordinates, through establishment of the National Ocean
Council, the ocean-related activities of Federal agencies to achieve greater efficiency and
effectiveness, with a focus on reduced bureaucracy, improved coordination and integration, and fiscal
responsibility. The Policy does not create new regulations, supersede current regulations, or modify
any agency's established mission, jurisdiction, or authority. Rather, it helps coordinate the
implementation of existing regulations and authorities by all Federal agencies in the interest of more
efficient decision-making. The Policy does not redirect congressionally-appropriated funds, or direct
agencies to divert funds from existing programs. Instead, it improves interagency collaboration and
prioritization to help focus limited resources and use taxpayer dollars more efficiently.

Exploration Solves Effective Ocean Policy

Exploration creates knowledge base for effective ocean policymaking
AND STREAMLINE OUR OCEAN BUREAUCRACY? http://vjel.vermontlaw.edu/publications/national-
ocean-policy-can-reduce-marine-pollution-streamline-ocean-bureaucracy/, Issue 3, Volume: 15, Pages
653-654, accessed 6/26/14, CK]

Arguably one of the most important areas of the NOP is in the promotion and support for research
and education on marine issues. The JOC gave this category a C because although some progress
had been made, there had been funding and program cuts, as well as delayed implementation of
critical tools, weakened ocean science, research, and education. 170 One of the greatest
improvements in this area was the installation of the data portal, ocean.data.gov, which serves as a
clearinghouse for access to non-confidential federal ocean data and planning tools. 171 There have also
been strong regional efforts to coordinate on regional ocean and coastal research, observing, mapping,
and restoration priorities. 172
However, more is needed in terms of funding and support for further education. Investments in
research, science, and education on ocean and coastal issues are crucial, particularly in the context of
marine pollution, because it will produce a more informed citizenry; create better stewards of ocean,
coastal, and Great Lakes resources; and increase awareness of business opportunities related to these
resources. 173 With a greater knowledge base, people can participate in activities that address the
issues facing our oceans and coasts. Furthermore, an educational system that incorporates ocean and
coastal science is crucial to ensuring that the next generation of ocean scientists and engineers are
sufficiently trained to continue to lead an innovation-based global economy.174 Country-wide
education would also bring more awareness to the pervasive interconnectivity of land and marine
pollution, and hopefully illuminate the need for efforts across the nation, rather than just on the
coasts.

Ocean Policy Impact

Effective ocean policymaking key to sustainable ocean and the economy
6/26/14, CK]

This Plan responds to such challenges by focusing and coordinating action among Federal agencies
under their existing authorizations and budgets, and by providing the tools we need to ensure a
robust, sustainable ocean economy. It also promotes better science and information to support
economic growth, more efficient permitting and decision-making, and healthier and more resilient
marine eco-systems that will continue to support jobs, local economies, and a skilled and diverse
ocean workforce.
A healthy marine environment provides significant economic benefits. For example, millions of
Americans experience the ocean, coasts, and Great Lakes each year through recreational fishing and
boating, which is a major contributor to the national economy. In 2010, marine tourism and recreation
accounted for 70 percent of the jobs produced by the total ocean economy-1.9 million American jobs
in total. As such, maintaining healthy, productive waters and access to them for recreation and other
activities is critically important to sustaining the benefits that so many Americans enjoy. The
recreational fishing and boating communities directly contribute to and help fund (through excise taxes
and license sales) many marine conservation, State wildlife and fishery programs, and other initiatives
that provide further benefits through vehicles such as the Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Trust Fund.
These are just some examples of the value provided by healthy marine waters.
Coordination Key to Engagement

Effective coordination key to public engagement
12-13, accessed 6/29/14, GNL]

The way an ocean exploration program is organizedboth nationally and internationallycan make a
difference in the effectiveness of public outreach and education efforts. By fostering collaborations
among scientists and educators, an exploration program can ensure that educators are an integral
part of the planning and conduct of the exploration activity, whether at sea or on land. To be successful
educators must learn the science necessary to effectively use the curricula, and scientists must
understand teachers needs. Those collaborations cannot be an afterthought; they must be fully
integrated throughout the process of ocean exploration. Informing government officials about
program plans and accomplishments is critical to any large, federally funded program, and it will be
important for all countries involved. This will require additional activities beyond those designed to
reach the general public.
Recommendation: Strong education and outreach programs with global applications should be
incorporated into any exploration program to bring new discoveries to the public, enfranchise the
global community in ocean exploration, and develop and foster collaborations among scientists and
educators in ocean exploration.
Ocean exploration provides rich content that easily captures the imagination of people of all ages. Any
ocean exploration effort should seek to:
bring new discoveries to the public in ways that infuse exploration into their daily lives and capture the
inherent human interest in the ocean;
enfranchise the global community in ocean exploration; and
develop and foster collaborations among scientists and educators in ocean exploration.
Strong education and outreach programs with global applications should be incorporated into the
exploration program. Capacity building not only to multiply the programs usefulness, but also to
develop and conduct international ocean explorationmust be integral to national and international
ocean exploration programs.
Successful cooperation between educators and scientists relies on educators learning the science
necessary to effectively use the curricula, and on scientists understanding teachers needs. Educator-
scientist partnerships could be accomplished through professional organizations (examples in the United
States include the National Science Teachers Association, the National Marine Educators Association,
and the American Geophysical Union) or through other model programs, such as the Centers for Ocean
Science Education Excellence created through NSF, and the Bridge program (Virginia Institute of Marine
Science, 2003) of NOPP. Professional development opportunities that immerse teachers in the world of
scientific investigation can support the development of inquiry-based, standards-based educational
materials and products. Educators and students, where appropriate, and science writers, artists,
journalists, and others could participate in expeditions or shore-based activities, and postproject lesson
plans could be developed by scientists and educators from the data collected.
Finding: In a large scale, international ocean exploration program, capacity building can serve to enlist
additional countries in the efforts, increase the resources (e.g., trained personnel) available for future
work, and aid partner nations in good stewardship of our shared oceans.
Recommendation: National exploration programs should strengthen participation in international
exploration through exchange programs for scientists and educators from different countries and
through training programs for educators who are preparing to set up exploration- based programs in
their own countries. All materials and resources developed or collected through the ocean exploration
program should be archived to document the history of collaborations among scientists and educators
involved in ocean exploration.
STEM

STEM Uniqueness

Number of STEM workers in the US are low
Rosen, Change the Equation Chief Executive Officer, 13
(Linda, 9/11/13, The Huffington Post, The Truth Hurts: The STEM Crisis is Not a Myth,
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/linda-rosen/the-truth-hurts-the-stem-_b_3900575.html, accessed
6/28/14, BCG)

Yet Charette does a fair bit of cherry picking himself while missing the big picture. He argues from
anecdotes and a handful of studies that support his point but leaves aside the mountain of data that
demonstrate a shortage. More important, he unwittingly points to one of the biggest causes of this
shortage: Demand for STEM skills has intensified across the entire economy.
Not just crying wolf
Charette limits his attention to the demand for people to fill jobs in traditional STEM fields like
technology or healthcare. But even in those fields, demand is strong and growing.
Rising demand for STEM workers is in fact nothing new. A sidebar to Charette's article quotes 80 years'
worth of warnings that a looming STEM crisis will hobble U.S. economic growth. The clear implication of
the sidebar is that the education and business leaders who have been making these warnings have been
crying wolf since before the Second World War. But were their fears of a STEM shortage really much ado
about nothing?
Hardly. The National Science Foundation (NSF) reports that S&E workforce grew from some 182,000 to
about 5.4 million people between 1950 and 2009, almost 15 times faster than the U.S. population and
nearly four times faster than the total U.S. workforce. Surely all those worried education and business
leaders were on to something. They foresaw a steep rise in demand for STEM talent as the U.S.
economy made the transition from an industrial economy to an economy focused more squarely on
technological innovation.
We can count ourselves lucky that the GI Bill, the national response to Sputnik, the race to put someone
on the moon, and a host of other seminal events helped fuel the growth of the STEM workforce to meet
this demand. Economists have argued that the technology those STEM workers helped create has
accounted for nearly half of the nation's economic growth in the second half of the twentieth century.
Now is no time to rest on our laurels. While the rate of growth in STEM jobs may have slowed through
our two 21st-century recessions, it remains robust. NSF puts it at 20 percent between 2000 and 2010,
a period during which the overall workforce experienced little growth.
And that robust growth will probably continue. Georgetown's Center on Education and the Workforce
predicts that the total number of STEM jobs will grow 26 percent between 2010 and 2020. The
Georgetown Center also projects that professional and technical jobs in healthcare, which it doesn't
include in its STEM numbers, will grow by 31 percent, far faster than the workforce as a whole.
(Charette criticizes a previous projection Georgetown released in 2011 for not foreseeing the depth and
duration of the recession, but he neglects to mention this more recent projection, which appeared in
June of this year.)
It's nice to be in demand
Even in recent years of slower growth, it has been good to be a STEM worker. Yes, as Charette notes,
some STEM employees have been laid off or unable to find jobs, which is an important reminder that
nothing in life is a sure bet. But such anecdotes don't stack up against the bulk of the data, which tell a
dramatically different story:
A Change the Equation study found that, even in the sluggish years between 2009 and 2012, there
were nearly two STEM-focused job postings for every unemployed STEM professional.
During those same years, unemployment in STEM stood at just over 4 percent, well less than the 9.3
percent unemployment rates for non-STEM workers.
People in STEM jobs benefit from being in such high demand. Study after study confirms that STEM
professionals get paid more than non-STEM professionals -- often much more -- even when you control
for their education and other factors. Contrary to Charette's claim that STEM wages have stagnated,
reports from Georgetown, the Commerce Department, and the Information Technology Innovation
Foundation show that they have risen faster than non-STEM wages, even in recent years. That is a sign
that employers are feeling the pinch.

Exploration Key to Tech

Ocean exploration promotes tech development

A global ocean exploration program should promote and enhance the development of new
oceanographic technology. Major oceanographic programs are frequently users or enhancers of
existing technology, and in many instances they have contributed to the development of important
advances in technology (Table 6.3). ADCPs, Lagrangian drifters and floats, the autonomous Lagrangian
circulation explorer, and improved meteorological packages were developed in conjunction with WOCE
and the Tropical Ocean and Global Atmosphere program. The Coastal Ocean Processes program
developed in situ plankton pumps, inner-shelf mooring techniques, and instruments to measure gas
flux. A global ocean exploration program will no doubt stimulate new technologies, and resources
should be available for the development of new tools to support selected exploration voyages or
investigations.
Finding: An ocean exploration program will require technology and facilities selected to suit the needs
of specific program plans. Access to standard and new technology, including commercially available
equipment and technology that is not used for and by research institutions, is necessary for an ocean
exploration program to succeed.

Coordination Solves STEM

Coordinated strategy solves STEM builds workforce capacity
6/26/14, CK]

A diverse workforce with interdisciplinary skills and training is needed to maintain the Nation's place
as a world leader in ocean science and to ensure informed management and use of ocean, coastal, and
Great Lakes resources. Agencies will coordinate to build the science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics (STEM) and managerial workforce capacity needed to ensure that management of and
research on ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems are of the highest quality possible.
Develop human capacity and the skilled workforce necessary to conduct ocean research and manage
ocean resources. Agencies will coordinate to ensure that educational programs include diverse
student groups and that a highly competent workforce is developed. Agency actions will result in
more students, particularly from underrepresented groups at the undergraduate and graduate level,
pursuing academic fields related to ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes science and management. This will
support the Nation's leadership in ocean research and development and the application of best
management practices. For example, agencies will use existing education and training resources to
provide scholarship, fellowship, and internship opportunities that leverage existing Federal investments
in ocean research, marine laboratories, and natural sciences to provide opportunities for education and
training. Agencies will also contribute to periodic ocean-focused academic competitions for middle
and high school students that have a positive impact on ocean-reIated career paths.

Exploration Solves STEM

Ocean exploration sparks interest in STEM fields
Beattie, Shedd Aquarium President and Schubel, Aquarium of the Pacific President, 13
*Ted A., Jerry R., 2013, Aquarium of the Pacific, Aquatic Forum, On the Importance of a National
Program of Ocean Exploration to Education,
http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/oceanexploration2020/oe2020_report.pdf, page 32 accessed 6/29/14
CK]

In the current competitive global economy, the United States faces a distinct disadvantage. Only 16
percent of American high school seniors are proficient in mathematics and interested in STEM careers.
And among those who do pursue college degrees in STEM fields, only half choose to work in a STEM-
related career.
The benefits of STEM education are clear. By 2018, the U.S. anticipates more than 1.2 million job
openings in STEM-related occupations, including fields as diverse as science, medicine, software
development, and engineering. STEM workers, on average, earn 26 percent more than their non-STEM
counterparts, and experience lower unemployment rates than those in other fields. In addition,
healthy STEM industries are critical to maintaining a quality of life in the United States.
A national program of ocean and Great Lakes exploration provides myriad ways to capture public
imagination and curiosity to support sustained involvement and more intense exposure not only to
STEM topics, but also the humanities and arts. New less expensive tools, such as small ROVs, remote
sensing stations, and underwater cameras, enable everyone to participate in ocean and freshwater
exploration as citizen scientists. These types of public engagements around exploration, such as
through the NOAA kiosks stationed in Coastal Ecosystem Learning Centers, provide a glimpse into the
true nature of science: not merely as a bundle of textbook facts, but a dynamic enterprise of
investigation that is constantly changing as our understanding evolves.
The effectiveness of STEM-focused programs are evident; studies have shown not only that young
people enjoy inquiry-based STEM activities in and out of school settings, but also that sustained
involvement and more intense exposure to STEM topics increase youth interest and confidence in
their scientific abilities. By engaging the public with ocean and Great Lakes observation, we provide
people of all ages with opportunities to explore their natural aquatic environments, and to fall in love
with the magic and mystery of scientific exploration.

Increasing exploration bolsters STEM by inspiring new generation
*Allie, 9/25/13, US News and World Report, Scientists Release First Plan for National Ocean

Expanding the nation's ocean exploration program could lead to more jobs, he adds, and could also
serve as an opportunity to engage children and adults in careers in science, technology, engineering
and mathematics, or STEM.
"I think what we need to do as a nation is make STEM fields be seen by young people as exciting
career trajectories," Schubel says. "We need to reestablish the excitement of science and engineering,
and I think ocean exploration gives us a way to do that."
Schubel says science centers, museums and aquariums can serve as training grounds to give
children and adults the opportunity to learn more about the ocean and what opportunities
exist in STEM fields.
"One thing that we can contribute more than anything else is to let kids and families come to
our institutions and play, explore, make mistakes, and ask silly questions without being
burdened down by the kinds of standards that our formal K-12 and K-14 schools have to live up
to," Schubel says.
[Note Schubel = Jerry Schubel, president and CEO of the Aquarium of the Pacific]

Exploration Solves Inspiration

Ocean exploration sparks STEM interest
downloaded from: http://www.nap.edu/catalog/10630.html,page 19, Accessed 6/30/14 CK]
Ocean exploration provides rich images that capture the imagination of people of all ages (Figure 8).
Interdisciplinary voyages of discovery present natural examples of science that are both engaging and
relevant to our lives. It is only through collaborations between explorers and educators that the full
educational potential of ocean exploration can be realized. These collaborations cannot be an after-
thought, but must be fully integrated throughout the entire process of ocean exploration.

Mars example proves motivation is spurred by exploration- absent exploration society
implodes
Barker, Masters Degrees in Physics, Psychology and Mathematics, 4
*Donald, 12/13/2004, The Space Review, Mars: the only goal for humanity,
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/285/1, accessed 6/29/14 CK]
Lets focus on one of the most prominent and endearing reasons for choosing Mars as the primary
destination of our human space flight goals. That is, the inspiration of future generations. For years,
our public representatives and those pursuing office continuously tout the need to bolster enrollment
(and thereby interest) in engineering, math, and science, and therefore support any programpublic
or privatethat seems to promote education in these fields. The overarching cure to the problem has
been to throw money at it or establish policies that try to entice students and teachers alike. These
have been Band-Aid cures at best. Real education can only occur in light of motivation, and that means
motivating students as well as the teachers and even policymakers. A person has to want to learn by
seeing a personal benefit in their future or, to a lesser degree, some altruistic sense of curiosity must be
instilled. Once the problem of motivation has been addressed, then free market economics will be
poised to support the expanding needs of the educational system. When students are motivated to
learn, then a means of supplementing the cost either has been or will be found. Again, this author
points out that there is only one modern, human-directed goal that has the intrinsic magnitude to
provide the long-term impetus and inspiration for engendering this base level of human motivation.
A historical analogy can further lend rational to this treatise in that the demise of advanced societies
and cultures can be compared through the examples of the Roman Empire and the Chinese Ming
Dynasty, where expansion and exploration over many years allowed the imaginations, perceptions,
and knowledge of the inhabitants to vastly expand, thereby further bolstering their societies intrinsic
strength and standard of living. The downfall, in this authors opinion, began just after these societies
breached a combined peak in their technological, economic, territorial, and mental expansion: a point
of cultural complacency that an organization or society reaches when it has no further intrinsic want
or external force driving the need to fulfill the basic human motivation to explore. The United States
now seems to be rapidly following suit, and has displaced, if not lost, its pioneering and frontiersman
ideology and mentality. Those base mindsets are the ones that helped to make this country the great
nation it is today. As a nation and species, we need to assess our current path and decide whether or
not we see the need to physically and mentally expand the frontiers of humanity. The alternative is to
just turn inward, to be crushed by the ancient egotistical, cultural, and political forces that engender
fear and preempt exploration and expansion.

AT Agency CPs

AT Current Agency CP

Prioritization key current agencies incapable of coherent national program

Individual programs of ocean explorationwhether managed by NOAA, an academic institution, or a
not-for-profit organizationfocus on priorities that fit their own organizational goals. While some
organizational priorities may be national in scope, in aggregate, they fall short of defining a coherent
national program. A national program of ocean exploration must include a diversity of voices in
setting priorities, a diversity of approaches to exploration, a wide array of disciplines, and
involvement of many different stakeholders. The results of such a national program of ocean
exploration must be widely and readily available to all. Identifying the framework for this program was
a primary goal of Ocean Exploration 2020: A National Forum, held July 19-21, 2013, at the Aquarium of
the Pacific in Long Beach, California.
We recognized at the outset that the success of the first National Forum on Ocean Exploration would
determine whether there would be a second. Acting on advice and assistance from the Ocean
Exploration Advisory Working Group (OEAWG), we designed Ocean Exploration 2020 to be of
manageable sizeno more than 120 participantsand to focus on the United States. We wanted
results and recommendations that could lead to immediate action and help build a diverse community
of ocean explorers and a demand for a second National Forum of Ocean Exploration. This section
describes our strategy for achieving these results.

New agency key to effective framework for exploration
Academies, http://explore.noaa.gov/sites/OER/Documents/national-research-council-voyage.pdf, pg. 7-

There has been continued support for and success from oceanographic research in the United States,
and a large-scale international exploration program could rapidly accelerate our acquisition of
knowledge of the worlds oceans. The current ocean-research-funding framework does not favor such
exploratory proposals. Additional funding for exploration without a new framework for management
and investment is unlikely to result in establishment of a successful exploration program. A new
program, however, could provide the resources and establish the selection processes needed to
develop ocean exploration theme areas and pursue new research in biodiversity, processes, and
resources within the worlds oceans. The current effort of the Office of Ocean Exploration at NOAA
should not be expected to fill this role.
After weighing the issues involved in oversight and funding, perhaps the most appropriate placement
for an ocean exploration program is under the auspices of the interagency NOPP, provided that the
problems with routing funds to NOPP-sponsored projects is solved. This solution has the best chance of
leading to major involvement by NOAA, NSF, and other appropriate organizations such as the Office of
Naval Research. The committee is not prepared to support an ocean exploration program within
NOAA unless major shortcomings of NOAA as a lead agency can be effectively and demonstrably
overcome. A majority of the committee members felt that the structural problems limiting the
effectiveness of NOAAs current ocean exploration program are insurmountable. A minority of the
committee members felt that the problems could be corrected. If there is no change to the status quo
for NOPP or NOAA, the committee recommends that NSF be encouraged to take on an ocean
exploration program. Although a program within NSF would face the same difficulties of the existing
NOAA program in attracting other federal (and nonfederal) partners, NSF has proven successful at
managing international research programs as well as a highly-regarded ocean exploration program that
remained true to its founding vision.
Finding: After exhaustive deliberation, the committee found that an ocean exploration program could
be sponsored through NOPP, or through one of the two major supporters of civilian ocean research in
the nation: NOAA or NSF.
Recommendation: NOPP is the most appropriate placement for an ocean exploration program, provided
the program is revised to accept direct appropriations of federal funds. If those funding issues are not
resolved, NOAA (with consideration to the comments above) or NSF would be appropriate alternatives.

New Approach Solvency

New approaches are key to future exploration this includes technology and thinkers
[Operating arm of the National Academy of Sciences, Oceanography in 2025: Proceedings of a
Workshop, http://dels.nas.edu/resources/static-assets/osb/miscellaneous/Biennial-Report-2009-
2010.pdf, pp. 29, accessed 6/30/14, BCG)

Advancing understanding of the ocean requires new approaches to exploration of the marine
environment; these approaches often entail high risk research and technological and conceptual
advances in allied and disparate disciplines. The future of oceanography will depend on the
contributions of creative thinkers who are well positioned to capitalize on new insights and forge
ahead into new, and often unforeseen, areas. Improved access to the coastal, littoral, and deep water
environments will depend on advances in infrastructure and technology, from advanced sensors to
satellites and unmanned vehicles. The development of innovative tools will facilitate novel experiments
and permit the study of processes across a wide range of spatial and temporal scales.
On January 8 and 9, 2009, the Ocean Studies Board hosted the Oceanography in 2025 workshop. This
workshop was designed to highlight challenges in understanding basic ocean processes and provide
opportunities for participants to brainstorm on new approaches for oceanographic research.
Scientists, engineers, and technologists were brought together to explore future directions in
oceanography, with an emphasis on physical processes. The focus centered on research and technology
needs, trends, and barriers that may impact the field of oceanography over the next 16 years, and
highlighted specific areas of interest: submesoscale processes, air-sea interactions, basic and applied
research, instrumentation and vehicles, ocean infrastructure, and education. To guide the white papers
and drive discussions, four questions were posed to participants: what research questions could be
answered, what will remain unanswered, what new technologies could be developed, and how will
research be conducted? This activity was funded by the Office of Naval Research.
Single Agency Key Coordination

Single agency coordination and clearinghouse role key to coordinating effective
exploration

The committee struggled with the difficulty of simultaneously satisfying goals 4 and 7 above. Consistent,
adequate funding for a large-scale program requires a strong advocate and leader to guide the
initiative through the federal budget process. This is a potential argument for housing exploration
within a single agency, but only if the agency considers the program a high priority. If the agency does
not have a vested interest in the success of the program, other efforts will be promoted instead,
almost surely resulting in the programs demise. Placing an exploration program within a single agency,
however, can dampen the interagency cooperation that is especially important in ocean research, which
unlike space research, is scattered among a number of agencies including NSF, Navy, and NOAA. In
recognition of the fact that many federal ocean science agencies bring capabilities and expertise to
the table, the U.S. Congress created the National Ocean Partnership Program (NOPP) (Box 5.1).

Single Agency Key Pollution

One single agency is key to solve marine pollution agency will mitigate corporate
pollution

The National Ocean Policy is still in its infancyindeed, the Final Implementation Plan was released in
April of 2013. The assessments conducted and the recommendations proposed thus far depend upon
coordination between all facets of government and across all regions of the United States. In the context
of marine pollution, the idea of coordination and collaboration is particularly important given the
transboundary and inter-connective nature of pollution. However, if after a few more years in motion,
the NOPs attempts to unitize and coordinate all the agencies and regional bodies fails or is moving
too slowly, the NOC may consider creating a break-off group whose priority is to coordinate solely
marine pollution. Due to the broad and expansive nature of the NOP, and because its goals are so
enormous and far-reaching, a single body that works to coordinate marine pollution among the
several states could be effective. This body would have experts in the land-use and marine
environment science and the ability to identify the greatest contributors to marine pollution. This
body could then identify the agencies, stakeholders, and industries that are linked to the pollution, i.e.
either contribute to the pollution or are involved in some facet of regulating the pollution. The marine
pollution body could have a stake in the Joint Initiatives proposed integrated ocean and coastal
budget, in order to allocate money for research in the sources and impacts of marine pollution. Such a
solution would help to coordinate regional and local policies on a more targeted scale, making the
goals more manageable and more specific than the broad and perhaps over-encompassing NOP.

AT National Ocean Council CP

Absent action from other actor the National Ocean Council cannot solve agenda
AND STREAMLINE OUR OCEAN BUREAUCRACY? Issue 3, Volume:15, Pages 651-652 CK]

Garnering robust national support and leadership is critical for the improvement of marine pollution
given the interconnectivity between landlocked regions, coastal regions, and the ocean. Unfortunately,
the JOC gave this category a C, noting that although the NOP laid good groundwork, it lacked
communication, stakeholder engagement, and tangible results. 162 Although the NOC successfully
released strategic action plans and the draft Implementation Plan, and organized the National Coastal
and Marine Spatial Planning Workshop in June 2011, the Councils work is far from complete.163
Comments submitted during various stages of NOP implementation reflect the disconnect between
stakeholders, notably industry stakeholders, and the NOC. For example, some raised concerns about
the effect of adopting a precautionary approach as suggested in one of the NOPs guiding
stewardship principles. The language of the relevant principle read: Decisions affecting the ocean, our
coasts, and the Great Lakes should be informed by and consistent with the best available science.
Decision-making will also be guided by a precautionary approach as reflected in the Rio Declaration of
1992, which states in pertinent part, *w+here there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack
of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to
prevent environmental degradation. 164
Many feared that this precautionary approach might mandate action or prohibit activities,
conceivably to the detriment of certain industries. However, the NOP Task Force clarified the
misconception by stating in part, precaution is a tool or approach . . . it is clear that the precautionary
approach does not mandate action or prohibit activities.165 In order to garner support from all
stakeholders, particularly in the current political environment, it is essential that the NOC regularly
involve all stakeholders during the actual implementation and future development of the NOPs
objectives and actions.

AT Non-USFG Counterplans

Federal Government Key to Tech

Experts agree federal involvement is key to develop the tech

By 2020, private sector investments in exploration technology development, specifically for the
dedicated national program of exploration, exceed the federal investment, but federal partners play a
key role in testing and refining new technologies.
Forum participants agreed that a top priority for a national ocean exploration program of distinction is
the development of mechanisms to fund emerging and creatively disruptive technologies to enhance
and expand exploration capabilities. In addition to significant federal government investment in
ocean exploration technology over timewhether by the U.S. Navy, NASA, NOAA, or other civilian
agencies involved in ocean explorationmany felt strongly that to shorten the time from
development to unrestricted adoption, more of the required investment would come from the private
sector.
These emerging technologies will likely include the next generations of ships; remotely operated
vehicles; autonomous underwater vehicles; telepresence capabilities; and new sensors. Most
participants felt that continuing to develop human occupied vehicles should be a much lower priority
for a national program than focusing on autonomous vehicles, sensors, observatories, and
communications systems.
Participants also felt that federal partners in the national program of exploration should play a key role
in testing and refining these technologies as well as working to adapt existing and proven
technologies for exploration.
Overall, some of the most important technologies to cultivate are those that collect physical and
chemical oceanographic data, biological data, and seafloor mapping data.

Federal Government Key to Partnerships

Federal role key to predictable commitment necessary to leverage partnerships

In 2020, there is an extensive and dynamic network of partnerships that link public agencies, private
sector organizations, and academic institutions. Each individual and each institution brings experience,
expertise, and creativity to the table. Partnerships that bring together individuals and institutions that
span multiple interfaces among different sectors enhance the potential for significant new advances
in discovery, understanding, wisdom, and action. In a time of shrinking federal resources, if there is
to be an effective national program of exploration, it will be accomplished through partnerships.
There was a strong consensusnear unanimitythat in 2020 and beyond, most ocean exploration
expeditions and programs will be partnershipspublic and private, national and international. NOAA
has been assigned a leadership role in developing and sustaining a national program of ocean
exploration under the Ocean Exploration Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-11). The act mandated that NOAA
undertake this responsibility in collaboration with other federal agencies.
Ocean Exploration 2020 invitees felt that federal and academic programs should be more assertive in
seeking partnerships with ocean industries. It was, however, acknowledged that the necessity of
sharing data might pose a challenge for some industry partners as well as federal agencies with
restricted missions, like the Navys Office of Naval Research.
There was a strong feeling that the community of ocean explorers needs to be more inclusive
and more nimble, two sometimes conflicting qualities. Nimbleness will require more non-
governmental sources of support and a small, dedicated, dynamic decision-making group that
represents the interests of the ocean exploration community and that commands their trust.
A coherent, comprehensive national program of ocean exploration requires sustained core support at
some predictable level from the federal government and demonstrated coordination among the
federal agencies involved in ocean exploration, in order to leverage involvement of business, industry,
foundations, and NGOs. Timely and effective communication among partners is necessary to build and
sustain the expanded community of ocean explorers.

Federal leadership is key to effective architecture for collaboration
Aquarium of the Pacific and NOAA, 13
[Aquarium of the Pacific and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, September 2013,
Aquarium of the Pacific, Aquatic Forum, Ocean Exploration 2020: A National Forum,
http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/oceanexploration2020/oe2020_report.pdf, page 39, accessed 6/29/14
CK]
pursuit of shared goals. Federal-and in particular, NOAA-leadership is essential to help design and

AT Private Actor Solves

Private and current actors cannot solve - funding and long term methodology
flawed
provides another model that comes close to OSEA but is heavily reliant on private funding that can
often be significantly reduced during recessions as endowments shrink. Moreover, a private foundation
is unlikely to meet the full financial burden to support the full mission of an OSEA or provide a
resource to the ocean science community as whole. This is not meant to criticize either NOAA or
MBARI, indeed both supported our own research and have made immense contributions to ocean
science and exploration, but neither do they fully realize our vision for OSEA.

AT Disadvantages

Tradeoff Answer

Funding for ocean exploration can be reallocated from unnecessary space funding
Etzioni, George Washington University international relations professor, 12
(Amitai, professor of international relations and director of the Institute for Communitarian Policy Studies at
George Washington University, CNN, Mars can wait. Oceans can't,
http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/09/opinion/etzioni-space-oceans/, accessed 6/27/14, BCG)

Actually, there are very good reasons to stop spending billions of dollars on manned space missions, to
explore space in ways that are safer and much less costly, and to grant much higher priority to other
scientific and engineering mega-projects, the oceans in particular.
The main costs of space exploration arise from the fact that we are set on sending humans, rather
than robots. The reasons such efforts drive up the costs include: A human needs a return ticket, while a
robot can go one way. Space vehicles for humans must be made safe, while we can risk a bunch of
robots without losing sleep. Robots are much easier to feed, experience little trouble when subject to
prolonged weightlessness, and are much easier to shield from radiation. And they can do most tasks
humans can.
British astronomer royal Martin Rees writes, "I think that the practical case (for manned flights) gets
weaker and weaker with every advance in robotics and miniaturization. It's hard to see any particular
reason or purpose in going back to the moon or indeed sending people into space at all." Nobel Laureate
Steven Weinberg calls manned missions "an incredible waste of money" and argues that "for the cost of
putting a few people on a very limited set of locations on Mars we could have dozens of unmanned,
robotic missions roving all over Mars."
The main argument for using humans is a public relations one. As Neil deGrasse Tyson puts it in Foreign
Affairs, "China's latest space proclamations could conceivably produce another 'Sputnik moment' for the
United States, spurring the country into action after a relatively fallow period in its space efforts." Also,
astronauts are said to inspire our youth to become scientists and explorers. However, it is far from
established that we cannot achieve the same effects by making other R&D projects our main priority.
Take the oceans, about which we know much less than the dark side of the moon. Ninety percent of the
ocean floor has not even been charted, and while we have been to the moon, the technology to
explore the ocean's floors is still being developed. For example, a permanent partially-submerged sea
exploration station, called the SeaOrbiter, is currently in development.
The oceans play a major role in controlling our climate. But we have not learned yet how to use them
to cool us off rather than contribute to our overheating. Ocean organisms are said to hold the promise
of cures for an array of diseases. An examination of the unique eyes of skate (ray fish) led to advances in
combating blindness, the horseshoe crab was crucial in developing a test for bacterial contamination,
and sea urchins helped in the development of test-tube fertilization.

AT Geopolitics

No international backlash
downloaded from: http://www.nap.edu/catalog/10630.html,Accessed 6/30/14 CK]

It is useful to encourage broad information sharing about ocean exploration initiatives, whether
undertaken by the United States or by other nations. Such information sharing could include
information about ongoing exploration programs, potentially available resources (including ships and
scientists), proposals for exploration, and other pertinent information. The Committee recommends
that IOC assist in communicating to participating governments the importance of cooperative ocean
exploration efforts. The Committee also recommends that IOC consider convening an annual conference
on ocean exploration, seeking advice from SCOR, POGO, and other interested entities as appropriate.
Indeed, one option would be for IOC to co- sponsor the recommended annual Ocean Exploration
Conference with SCOR, The International Global Ocean Exploration Workshop held at IOC
headquarters in May 2002 demonstrated great international interest, as well as capabilities, in ocean
exploration. This interest was very broad and included both developed and developing countries.
Neg
DA Links

Politics

Ocean Policy Controversial

Plan unpopular-causes partisan fights in an election year
(Juliet, October 28, 2012, Washington Post, National ocean policy sparks partisan fight,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/national-ocean-policy-sparks-partisan-
fight/2012/10/28/af73e464-17a7-11e2-a55c-39408fbe6a4b_story.html, Accessed 7/13/14, AA)

Partisan battles are engulfing the nations ocean policy, showing that polarization over environmental
issues doesnt stop at the waters edge.
For years, ocean policy was the preserve of wonks. But President Obama created the first national
ocean policy, with a tiny White House staff, and with that set off some fierce election-year fights.
Conservative Republicans warn that the administration is determined to expand its regulatory reach
and curb the extraction of valuable energy resources, while many Democrats, and their
environmentalist allies, argue that the policy will keep the ocean healthy and reduce conflicts over its
use.
The wrangling threatens to overshadow a fundamental issue the countrys patchwork approach to
managing offshore waters. Twenty-seven federal agencies, representing interests as diverse as farmers
and shippers, have some role in governing the oceans. Obamas July 2010 executive order set up a
National Ocean Council, based at the White House, that is designed to reconcile the competing interests
of different agencies and ocean users.
The policy is already having an impact. The council, for example, is trying to broker a compromise among
six federal agencies over the fate of defunct offshore oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico. Recreational
fishermen want the rigs, which attract fish, to stay, but some operators of commercial fishing trawlers
consider them a hazard and want them removed.
Still, activists invoking the ocean policy to press for federal limits on traditional maritime interests are
having little success. The Center for Biological Diversity cited the policy as a reason to slow the speed of
vessels traveling through national marine sanctuaries off the California coast. Federal officials denied
the petition.
During a House Natural Resources Committee hearing on ocean policy last year, the panels top
Democrat, Rep. Edward J. Markey (Mass.), said that opposing ocean planning is like opposing air traffic
control: You can do it, but it will cause a mess or lead to dire consequences.
Rep. Steve Southerland II (R-Fla.), who is in a tight reelection race, retorted that the policy was like
air traffic control helping coordinate an air invasion on our freedoms. An environmental group called
Ocean Champions is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to unseat him.
The sharp rhetoric puzzles academics such as Boston University biologist Les Kaufman. He contributed to
a recent study that showed that using ocean zoning to help design wind farms in Massachusetts Bay
could prevent more than $1 million in losses to local fishery and whale-watching operators while
allowing wind producers to reap $10 billion in added profits by placing the turbines in the best locations.
Massachusetts adopted its own ocean policy, which was introduced by Mitt Romney, the Republican
governor at the time, and later embraced by his Democratic successor, Deval L. Patrick.
The whole concept of national ocean policy is to maximize the benefit and minimize the damage.
Whats not to love? Kaufman said, adding that federal officials make decisions about offshore energy
production, fisheries and shipping without proper coordination.
Nearly a decade ago, two bipartisan commissions called upon the government to coordinate its
decisions regarding federal waters, which extend from the roughly three-mile mark where state waters
end to 200 miles from shore.
When Romney moved to establish ocean zoning in 2005 in Massachusetts, he warned that without it
there could be a Wild West shootout, where projects were permitted on a first come, first served
basis.
In Washington, however, legislation to create an ocean zoning process failed. The policy set by Obama
in 2010 calls for five regions of the country the Mid-Atlantic, New England, the Caribbean, the West
Coast and the Pacific to set up regional bodies to offer input.
White House Council for Environmental Quality spokeswoman Taryn Tuss said the policy does not give
the federal government new authority or change congressional mandates. It simply streamlines
implementation of the more than 100 laws and regulations that already affect our oceans.
House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings (R-Wash.) said he is not opposed to a
national ocean policy in theory. But he said he is concerned that the administrations broad definition of
what affects the ocean including runoff from land could open the door to regulating all inland
activities, because all water going downhill goes into the ocean. ... That potential could be there.
The House voted in May to block the federal government from spending money on implementing the
policy, though the amendment has not passed the Senate.
Two influential groups anglers and energy firms have joined Republicans in questioning the
administrations approach.
In March, ESPN Outdoors published a piece arguing that the policy could prohibit U.S. citizens from
fishing some of the nations oceans, coastal areas, Great Lakes, and even inland waters. The article,
which convinced many recreational fishermen that their fishing rights were in jeopardy, should have
been labeled an opinion piece, the editor said later.
Fishermen saw this as just another area where fishing was going to be racheted down, said Michael
Leonard, director of ocean resource policy for the American Sportfishing Association, whose 700
members include the nations major boat manufacturers, as well as fish and tackle retailers. Leonard
added that the White House has solicited some input from anglers since launching the policy and that
they will judge the policy once its final implementation plan is released, after the election.
The National Ocean Policy Coalition a group based in Houston that includes oil and gas firms as well
as mining, farming and chemical interests has galvanized industry opposition to the policy. Its vice
president works as an energy lobbyist at the law firm Arent Fox; its president and executive director
work for the firm HBW Resources, which lobbies for energy and shipping interests.
Brent Greenfield, the groups executive director, said that the public has not had enough input into the
development of the policy and that his group worries about the potential economic impacts of the
policy on commercial or recreational activity.
Sarah Cooksey, who is Delawares coastal-programs administrator and is slated to co-chair the Mid-
Atlantics regional planning body, said the policy will streamline application of laws already on the
books. No government wants another layer of bureaucracy, she said.
In Southerlands reelection race, Ocean Champions has labeled the congressman Ocean Enemy #1 and
sponsored TV ads against him. Jim Clements, a commercial fisherman in the Florida Panhandle district,
has mounted billboards against Southerland on the grounds his stance hurts local businesses.
Southerland declined to comment for this article.
Ocean Champions President David Wilmot said that while most ocean policy fights are region e
partisan. I do not think it will be the last.al, this is the first issue Ive seen thats become partisan. I
do not think it will be the last.

Ocean policy sparks partisan fights plan would spark controversy
Stauffer, Ocean Program Manager, 6/1/14
(PETE, 6/1/14, Surfrider Foundation, Texas Lawmaker Leads Attack on our National Ocean Policy,
http://www.surfrider.org/coastal-blog/entry/congress-takes-aim-at-our-national-ocean-policy, accessed
7/13/14, AA)

Who is Congressmen Bill Flores and what does he have against the ocean? Last week, the Republican
lawmaker from Bryan, Texas led yet another effort in Congress to undermine the National Ocean
Policy (NOP). By a mostly party line vote, the U.S. House passed his amendment to an appropriations
bill (HR 4660) to defund the National Ocean Policy. The measure will next be considered by the Senate.

Incredibly, this is Rep. Flores sixth attempt in the past two years to obstruct implementation of the
National Ocean Policy through a legislative amendment. This raises an important question: why is a
lawmaker from a land-locked district taking such a keen interest in ocean policy? The answer, not
surprisingly, is politics.
When the National Ocean Policy was established by President Obama in 2010 it signaled a serious
attempt to address the many shortcomings of our nations piecemeal approach to ocean
management. Taking its cue from the recommendations of the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy - a
bipartisan body established by President George W. Bush - the policy emphasizes improved
collaboration across all levels of government to address priorities such as water quality, marine debris,
and renewable energy A cornerstone of the policy is the establishment of regional ocean parterships
(ROPs) that empower states to work with federal agencies, stakeholders, tribes, and the public to plan
for the future of the ocean.
In just three years, important progress has been made, despite a glaring lack of support from Congress.
An Implementation Plan has been released with hundreds of actions that federal agencies are taking to
protect marine ecosystems and coastal economies. Collaborative projects are moving forward to restore
habitats, advance ocean science, and engage stakeholders. And finally, the Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, and
West Coast regions have begun ocean planning to enusure that future development will mimize impacts
to the environment and existing users.

Of course, such success stories do not resonate well in Washington D.C., where controversy rules the
day and political parties instinctively oppose each others proposals. As an initiative of the Obama
Presidency, the policy has suffered from partisan attacks, despite the collaborative framework it is
based upon. Yet, such political gamesmanship by our federal leaders is obscuring an important truth -
the principles of the National Ocean Policy are taking hold in states and regions across the country, even
without the meaningful support of Congress.

Funding to ocean agencies empirically been unpopular with Republicans
Helvarg, Blue Frontier Executive Director, 14
[David, 2-14-14, The Hill, The oceans demand our attention, http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-
blog/energy-environment/198361-the-oceans-demand-our-attention, 7-13-14, AAZ]

The latest battle over the future of Americas ocean frontier is being fought out in a seemingly unrelated
bill in Congress. Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.) recently introduced his National
Endowment for the Oceans rider to the Senate version of the Water Resources Development Act
(WRDA), which funds the Army Corps of Engineers to work on dams, dredging and flood control. The
Endowment would establish a permanent fund based on offshore energy revenue for scientific
research and coastal restoration.
On the House side Tea Party Republican Rep. Bill Flores (Texas) has a rider to cancel out any funding
that might allow the Army Corps to participate in the Obama administrations National Ocean Policy,
which he claims would empower the EPA to control the property of his drought-plagued constituents
should any rain (generated by the ocean) land on their rooftops.
One rider represents a constructive addition and the other a paranoid partisan impediment to an ocean
policy aimed at coordinating federal agencies in ways that could reduce conflict, redundancy and
government waste, putting urban planning in the water column, in the words of former Commandant
of the Coast Guard Admiral Thad Allen. Allen, who coordinated federal disaster response to Hurricane
Katrina and the BP oil blow out understands the importance of working together when responding to a
disaster. And like it or not, overfishing, pollution, coastal sprawl and climate change have created an
ongoing disaster in our public seas.
Unfortunately progress towards a major reorganization of how we as a nation manage and benefit
from our ocean continues to advance with all the deliberate speed of a sea hare (large marine snail).
In 2004 ocean conservationists held their first Blue Vision Summit in Washington D.C. It was there
Rep. Sam Farr (D-Calif.) called for a Big Ocean Bill, to incorporate many of the recommendations of the
2003 Pew Oceans Commission and 2004 U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy, the first blue ribbon panels
to examine the state of Americas blue frontier in over three decades. During his presidency, George W.
Bush established major marine reserves in the Pacific, but otherwise ignored his own federal
commissions recommendations along with those of the Pew group headed by future Secretary of
Defense (now retired), Leon Panetta. As a result Americas seas continue to be poorly managed by 24
different federal agencies taking a piecemeal approach to their oversight under 144 separate laws.
In the fall of 2008, Oregon State marine ecologist Dr. Jane Lubchenco met with then President-elect
Obama in Chicago. There, he offered her the job of running The National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), and she suggested he promote an ocean policy based on the two commissions
recommendations that he agreed to do.
By the time of the 2009 Blue Vision Summit it was clear Congress had become too polarized to pass
major ocean reform legislation at the level of the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts of the last century.
Still, activists gathered there were thrilled to hear the new White House Council on Environmental
Quality Chair, Nancy Sutley, announce plans for a new National Ocean Policy initiative by the Obama
administration. This was followed by a series of six public hearings over the next year held in different
parts of the country. Ocean conservationists were able to mobilize thousands of people and 80 percent
of public comments favored moving forward with a policy of ecosystem-based regional planning for
ocean uses.

Plan UnpopularCongress already funds NOAA so plan is perceived as a redundant
agency
NOAA, 13
(NOAA, 7/21/13, NOAA, Ocean Exploration 2020 Outcome,
http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/oceanexploration2020/agenda.html, accessed 7/13/14, AA)

The U.S. National Ocean Exploration Program brings together federal agencies, academia, and the
private sector in an open, inclusive partnership program. It has become the international model for
ocean exploration. The President mentions it in her State of the Union address and Congress has
elevated the level of support for the program to $75 million per year. The appropriation has grown
each year for the past four years.

Spending & Tradeoff

Expensive

OSEA would require massive financial investment
Mustain, Live Science, 11
*Andrea, June 8, Live Science, Mysteries of the Oceans Remain Vast and Deep,
http://www.livescience.com/14493-ocean-exploration-deep-sea-diving.html, accessed July 15, 2014, EK]

Exploring these regions deep below the ocean's surface is difficult, time-consuming and expensive.
Which hasn't stopped people from trying and making incredible discoveries along the way.
Known unknowns
Shallower parts of the ocean, and those closer to coastline, have understandably gotten the lion's share
of investigation.
What's been fairly well explored is about one Washington Monument down into the ocean about
556 feet (170 meters) said Mike Vecchione, a veteran scientist with NOAA and the Smithsonian
Institution.
Impressive, perhaps, yet the average depth of the planet's oceans is 13,120 feet (4,000 m), the height of
many peaks in the Rockies and the Alps. [Infographic: Tallest Mountain to Deepest Ocean Trench]
"In the deep ocean we're still exploring, and frankly, that's most of the planet that we live on. And
we're still in the exploratory phase," Vecchione told OurAmazingPlanet.

Ocean exploration is exceedingly expensive; simple surveys cost $50 million
Carlyle, Subsea Hydraulics Engineer, 13
(Ryan, 1/31/2013, Forbes, Why Don't We Spend More On Exploring The Oceans, Rather Than On Space
Exploration?, http://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2013/01/31/why-dont-we-spend-more-on-
exploring-the-oceans-rather-than-on-space-exploration/, accessed 7/15/14, AA)

So as someone whose job deals with exploring the ocean deeps see my answer to Careers: What
kinds of problems does a subsea hydraulics engineer solve? I can tell you that the ocean is
excruciatingly boring. The vast majority of the seafloor once you get >50 miles offshore is barren,
featureless mud. On face, this is pretty similar to the empty expanses of outer space, but in space you
can see all the way through the nothing, letting you identify targets for probes or telescopes. The goals
of space exploration are visible from the Earth, so we can dream and imagine reaching into the heavens.
But in the deep oceans, visibility is less than 100 feet and travel speed is measured in single-digit
knots. A simple seafloor survey to run a 100 mile pipeline costs a cool $50 million. The oceans are
vast, boring, and difficult/expensive to explore so why bother?

OSEA would have to all new infrastructure and all new tech to solve

What Does an OSEA look like? At the core OSEA would need a mission dedicated to basic research and
exploration of the >;90% of the worlds oceans that remain unexplored. High risk with the potential for
high impact would be the norm. Pioneering knows no other way to achieve those truly novel and
impactful gains.
To achieve these goals, OSEA would need substantial infrastructure and fleet including international
and regional class research vessels, a submersible, remotely operated vehicles, and autonomous
underwater vehicles. Funding would need to be secure on decadal cycles to insure both the longevity
and permanence of this mission but allow for oversight to ensure OSEA was meeting its mission and
financial responsibilities. An ocean exploration center would be staffed with a vibrant community of
researchers, engineers, and administrators, postdoctoral fellows, graduate students, and visiting
experts with a strong interacting and supportive community working toward uncovering the mysteries
of the oceans. Research would be funded internally from a broad OSEA budget, not externally, freeing
scientists and engineers to actually do science and engineering as opposed to the only current option,
which is writing grants to other agencies with a less than 10% chance of funding.

Deep-sea marine research requires expensive technology
Ben-Avraham, Haifa University Professor, 13
(Zvi, 11/19/2013, THE MEDITERRANEAN SEA RESEARCH CENTER OF ISRAEL AT THE UNIVERSITY OF
HAIFA,
http://www.haifauniv.ca/images/Mediterranean%20Sea%20Research%20Center%20of%20Israel.pdf ,
accessed 7-15-14, AKS)

Deep-sea marine research is difficult and complex, even with todays advanced technologies.
Investigating the deep-sea floor requires expensive infrastructures that can withstand pressure at
great depths and are difficult to finance and maintain. Most of Israels marine research infrastructure is
non-existent or antiquated at best. Deep sea marine research is dependent on purchasing expensive
deep sea exploration equipment (such as manned and unmanned submersibles, trawls and towed
camera platforms), upgrading our national marine research infrastructure, securing appropriate levels
of technical support and ensuring ongoing maintenance.

Trade-Off with Other Ocean Science

Implementing ocean policy forces tradeoff with other ocean science resources
Madsen, North Pacific Fisheries Management Council chair, 12
(Stephanie, vice president of the Pacific Seafood Processors Association, Summer 2012, Pacific
Fisheries Review, National Ocean Policy: A New Bureaucracy That Could Compromise Regional
Fisheries Management, http://www.pacificfisheriesreview.com/pfr_june12_story6.php,
accessed 6/27/14, GNL)

The Administrations draft NOP Implementation Plan proposes 53 federal governmental actions and
nearly 300 milestones, with 158 of those milestones to be completed in 2012 or 2013. Congress is
cutting funding for most federal agencies and has not provided new funding for NOP implementation,
so where is the money coming from to fund these new activities? Commercial fishing interests are
concerned that money has been, and will be, diverted from under-funded core NOAA Fisheries science
and management programs to pay for a new bureaucracy and for new activities not authorized by
Congress.
Proponents are well aware of the tenuous authority of the Administration to implement the NOP, yet
they move ahead without apparent concern. These same proponents, however, insisted previously that
Congressional action to create a national ocean policy was necessary. NOP proponents supported bills
introduced in the previous four Congresses that proposed a national ocean policy, as well as many of the
councils and committees subsequently established through Executive Order. None of the bills
introduced in successive Congresses passed. In fact, none passed either body of Congress.
Now, without Congressional authorization or dedicated appropriations, the Administration states that
funding to implement the NOP, including ocean zoning activities, will come from repurposing
existing resources. The commercial fishing industry does not support repurposing core NOAA
Fisheries science and management programs to establish a new oceans bureaucracy that at the very
least creates duplicative fisheries management authority. It is a hollow argument advanced to date by
the Administration that repurposing funds creates efficiencies when, at least in the case of fisheries
management, it creates confusing, overlapping jurisdictional lines and duplicates existing resource
management processes.
In May, the House of Representatives voted to prohibit certain federal agencies, including NOAA, from
spending taxpayer dollars on the NOP, in large part, because Congress has not authorized many of the
activities contained in the NOP implementation plan. Hopefully, the Senate will act, as well. The
Administration could show good faith by not moving forward with establishing ocean zoning bodies until
either Congress acts to define their scope of authority or the Administration appropriately limits their
mandate.
The Pacific Northwest and Alaska fishing industry are proud of our progressive and innovative approach
to properly managing ocean resources. And we are proud of our collaborative working relationship with
state and federal fishery managers. We do not welcome that relationship being put at risk by
implementation of an NOP that is being rushed forward without regard for constituents concerns.

Ocean exploration program trades off with other agencies funding is mutually
exclusive
McClain, National Evolutionary Synthesis Center, 12
[Craig, 10-16-12, Deep Sea News, We Need an Ocean NASA Now ,
http://deepseanews.com/2012/10/we-need-an-ocean-nasa-now-pt-3/, 7-15-14, AAZ]

The Ghost of Ocean Science Past 85% of Americans express concerns about stagnant research
funding and 77% feel we are losing our edge in science. So how did we get here? Part of the
answer lies in how ocean science and exploration fit into the US federal science funding
scene. Ocean science is funded by numerous agencies, with few having ocean science and
exploration as a clear directive. Contrast to this to how the US traditionally dealt with
exploration of space. NASA was recognised early on as the vehicle by which the US would
establish and maintain international space supremacy, but the oceans have always had to
compete with other missions. We faced a weak economy and in tough economic times we
rightly looked for areas to adjust our budgets. Budget cuts lead to tough either/or situations:
do we fund A or B? Pragmatically we choose what appeared to be most practical and yield
most benefit. Often this meant we prioritized applied science because it was perceived to
benefit our lives sooner and more directly and, quite frankly, was easier to justify politically
the expenditures involved. In addition to historical issues of infrastructure and current
economic woes, we lacked an understanding of the importance of basic research and ocean
exploration to science, society, and often to applied research. As example, NOAA shifted
funding away from NURP and basic science and exploration but greatly increased funding to
research on applied climate change research. Increased funding for climate change research is
a necessity as we face this very real and immediate threat to our environment and economy.
Yet, did this choice, and others like it, need to come at the reduction of our countrys capability
to conduct basic ocean exploration and science and which climate change work relies upon?

Mining DA

Mining Link

Exploration includes exploitation of ocean resources
Schubel, Aquarium of the Pacific president and CEO, and McKinnie, NOAA's Office of
Ocean Exploration and Research senior advisor, 13
*Jerry, David, Accelerating Ocean Exploration, included in Ocean Exploration 2020 forum, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration & Aquarium of the Pacific, September 2013, The Report of
Ocean Exploration 2020: A National Forum,

Weve only explored five to ten percent of the World Ocean just imagine what wed find if we could
explore even more of Earths final frontier.
We have an unprecedented opportunity to increase the pace and efficiency of exploring the unknown
ocean in all of its dimensions in space and time. The past 20 years have seen a dramatic increase in
attempts by the U.S. government, academic institutions, private industry and entrepreneurs, and others
to explore unknown ocean areas and phenomena. The results of these expeditions establish a
foundation that inspires others to follow: to build on the discoveries and apply the knowledge gained
to address some of the most pressing challenges we face as a nation and an interconnected world, in
addition to the ultimate challengeour human survival.
Ocean Exploration: An Opportunity and A Necessity
A strong commitment to ocean exploration and research is an opportunity, an urgent necessity, and an
issue of national security.
Every ocean exploration expedition yields new data and information, often new species, and
sometimes entirely new ecosystems. Scientists from different disciplines, resource managers, and the
public working together, unfettered by preconceived notions or constrained by narrowly defined
hypotheses, are empowered by the exploratory process.
Exploration:
demands integration of observations, concepts, thoughts, and ideas.
leads to discovery of new resourcesfood, medicines, minerals, and new sources of energy.
leads to new connections among diverse observations that allow us to quickly provide information
critical for establishing or refining marine policy, as well as making important decisions concerning the
conservation and sustained use of marine resources.
is a critical early phase of research. It guides research to areas and topics of promise and helps
generate and refine research hypotheses, thus increasing the return on the nations investment in
research. As we saw with the discovery of hydrothermal vents and chemosynthetic communities in the
1970s, exploration sometimes requires us to rethink long-held and well-established scientific paradigms,
exposing our ignorance and dramatically expanding our knowledge as a result.
pushes technology development. As we seek to explore new depths, in new time horizons, and
understand new details of the ocean, new technologies and tools are developed, from sensors to
telecommunications.
inspires and moves us as humans to action, forever changing our perspectives and daily lives, and
leaves us with a legacy of knowledge and renewed passion to ensure humanitys survival on the ocean
planetEarth.
We depend on the ocean more now than ever beforeas a nation and as a global community. As new
technologies and new partnerships allow us to explore and exploit more of the ocean, more quickly,
and at a higher resolution and rate than could even be imagined a decade ago, the pressures and
impacts on the ocean systems and resources on which we depend also increase. Nations around the
world understand the political and economic importance of exploring the ocean, whether in the Arctic
or in the South China Sea. Ocean Exploration 2020 is a timely reminder of what we can achieve if we
seize our opportunities to actand the consequences if we do not.

Seabed Mining Impacts

Deep sea mining destroys unique deep sea species massive loss of biomass
Levitt, The Ecologist, 10
[Tom, 10-28-10, The Ecology, How deep-sea mining could destroy the 'cradle of life on earth',
http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/653840/how_deepsea_mining_could_destroy_the_c
radle_of_life_on_earth.html, accessed 7-13-14, AAZ]

As well as being metal-rich, the volcanogenic hydrothermal deposits which Nautilus plans to mine are
home to a unique ecosystem that is still largely unknown to scientists since being discovered in the
late 1970s. Initially, the deep sea was thought to be full of soft sediment and little else but the
discovery of hydrothermal vents on the seabed, which produce the deposits, revealed a completely
novel ecosystem, unreliant on photosynthesis.
Its the cradle of life on earth, explains Dr Rod Fujita from the Environmental Defense Fund and author
of studies looking into deep-sea mining, and the only one that does not depend on sunlight. There are
species there that are found nowhere else on earth. Its not like any land habitats we are used to; in
fact you have to have your perspective altered to appreciate this deep-sea world, he says.
The mining process in PNG will take the top 20-30m off the seabed at a depth of 1,500m and lift it up
to the surface before transferring it by barge to processing sites on land. You will destroy fauna just by
lifting the land, says deep-sea ecologist Professor Paul Tyler, from the National Oceanography Centre at
Southampton University. It is possible you might mine at a distance [from the hydrothermal vents] but
by mining close by you will affect the flow and the vents might switch off and then all the animals die
you lose a huge biomass.

Deep sea mining will have adverse impact on biodiversity
Samson, Papua New Guinea Institute of Biological Research Conservation Biologist, 12
[Mellie, 12-7-12, Scidev, Deep sea mining- a dangerous experiment,
http://www.scidev.net/global/biodiversity/opinion/deep-sea-mining-a-dangerous-experiment.html,
accessed 7-13-14, AKS]

Pacific governments should not approve deep-sea mining until more is known about its likely impact,
says conservation biologist Mellie Samson Jr.
Deep sea mining (DSM) is the new frontier in extractive mining. For the companies involved, as well as
the governments that own the mining rights, it offers substantial profits.
However DSM is still experimental in nature, with potentially vast adverse environmental effects. It
also makes use of new technologies that have yet to be tested.
In January 2011, the government of Papua New Guinea (PNG) granted the world's first deep-sea mining
lease to Nautilus Minerals Inc, a Canadian mining firm, which is about to embark on a seabed mining
project known as the Solwara 1 project.
This experiment, in which the PNG government will have a substantial stake, will take place 1.6
kilometres below the surface of the Bismarck Sea, off the coast of the New Ireland Province of PNG.
In recent months, however, the government has come under increasing pressure from environmental
groups and others to withdraw from the project, on the basis that not enough is yet known about its
potential environmental impact.
Whatever decision is taken, other island nations should reflect on the arguments being made about
the dangers of moving too hastily into DSM, and consider their responsibility to protect marine
biodiversity and the seas within the Pacific region.
Conservation concerns
Interest in seabed mining is growing due to an increase in global demand for metals, and the fact that
land resources are increasingly being mined to the limits of their capacity.
Solwara 1 is the first of a potentially large number of offshore mining projects within the Bismarck Sea
and wider Pacific region. Applications were approved last year from firms registered in both Nauru and
Tonga to explore areas within the jurisdiction of the UN's International Seabed Authority (ISA).
Solwara 1 focuses on mineral deposits laid down over thousands of years around underwater
hydrothermal vents (geysers), known as seafloor massive sulphides. These deposits occur at depths of
one to two kilometres, and can range in mass from several thousand to 100 million tonnes.
However fears have been expressed by critics of the project that not enough research has been
carried out to enable convincing conclusions to be drawn on the likely environmental impacts of DSM,
particularly as there is very little knowledge of biological diversity and ecosystems within the deposit
areas.
The ecosystems surrounding hydrothermal vents combine superheated and highly mineralized vent
fluids with microbes that are capable of using chemicals as a nutritional source. In recent years, such
ecosystems have been found to host over 500 species previously unknown to science.
Conservation strategies need to be developed to mitigate the impact of mining activities and enhance
the recovery of biodiversity in the mining zones, particularly since the project is likely to have a severe
impact on the rarely explored biological ecosystems found at Solwara 1 and subsequent mining
locations.

Seabed mining hurts the environment 3 reasons
Markussen, Ocean Futures director, 94
(Jan Magne, 1994, GREEN GLOBE YEARBOOK 1994, Deep Seabed Mining and the Environment:
Consequences, Perceptions, and Regulations, http://www.fni.no/ybiced/94_02_markussen.pdf, Pg. 33,

Main Environmental Problem Areas
There are three main environmental problem areas to be expected from exploitation of nodule
deposits:9
The first relates to what happens on the seabed. As the collector unit gathers nodules, it will
seriously destroy the top few centimetres of the seabed, causing major disturbance and disruption to
the flora and fauna in the mining tracks. In addition, the propulsion system of the collector unit will stir
up sediments; as a result, organisms in and around the tracks will be partially or entirely buried. In the
mining tracks, for instance, a mortality rate of 95100 per cent may be expected for organisms found
there.
The second relates to the discharge of waste water from the mining ship. After the nodules have
been gathered by the collector unit, they will be washed clean by water jets. The nodules will then be
crushed and brought to the surface as slurry containing both crushed nodules and water. When the
slurry reaches the surface, there will be a partial discharge of waste water containing particulate
matter and trace metals. This discharge may interfere with light penetration and reduce
photosynthesis in the surface layers. Furthermore, the waste water will be considerably colder than the
surface water.
The third relates to onshore processing. This includes waste water, tailings, and slag. Here roughly
the same problems will be encountered as in land-based mining operations.

Russia

Russian Sphere of Influence Links

Russia moving towards hegemonic ocean exploration now
Maritime Doctrine of Russian Federation 2020, 2001
(APPROVED by President Vladimir Putin, 27 July 2001, Russian Federation, Pr-1387, Maritime Doctrine
of Russian Federation 2020,
http://www.oceanlaw.org/downloads/arctic/Russian_Maritime_Policy_2020.pdf, accessed 7/15/14, AA)

The objectives of the National Marine Policy
The objectives of the national marine policy is to implement and protect the interests of the Russian
Federation in the oceans and the strengthening of the position of the Russian Federation among the
leading maritime nations.
The main objectives of the national marine policy are:
preservation of the sovereignly inland marine waters, territorial sea and airspace above them, on the
bottom and in the subsoil;
implementation of the jurisdiction and protection of sovereign rights in the exclusive economic zone
for exploration, development and conservation of natural resources, both living and non-living at the
bottom, in the subsoil and the superjacent waters, the management of these resources, energy
production through the use of water, currents and wind, the creation and use of artificial islands,
installations and structures, marine scientific research and conservation of the marine environment;
realization and protection of sovereign rights over the continental shelf of the Russian Federation for
the exploration and exploitation of its resources;
realization and protection of freedom of the seas, including freedom of navigation, operations,
fisheries, research, freedom to lay submarine cables and pipelines;
protection of the Russian Federation with the marine areas, protection and the protection of
national borders the Russian Federation, sea and airspace.

Russia using ocean exploration as a means to be a hegemon and for security purposes
Maritime Doctrine of Russian Federation 2020, 2001
(APPROVED by President Vladimir Putin, 27 July 2001, Russian Federation, Pr-1387, Maritime Doctrine
of Russian Federation 2020,
http://www.oceanlaw.org/downloads/arctic/Russian_Maritime_Policy_2020.pdf, accessed 7/15/14, AA)
I. General Provisions
The development of space and ocean resources - one of the major directions of development of world
civilization in the third millennium. The essence of the national policies of the major maritime powers
and the majority of the world community in the foreseeable future will be an independent action and
cooperation in the development of the oceans, as well as the inevitable competition on the way.
Historically, Russia - the leading maritime power, on the basis of its spatial and geophysical features,
place and role in global and regional international relations. She earned this status because of
geographical location with access to three oceans and sea borders, as well as a tremendous contribution
to the study of the oceans, to the development of shipping, many great discoveries made by famous
Russian navigators and adventurers.
The Maritime Doctrine of Russian Federation (hereinafter - Marine doctrine) is the fundamental
document defining the public policy of the Russian Federation in the field of maritime activities -a
national marine policy of the Russian Federation (hereinafter - the National Maritime Policy).
Maritime activities - activities of the Russian Federation in the field of research, development and use
of the oceans in the interest of security, sustainable economic and social development of States
(hereinafter - the maritime activity).
The legal basis for maritime doctrine consists of the Constitution of Russian Federation, federal laws and
other regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the
Sea of 1982, international treaties in the field of maritime activity, the use of space resources and the
oceans.
Marine doctrine developed in relation to maritime activity provisions of the National Security Concept of
Russian Federation, the Foreign Policy Concept of the Russian Federation, the Russian Federation
Military Doctrine, Concept of the shipping policy of the Russian Federation, the Basic Policy of the
Russian Federation in the field of naval activities in 2010 and other regulatory legal acts of the Russian
Federation.
The combination of forces and means of the state and the ability to implement the National Marine
Policy constitute marine potential Russian Federation. The basis of maritime capabilities the Russian
Federation are the Navy, the Maritime Border Guard Federal Border Service, the civilian maritime fleet
(hereinafter - the Russian Navy), as well as infrastructure for their operation and development, maritime
business and naval activities of the state.
Implementation of Marine doctrine should further strengthen the position of Russia as a leading
maritime power, and create an enabling environment for achieving the goals and objectives of
national maritime policy.

Counterplans
NOAA Counterplan

1NC NOAA CP

Text
exploration of the Earths oceans through an endowed National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration.

NOAA leadership is key to effective change
http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/oceanexploration2020/oe2020_report.pdf, page 39, accessed 6/29/14
CK]
pursuit of shared goals. Federal-and in particular, NOAA-leadership is essential to help design and

NOAA Solves Coordination

NOAA leadership key to coordination and framework
American Geosciences Institute, 9
*11/4/9, American Geosciences Institute, The Future of Ocean Governance: Building Our National
Ocean Policy, http://www.agiweb.org/gap/legis111/wateroceans_hearings.html#apr22, accessed
6/28/14 CK]

The Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportations Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries,
and Coast Guard Subcommittee held a hearing on November 4, 2009, in order to discuss the interim
report and direction of the Presidents Interagency Oceans Policy Task Force (IOPTF). Chairwoman
Maria Cantwell (D-WA) showed strong support for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) in her opening remarks, saying that NOAA plays a pivotal role in dealing with
these issues. She continued that the administration should acknowledge and strengthen NOAAs
role, and literally give them a seat at the table of the National Ocean Council. She then supported the
enactment of an organic act for NOAA. Ranking Member Olympia Snowe (R-ME) then lamented the
term best available science, typically used in determining resource management decisions, which she
considered sometimes to be inadequate. To that end, she and Cantwell had authored legislation
establishing a budget of $8 billion for NOAA by 2011, and an agreement to double that budget to
2013, to allow scientists to achieve indisputable science. NOAA must remain our nations leader in
ocean policy, said Snowe, and she criticized the IOPTFs interim report for not prescribing the agency a
great enough role. Mark Begich (D-AK) pointed out that he agrees with the interim reports support for
the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea. Bill Nelson (D-FL) finished by thanking NOAA Administrator
Jane Lubchenco for bringing science to the question of the oceans, describing how lonely it has been
in his fight to prevent open drilling policies in the waters around Florida.
Chair of the IOPTF Nancy Sutley then initiated the testimony. She noted that the interim report
contains priorities for the administration in addition to proposals for a national policy, and that they
were now moving towards an integrated marine resource management approach. Jane Lubchenco
explained NOAAs role as the nations primary ocean agency, and suggested that the agency is well
positioned to manage the many aspects of overall ocean policy. According to Lubchenco, NOAAs
goal is to move towards a more robust, holistic management approach that reduces ocean-human
use conflicts and ecosystem impacts, while enabling sustainable use of oceans. Lubchenco furthered
that NOAA was committed to implementing those recommendations. The nations oceans are
counting on us, she finished. Admiral Thad Allen, Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard, then
commented that we need to establish a sustainable balance between use and conservation, and
that one of the tools to help achieve this was marine spatial planning. Spatial planning would provide a
framework upon which ocean use decisions could be made in a clear and transparent way, and help
the Coast Guard to later enforce those policies. He continued by supporting the U.S. signing on to Law
of the Sea, arguing that it would be good for relations with the international maritime community, and
commending the Task Force for considering Arctic issues. Lastly, Associate Undersecretary of the
Department of the Interior (DOI) Laura Davis testified by describing some of the process the task force
has followed, including a series of local meetings around the country with interested citizens. She noted
that the agencies had already elicited a new level of communication for the sister agencies involved
with stewardship of the oceans.
The predominant question for the panel revolved around leadership of the ocean policy once it has
been established. Cantwell asked who should be leading this. Sutley responded that the consensus of
the task force was to have a National Ocean Council (NAC) be responsible including representation
from all of the involved parties, and to be chaired jointly by the Council for Environmental Quality and
the Office of Science and Technology Policy. Lubchenco and Allen agreed that one single entity could
not be responsible for administering such vast responsibilities, but that it required strong central
leadership to bring involved parties together. Lubchenco admitted that NOAA has a key role to play,
while Allen conferred that the Coast Guard should play a support role. Davis concurred with the
recommendations from the witnesses.
Snow remarked that it defies, frankly, reason that NOAA would not have a position on the NAC,
much less leadership of it. Begich questioned why it would not make more sense for two secretary-level
positions to chair the NAC. Sutley responded that it was the consensus that with such broad, inter-
agency jurisdiction of this policy, it made sense to have a higher level of administration responsible.
Lubchenco responded that in this case, the Secretary of Commerce superseded her responsibilities to
represent the Department of Commerce (DOC) on the council. Snowe questioned if then it made more
sense for NOAA to be individually chartered and have an organic act like other agencies. For NOAA
to have an organic act, Lubchenco agreed, but to comment on its removal from within the umbrella of
the DOC, Lubchenco said was beyond my pay grade.
Cantwell asked then how an actual response to an issue would work within the council system.
Lubchenco responded that NOAA would work to gather the data and answer the underlying questions
behind these problems, but that actually solving them would be an interagency responsibility. Sutley
responded that this was something the IOPTF would still have to work on. Begich then questioned the
resources to be diverted for this effort, pointing out that NOAA had already admitted it would need to
re-prioritize in order to accomplish the tasks assigned it by the new policy. He then questioned the
economic considerations that went into the policy, and where the budget for this would come from.
Sutley responded that they had been conscious of the economics and will continue to be, so many of
the agencies involved are already budgeting in some way for this.

NOAA Funding Solves Exploration

Funding NOAA allows US to lead in undersea exploration through new technology
NOAA 2
*National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association, NOAA Budget Request,
http://www.publicaffairs.noaa.gov/budget02/oar_oceanexplore.html, accessed 6/27/14, BCG)

NOAA is requesting an increase of $10.0 million for the Ocean Exploration Initiative, established in
2001 to systematically search and investigate the oceans for the purpose of discovery. This initiative
proposes the most ambitious chapter ever in the history of human discovery on Earth: the exploration
of the Earth's oceans. Although Ocean Exploration is a NOAA-wide effort incorporating the effort of
many line offices, budget activity is located in the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research's (OAR)
Ocean and Great Lakes Research budget subactivity.
Covering more than 70 percent of the surface of the earth, with an average depth of 3,800 meters, the
oceans are the last, largely unexplored frontier on our planet. In fact, ocean scientists estimate that
only five percent of our oceans have been explored. This initiative seeks to bring a multi-disciplinary
array of the best of our nation's ocean scientists to ocean frontiers to discover new species, ocean
processes, cultural antiquities and artifacts, and biological and mineral resources. The need to extend
U.S. leadership in Ocean Exploration was first articulated by the Stratton Commission which led to the
formation of NOAA. For the past three decades, NOAA has pursued a course of ocean regulation and
management without ever developing a comprehensive exploration program. Thus our science lacks a
fundamental understanding of enormous ocean regions and important ocean systems. In June 2000, a
U.S. panel of ocean scientists, explorers, and educators convened to create history's first National
Strategy for Ocean Exploration. Their report, Discovering Earth's Final Frontier: A U.S. Strategy for Ocean
Exploration, is a responsible plan to undertake new activities in ocean exploration.
Recent progress in technology permits us to completely rethink how we conduct exploration and
oceanographic studies. Developments in biotechnology, sensors, telemetry, power sources,
microcomputers and materials science now permit the U.S. to dream of rivaling space exploration in our
ability to go to and study the undersea frontier. We need not be limited by weather and blind sampling
from ships, but like true explorers, can immerse ourselves in new places and events. NOAA proposes to
embark on a national endeavor, to build on our initial efforts in ocean research, partner with existing
public, private, and academic ocean exploration programs outside of NOAA, and to achieve
international leadership in undersea exploration and research.

NOAA Key to Solve Partnerships

Strong NOAA solves private public partnerships
Conley, CSIS Europe Program director and senior fellow, 13
*Heather, March 2013, Center for Strategic and International Studies, The New Foreign Policy Frontier
U.S. Interests and Actors In The Arctic,
http://csis.org/files/publication/130307_Conley_NewForeignPolFrontier_Web_0.pdf, page 13, accessed
6/30/2014 CK]

Conducting environmental scientific research in the Arctic is another major aspect of U.S. government
activity, and a number of governmental institutions and agencies are tasked with researching the
unique Arctic environment. NOAA, which is part of the Department of Commerce, plays a leading role
in this arena, focusing on the science behind environmental conditions, climate patterns, and the effects
of climate change on existing ecosystems. NOAA seeks to understand and predict changes in climate,
weather, oceans, and coasts, which includes a focus on the Arctic. NOAA also works in close
collaboration with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to manage and operate
polar-orbiting and geostationary environmental satellite systems. Through these satellites, NASA
provides the necessary technology to observe global climate change patterns and shifts in the extent
of Arctic ice. In FY 2012, NOAA allocated $1.8 billion to the National Environmental Satellite, Data, and
Information Service, including $181 million for operating its satellite programs and facilities and $1.69
billion for procurement, acquisition, and construction of new environmental monitoring satellite
systems.9 The budget request for FY 2013 was $2.04 billion: $191 million for operations and $1.85
billion for procurement.
The U.S. government is not the only interested consumer of NOAA climatic information. In August
2011, NOAA signed a unique collaborative agreement with three oil companies, Shell Exploration &
Production, ConocoPhillips, and Statoil USA E&P Inc., to share ocean, coastal, and meteorological
data, as well as sea ice and sea floor mapping studies. This is an important example of the growing
role and intersection of public and private sector interests in the Arctic.

NOAA must coordinate with private and federal agencies
*operating arm of the National Academy of Sciences, NOAAs Education Program: Review and Critique,
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12867, accessed 6/29/14, BCG)

There is a national need to educate the public about the ocean, coastal resources, atmosphere and
climate. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the agency responsible for
understanding and predicting changes in the Earths environment and conserving and managing
coastal and marine resources to meet the nations economic, social and environmental needs, has a
broad mandate to engage and coordinate education initiatives on these topics. Since its creation in
1970, the NOAA has supported a variety of education projects that cover a range of topics related to the
agencys scientific and stewardship mission.
NOAA uses formal and informal learning environments to enhance understanding of science,
technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM), and to advance environmental education. The work
of this agency overlaps and compliments the missions of other federal agencies, institutions of higher
education, private and nonprofit organizations. Coordination among these agencies and organizations
has been challenging. Limited education resources and the inherently global nature of NOAAs mission
make strategic partnerships critical in order for the agency to accomplish its goals. Additionally, clear
education goals, planning, and strategic use of resources are critical aspects for effective partnerships.

Private Contractor Counterplan

1NC Private Contractor CP
Text

exploration of the Earths oceans through a nonfederal external contractor.

Nonfederal external contractor key to solve exploration, efficacy, and
coordination and best leverages funding
Academies, http://explore.noaa.gov/sites/OER/Documents/national-research-council-voyage.pdf, pg. 8-

In recent years, agencies have increasingly turned to nongovernmental groups to take on the day-to-
day operations of large programs. The advantages of this approach are several. First, the process of
competitive bidding for the management of the program leads to creativity in program design, cost
savings, and incentives for excellent performance. Second, as programs build up and close down, there
is no need to accommodate the personnel requirements through agency headcount. NSF chose the
independent contractor route in selecting Joint Oceanographic Institutions to operate ODP, and has
recently proposed a similar plan for management of the Ocean Observing Initiative and the Integrated
Ocean Drilling Program (in this case the associated not-for-profit is an international corporation).
Likewise, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration will be selecting an independent
contractor to manage the International Space Station.
The advantages of an external contractor are potentially even greater for an ocean exploration
program. For example, if NOPP were to lead the effort, management by an independent contractor
would provide a neutral third party to balance the interests of the various agency partners and accept
contributions from a variety of public and private sources. If NOAA were to lead the program,
management by an external group could mitigate some of the perceived inadequacies in the present,
internal-NOAA program. For example, the program would be an arms length away from the
pressures of the agency mission and subjected to regular external review. Depending on the choice of
the external managing organization, grant processing, priority-setting, connection to the external
community, and transparency of decision making could be improved. If NSF were asked to lead the
program, the agency would almost surely choose this route rather than build internally the
infrastructure to manage the exploration-specific assets and data system.
Management of large-scale ocean research programs can be effective and efficient through the use of
independent contractors. Nonfederal operators can receive support from multiple government
agencies and receive financial support from private sponsors. Independent audits of program
performance can be used to ensure the program is achieving the desired outcomes.
Recommendation: A nonfederal contractor should be used to operate the proposed U.S. ocean
exploration program. The original contract should be awarded following a competitive bidding
process. The program should be reviewed periodically and should seek to leverage federal resources
for additional private contributions.

Solves Exploration

Nonfederal organizations solves exploration
National Research Council Division on Earth and Life Studies Ocean Studies Board, 3
[National Research Council Division on Earth and Life Studies Ocean Studies Board, 11/4/2003, The
National Academies, Major Ocean Exploration Effort Would Reveal Secrets of the Deep,
http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=10844, accessed 6/29/14 CK]
WASHINGTON -- A new large-scale, multidisciplinary ocean exploration program would increase the
pace of discovery of new species, ecosystems, energy sources, seafloor features, pharmaceutical
products, and artifacts, as well as improve understanding of the role oceans play in climate change,
says a new congressionally mandated report from the National Academies' National Research Council.
Such a program should be run by a nonfederal organization and should encourage international
participation, added the committee that wrote the report.
Congress, interested in the possibility of an international ocean exploration program, asked the
Research Council to examine the feasibility of such an effort. The committee concluded, however, that
given the limited resources in many other countries, it would be prudent to begin with a U.S. program
that would include foreign representatives and serve as a model for other countries. Once programs
are established elsewhere, groups of nations could then collaborate on research and pool their
resources under international agreements. "The United States should lead by example," said
committee chair John Orcutt, professor of geophysics and deputy director, Scripps Institution of
Oceanography, University of California, San Diego.

Funding Solvency

Private investors are willing to increase ocean exploration solves affs advantages
Gonzalez, io9 senior editor, 12
(Robert, senior editor at io9, James Cameron says today's ocean exploration is piss poor. He's right,
http://io9.com/5894566/james-cameron-says-the-current-state-of-ocean-exploration-is-piss-poor-hes-
right, accessed 6/27/14, BCG)
James Cameron is unhappy with the present state of ocean exploration. He's so unhappy that he's
taken it upon himself to spearhead an effort to return to Challenger Deep, the deepest known point in
all the world's oceans. In fact, he's making the trip this week and he's making it alone.
To clarify, Cameron will be making the dive alone, but plenty of others will be assisting the mission in
other ways after all, Cameron isn't the only one unhappy with the current state of ocean exploration;
he's drummed up experts from all over the world to make this excursion a reality.
Cameron's descent will be made in a custom-built submersible that he had specially designed for the
almost 11,000-meter dive into the most cavernous reaches of the Marianas Trench. Conditions
permitting, Cameron hopes to be on the bottom of Challenger Deep by this Wednesday.
Should he succeed, Cameron will become the third person in history to visit the deepest point on
Earth. Go ahead and let that figure sink in for a moment. More people have walked on the surface of
the Moon than have visited the bottom of the Marianas Trench. We've even been to the Moon more
recently than we have the very bottom of the sea the last (and only) time somebody visited
Challenger Deep in person was in 1960. The overwhelming majority of our planet is covered in oceans,
and yet we still know so few of their deepest, darkest secrets.
With this in mind, Cameron is working with researchers from around the world to make the dive a
scientifically meaningful one. His seven-meter-tall submersible (named the DeepSea Challenger,
featured up top and in this video) is equipped with a water sampler, a sediment collector, a "slurp gun"
for nabbing animals, a robotic manipulator arm, cameras, and of course lots and lots of lights. He'll
be accompanied by a trio of unmanned "landers," equipped with even more gadgets, samplers, and
baited animal traps.
What is most remarkable about Cameron's expedition is how much potential is has for expanding our
limited knowledge of the oceans' depths. Consider, for example, that if the DeepSea Challenger (or one
of the three landers) returns to the surface with even a single fish from below 4,000 meters, it will be an
unprecedented scientific achievement.
The lack of knowledge surrounding the oceans' depths isn't particularly surprising when you realize
that funding for deep sea research has been dwindling for years. And according to Craig McClain
chief editor at Deep Sea News, and a deep sea researcher, himself more cuts to deep sea funding
are imminent. McClain says that John R. Smith, the Science Director at the Hawai'i Undersea Research
Laboratory, recently sent out an email notifying the community that
NOAA has zeroed out funding for the Undersea Research Program (NURP) for FY13 beginning Oct 1,
2012, and put all the centers on life support funding (or less) for the current year. Many other NOAA
programs, mostly extramural ones, have been cut to some level, though it appears only NURP and
another have had their funding zeroed out completely.
James Cameron says today's ocean exploration is piss poor. He's right.
McClain says that what's especially striking about this "is that within the FY13 NOAA Budget, the Office
of Ocean Exploration [the division that contains NURP] took the second biggest cut of all programs (-
16.5%). Sadly, the biggest cut came to education programs (-55.1%)."
With any luck, Cameron's efforts will go a long way in piquing public interest in deep sea research.
(We know, for example, that Pandora's oceans will feature prominently in the Avatar sequel, and that
Cameron has even toyed with the idea of filming parts of the movie in the Marianas Trench.) Doug
Bartlett, a marine microbiologist at the Scripps Institute of Oceanography and Cameron's chief scientist
for the dive, thinks that the mission will help get kids "dreaming of the possibility of going into
engineering and oceanography and all sorts of science fields." But Cameron says that reversing the
decline of deep sea research will take more than his expedition, alone.
"I think we've got to do better," he told Nature News. "If it means getting private individuals together
with institutions and bypassing the whole government paradigm, that's fine. Maybe that's what we
need to do."

Private funding necessary for tech start ups
http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/oceanexploration2020/oe2020_report.pdf, page27 accessed 6/29/14
CK]

By 2020, private sector investments in exploration technology development, specifically for the
dedicated national program of exploration, exceed the federal investment, but federal partners play a
key role in testing and refining new technologies. Forum participants agreed that a top priority for a
national ocean exploration program of distinction is the development of mechanisms to fund
emerging and creatively disruptive technologies to enhance and expand exploration capabilities. In
addition to significant federal government investment in ocean exploration technology over time-
whether by the U.S. Navy, NASA, NOAA, or other civilian agencies involved in ocean exploration-many
felt strongly that to shorten the time from development to unrestricted adoption, more of the
required investment would come from the private sector.
These emerging technologies will likely include the next generations of ships remotely operated
vehicles; autonomous underwater vehicles; telepresence capabilities; and new sensors. Most
participants felt that continuing to develop human occupied vehicles should be a much lower priority
for a national program than focusing on autonomous vehicles, sensors, observatories, and
communications systems.
Participants also felt that federal partners in the national program of exploration should play a key role
in testing and refining these technologies as well as working to adapt existing and proven
technologies for exploration.
Overall, some of the most important technologies to cultivate are those that collect physical and
chemical oceanographic data, biological data, and seafloor mapping data.

Wealthy investors solve for ocean exploration NOAA and NSF are too limited
Schrope, Schmidt Ocean Institute outreach coordinator, 13 (Mark, Outreach coordinator at
Schmidt Ocean Institute, The Washington Post, Wealthy backers support scientific efforts to explore
deep seas, http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/wealthy-backers-support-
scientific-efforts-to-explore-deep-seas/2013/05/24/486c6430-b716-11e2-aa9e-
a02b765ff0ea_story.html, accessed 6/27/14, BCG)

A small but growing number of wealthy patrons, enamored of the possibilities of undersea
exploration, are donating the use of ships, submersibles and other resources to support missions that
might otherwise be unaffordable.
Funding pure ocean exploration - going where no person has gone before - has always been hard for
researchers. Federal agencies do support exploratory work, but they generally award grants to pursue
answers to well-formed questions. This can create a Catch-22, in which scientists don't know which
questions to ask until they get into unexplored areas.
Beginning in 2001, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration had an Ocean Exploration
program that provided grants for open-ended work, but the program's priorities have shifted toward
more limited work aboard the agency's exploration vessel Okeanos Explorer.
Most oceanographers rely on support from the National Science Foundation, but its budget, level at
best for several years, has had to deal with rising fuel prices and other costs required to maintain its
fleet of research vessels, leaving less available for grants.

Politics Net Benefit

Republicans love giving federal projects to the private sectorEx-Im bank
proves
Schouten, USA Today, 14
*Fredreka, 6/22/14, USA Today, New House leader opposes U.S. Export-Import Bank,
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/06/22/kevin-mccarthy-opposes-export-
import-bank/11235809/, accessed 7/15/14, AC]

WASHINGTON - The House's next majority leader said Sunday that he does not support renewing
the charter of the Export-Import Bank of the United States when it expires in September a move
that puts the key Republican at odds with some of the country's largest business interests.
Asked whether he could allow the bank's charter to expire, Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., said: "Yes,
because it's something that the private sector can be able to do." McCarthy spoke on Fox News
Sunday.
"One of the problems with government is they take hard-earned money so others do things that the
private sector can do," he said.
His position is a dramatic departure from that of the man he will replace, Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va., who
negotiated in 2012 to save the bank as conservatives clamored to kill it. (House Republicans on
Thursday elected McCarthy to succeed Cantor as majority leader. Cantor, who lost his primary election
June 10, will resign his No. 2 leadership post at the end of July.)
The bank helps U.S. companies ranging from big companies such as Boeing and General Electric to
small firms by subsidizing loans to foreign customers to help them buy U.S. products. The agency
says it supported 200,000 Americans jobs by financing or guaranteeing $37.4 billion of U.S. exports last
year.
Its reauthorization is backed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of
Manufacturers, and both groups planned a joint news conference Monday afternoon as part of a public-
relations drive to urge Congress to save the program. Proponents say dismantling the bank, created in
1934, would put U.S. companies at a competitive disadvantage with foreign firms that are aided by
similar programs in their own countries.
But Tea Party-aligned groups, including the Heritage Foundation and the Koch-backed Americans for
Prosperity, have denounced the bank as an example of "crony capitalism" and have vowed to lobby
hard to end it. Bolstering their cause: Texas Rep. Jeb Hensarling, the Republican chairman of the
committee with jurisdiction over the bank, has emerged as a vocal advocate in Congress for killing it.
The White House backs the bank. However, its charter will expire without congressional action and
prevent the bank from financing new loans.

Other Counterplans
National Ocean Council CP Solvency

National Oceans Council solves and is most efficient for coordination
Policy, National Ocean Council, April 2013, NATIONAL OCEAN POLICY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, pg. ii,
6/26/14, CK]

We are pleased to deliver the National Ocean Policy Implementation Plan (Plan), a document that
translates the National Ocean Policy into on-the-ground actions that will benefit Americans. The Plan
presents specific actions Federal agencies will take to bolster our ocean economy, improve ocean
health, support local communities, strengthen our security, and provide better science and
information to improve decision-making.
The National Ocean Policy, created by Executive Order 13547 on July 19, 2010, established the National
Ocean Council, which consists of 27 Federal agencies, departments, and offices working together to
share information and streamline decision-making. The Council developed the Plan over a two-year
period with extensive public input from a wide range of stakeholders.
The National Ocean Policy and accompanying Plan will help spur economic growth, empower states
and communities, and save taxpayer dollars through better coordination that avoids conflicts. They
are examples of common-sense good government that will help Americans sustain and enjoy our ocean
resources.

National Ocean Councils plan solves bureaucratic problems at all levels
6/26/14, CK]

Importantly, this Plan was informed by thoughtful input from national, regional, and local
stakeholders from all marine sectors; tribal, State, and local governments; private sector partners,
academic scientists, and the general public. It reflects careful consideration of extensive public
comments, particularly those that relate to the importance of incremental change, pilot projects,
support for local and regional capacity and self-determination, and the fundamental need for more and
better information.
The Implementation Plan better aligns multiple agency priorities and activities to promote greater
synergies and efficiencies in Federal spending. Given today's constrained fiscal climate and recognizing
uncertainty in the budget and appropriations processes, completion of every action within the identified
timeframes will depend upon the availability of funds and resources.
In that vein, this Plan is intended to be a living document. It is designed to be adaptive to new
information or changing conditions, and will be updated periodically as progress is made, lessons are
learned, new activities are planned, and as the Nation continually strives to improve the stewardship of
the ocean, coasts, and Great Lakes for the benefit of current and future generations.

National Ocean Policy Recommendation CP Solvency

National Ocean Policy creates non-binding change or directives

Whether or not Executive Order 13,547 runs afoul of the separation of powers doctrine is a matter of
time. Nevertheless, there is a distinction in the language of the Policy that opponents may be
overlooking. The Executive Order calls for a national policy. 137 A policy, keep in mind, is no more than
guidance to agencies and decision-makers.138 The language of the Implementation Plan for the Policy
dismisses any hint of binding authority; it reads:
The Policy does not create new regulations, supersede current regulations, or modify any agencys
established mission, jurisdiction, or authority. Rather, it helps coordinate the implementation of existing
regulations and authorities by all Federal agencies in the interest of more efficient decision-making. The
Policy does not redirect congressionally-appropriated funds, or direct agencies to divert funds from
existing programs. Instead, it improves interagency collaboration and prioritization to help focus limited
resources and use taxpayer dollars more efficiently.139
The Final Implementation Plan for the NOP is by no means a binding body of laws; again, it is merely
guidance for federal and state agencies, stakeholders, and communities to begin prioritizing ocean and
coastal issues. The Plan recommends the types of actions agencies will take to address such priorities,
and provides the tools required for taking such action. Ultimately, the NOP is a perfectly appropriate use
of presidential authority to bring desirable national priorities to the fore.

National Ocean Policy doesnt make anything new
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management 13*
[Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, *last date referenced was 4/16/13, US Dept of the Interior,
National Ocean Policy http://www.boem.gov/National-Ocean-Policy/, accessed 6/26/14,CK]

The National Ocean Policy sets forth a vision of an America whose stewardship ensures that the ocean,
our coasts, and the Great Lakes are healthy and resilient, safe and productive, and understood and
treasured so as to promote the well-being, prosperity, and security of present and future generations. In
order to better meet our Nations stewardship responsibilities for the ocean, our coasts, and the Great
Lakes, President Obama established the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force (Task Force) and charged
the Task Force with developing recommendations to enhance our ability to maintain healthy, resilient,
and sustainable ocean, coasts, and Great Lakes resources. The Department of the Interior was part of
the Task Force and BOEM will have a substantive role in meeting goals in the National Ocean Policy
Implementation Plan, which was released on April 16, 2013 by the Obama Administration:
Designed to be a living document, the Implementation Plan translates the National Ocean Policy into on-
the-ground actions to benefit the American people. With significant public input from a wide spectrum
of individuals and interests, the final Implementation Plan focuses on improving coordination to
increase administrative efficiencies in the Federal permitting process; better manage the ocean, coastal,
and Great Lakes resources that drive so much of our economy; develop and disseminate sound scientific
information that local communities, industries, and decision-makers can use; and collaborate more
effectively with State, Tribal, and local partners, marine industries, and other stakeholders. Without
creating any new regulations or authorities, the plan will ensure the many Federal agencies involved in
ocean management work together to reduce duplication and red tape and use taxpayer dollars more
efficiently.

Regional Planning CP Solvency

Regional partnerships allows flexible implementation based on local priorities
ocean-policy-can-reduce-marine-pollution-streamline-ocean-bureaucracy/, Issue 3, Volume:15, Page
653, accessed 6/26/14, CK]

One of the NOPs more notable accomplishments thus far is its effect on the regional, state, and local
leadership and implementation efforts. The JOC gave this category an A-, noting regional ocean
partnerships continue to make progress but need more support from states and federal agencies. 168
States and regions across the nation are showing greater understanding and management of ocean
resources through a variety of collaborative tools and strategies. Many regions have created regional
planning bodies, which are encouraged to implement the NOP in creative and sensible ways. The NOC is
supposed to provide flexibility for these regions, allowing each to focus on their own priorities and
needs. For instance, some regional planning bodies collect data, develop stakeholders involvement
initiatives, and develop regional marine protected areas.169

Case Neg

Leadership Answers

Status Quo Solves Science Diplomacy

Science diplomacy strong nowno need for planscience envoy programs prove
Koenig, American Association for the Advancement of Science Energy Journalist, 9
[Robert, 5 June 2009, American Association for the Advancement of Science, Fuzzy Spots in
Obama's Science Diplomacy, http://news.sciencemag.org/2009/06/fuzzy-spots-obamas-
science-diplomacy, accessed 7-15-14, J.J.]
Administration officials are scrambling to add substance to President Barack Obamas new Middle
Eastern science diplomacy initiatives, mentioned Thursday in his speech in Cairo. The President
promised new science envoys, centers of excellence, and a technological development fund for
the Middle East, North Africa, and Southeast Asia. The State Department and White House Office of
Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) were working today to bring those words into focus.
Details of these initiatives will be crafted in discussion with officials in the nations where they will be
based, said OSTP spokesman Rick Weiss. Nina V. Fedoroff, science adviser to the Secretary of State and
the Agency for International Development, said that proposals for centers of excellence have been
bubbling up from several different directions with emphasis on issues such as agriculture and public
health.
A State Department fact sheet explained that the United States will work with educational institutions,
NGOs and foreign governments to decide the focus and location of such centers.
The new science envoys program could follow the lines of a bill sponsored by Sen. Lugar (RIN) and
approved by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that would deploy prominent scientists on
missions of goodwill and collaboration. Fedoroff said such efforts would dovetail with evolving State
Department science diplomacy programs.
Obama also announced a new regional fund to support technological development in Muslim-majority
countries. The fact sheet said the fund would help pay for S&T collaboration, capacity development
and innovations with commercial potential.

Effective status quo scientific engagement from the US solves
Dehgan, Science and Technology Adviser of U.S. Agency for International
Development, & Colglazier, Science and Technology Adviser to U.S. Secretary of State,
12
[Alex & E. William, 12.07.2012, American Association for the Advancement of Science,
Development Science and Science Diplomacy,
http://www.sciencediplomacy.org/perspective/2012/development-science-and-science-
diplomacy, accessed 7-15-14, J.J.]

Cooperation on science, technology, and engineering around development challenges provides U.S.
diplomats with a significant opportunity to leverage science as a tool of smart power. U.S. scientific
expertise is highly regarded around the world, even in areas where U.S. popularity may be low.
Despite fierce competition and rapidly increasing parity in science, technology, and engineering assets
among nations, the United States remains predominant in most fields and is a world leader in
education, research, and innovation. Scientific engagement serves U.S. interests to promote stability
by empowering a traditional source of moderate leadership. Scientists frequently are the intelligentsia
of society and play important roles as leaders in many developing countries. The values inherent in
sciencehonesty, doubt, respect for evidence, transparency and openness, meritocracy, accountability,
tolerance, and hunger for opposing points of vieware values that Americans cherish. They are also
values that achieve political goals, such as improving governance, transparency, and the rule of law.
Scientific engagement can also build long-term frameworks that reinforce and support official
relationships between the United States and other countries. Science diplomacy is not the
relationship itself, but provides the scaffolding essential for the relationship to thrive

AT Science Diplomacy Solvency

Science diplomacy is hyped up
Copeland, Senior Fellow Canadian Defense and Foreign Affairs Institute, 11
*Daryl, Nov. 2011, Center for International Policy Studies, Science Diplomacy: Whats It All
About?, http://cips.uottawa.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Copeland-Policy-Brief-Nov-11-5.pdf,
accessed 7-15-14, J.J.]
However, there exists an even more fundamental difficulty: S&T issues are largely alien to, and almost
invisible within, most international policy (IP) 'Institutions. S&T and IP are effectively two solitudes,
existing in separate floating worlds that rarely intersect. When diplomats or politicians talk about IP,
you rarely hear anything about S&T. Similarly, when scientists get together to discuss their work, it is
rarely in the context of diplomacy or international policy. Indeed, scientists, besides being notoriously
poor communicators, tend to cherish their independence from politics aid government. The skill sets,
activity time frames and orientations of the two groups differ markedly. It must be asked: How many
diplomats are scientists? How many scientists are diplomats? How often do scientists and diplomats
mix? Foreign ministries, development agencies, and indeed most multilateral organizations are
without the scientific expertise, technological savvy, cultural or RED network access and crosscutting
linkages required to understand and manage S&T issues effectively.
Add up all of this, and a rather disturbing picture emerges. It is something akin to a triple whammy. In
mainstream popular culture, (a) diplomacy is seen as irrelevant and ineffective; (b) international policy
is viewed as esoteric and exotic; and (c) science is perceived as complex and impenetrable. Raise any
one of these subjects on its own and most peoples eyes glaze over. Put all three together, and you have
a combination capable of stopping just about any dinner party conversation in its tracks.

Laundry list of alt reasons why science diplomacy fails
Newman, Expert in Experimental High Energy Physics, 11
*Harvey, September 2011, APS Forum on International Physics, Session Y5 at the April
meeting, http://www.aps.org/units/fip/newsletters/201109/y5.cfm, accessed 7-15-14, J.J.]

After commenting on the varied forms of partnership in the projects mentioned, Barish returned to his
central themes: "Developing and supporting such large facilities must be an important part of U.S.
Science Policy, in order to keep U.S. science at the forefront", and "the U.S. must be part of the most
important science to be most competitive and to have the biggest impact on society." He used the
progress of the ILC Global Design Effort as a success example, while highlighting the key role of
governments in establishing global projects that can move forward to successful completion over a
period of one or more decades. He highlighted the challenges of integrating the U.S. system, with its
one-year funding cycle and particular ways of governance, project management and accountability with
those of other countries and/or international organizations. Looking to the future, if the U.S. aspires to
host a major international project to do frontier science, Barish said: "we must solve problems of
governance, visas, in-kind contributions, accountability, contingency and [the way we handle] cost
overruns" to work effectively with our international partners.

No private sector incorporation cuts effectiveness
National Research Council, Private & Nonprofit institutions, 11
[National Research Council, U.S. and International Perspectives on Global Science Policy and
Science, pg. 34, J.J.]
Workshop presentations and discussions on barriers to progress and best practices for advancing
science in the global context and for science diplomacy were very similar. Participants suggested several
barriers to progress that are also encountered in science diplomacy. The U.S. government has been
actively undertaking science diplomacy efforts in the last few years. Some participants stated that
these efforts are most important when there are difficult governmental relationships, which can lead
to sensitivity as to the motivation behind these efforts. They noted that the limitations on U.S. use of
science in diplomacy are often long-standing policies and laws that were motivated originally and
primarily by a concern for control of technology, whereas now what seems most needed is
engagement and the embrace of competition. This is particularly salient in unnecessarily cumbersome
mobility controls, that is, visas and travel restrictions. Foreign professionals were described as often
being of two minds: They value collaborating with U.S. counterparts, yet many are also apprehensive
about attending conferences within the United States because of visa uncertainties and difficulties, and
security controls. Science envoy Gebisa Ejeta noted that implementation of controls in the United
States since September 11, 2001 has been very discouraging and has stifled its global engagement
capacities. Several workshop participants also noted that U.S. policies ought to recognize that effective
competition raises the bar for everyone and serves as a major source of future opportunities. Many
participants emphasized the importance of the private sector in global science and technology
engagement. As Eric Bone of the U.S. Department of State observed, partnerships with the private
sector are essential, and science diplomacy should not be restricted to a government-to-government
exercise. Unfortunately, capacity for this type of partnership is weak in the developing world, noted
Gebisa Ejeta. A related impediment, he said, is that existing policy and regulatory frameworks have been
perceived by some as biased towards the developed world. This is particularly relevant to intellectual
property rights, such as the ones generated by the 1985 Utility Patent Act for biological agents and
products. This act encouraged the heavy infusion of financial resources to to private-sector research in
the field of molecular biology. It also resulted inadvertently in a significant reduction in public research
spending in both developed and developing countries. These new investments in the private sector
triggered a rush of patenting, in some cases fueling misunderstandings among poor and rich nations.
Ejeta added that the public-private partnerships in the developed world also need to be revisited. For
example, increases of private investments in agricultural biotechnology are associated generally with
decreased public spending, thus creating an unhealthy imbalance.

Relations are an alt cause
David, SciDev founding director, 9
*Dickson, 4/6/9, SciDev, The limits of science diplomacy,
http://www.scidev.net/global/capacity-building/editorials/the-limits-of-science-
diplomacy.html, accessed 7-15-14, J.J.]

Perhaps the most contentious area discussed at the meeting was how science diplomacy can frame
developed countries' efforts to help build scientific capacity in the developing world.
There is little to quarrel with in collaborative efforts that are put forward with a genuine desire for
partnership. Indeed, partnership whether between individuals, institutions or countries is the
new buzzword in the "science for development" community.
But true partnership requires transparent relations between partners who are prepared to meet as
equals. And that goes against diplomats' implicit role: to promote and defend their own countries'
interests.
John Beddington, the British government's chief scientific adviser, may have been a bit harsh when he
told the meeting that a diplomat is someone who is "sent abroad to lie for his country". But he
touched a raw nerve.

Ocean Collapse/Biodiversity Answers

Status Quo Solves Exploration

Status quo solves NOAA and NSF are investing expanding submersible fleet and
exploration now
Terdiman, CNET News Senior Writer, 10
*Daniel, 4/15/10, CNET News Oceans Salvation may lie in exploration,
http://www.cnet.com/news/oceans-salvation-may-lie-in-exploration/, accessed 6/29/14, BCG)

The urgent goal, Hammond said, is to make a dent in the 90 percent of the world's oceans that humans
know nothing about. And that's where NOAA is putting its money where its mouth is: by taking a
former Department of Defense acoustic surveillance vessel that it acquired in 2005 and retrofitting it
as a world-class "global range ship of discovery."
Christened the Okeanos Explorer--okeanos is Greek for ocean--the ship, which is undergoing field trials
in Hawaii right now and should embark on its first major expedition in June, is a testament to scientists
applying technology to solve some significant problems.
Among its innovations, the Okeanos Explorer is outfitted with what is called a remotely operated
vehicle (ROV), essentially an unmanned submersible, that can descend to 6,000 meters below the
surface. Like many of its cousins, it is tethered to its mothership with fiber-optic cable that can transmit
data from a host of sensors and cameras.
But what makes the Okeanos unique is that it features telepresence technology that will allow it to
beam any kind of data gathered from the ROV, be it high-definition video or high-resolution
photographs, to anywhere in the world via a super-high-speed satellite Internet connection in real-
time. And that means, Hammonds explained, that scientists in command centers anywhere in the
world can participate in the exploration as it's happening, a major leap forward given the economics
of putting people on board ships that might be anywhere on Earth at any time.
The National Science Foundation, too, is investing in ROVs and seeing them as a way to expand the
reach of its research. For some time, it has operated an ROV known as Jason, which has a 6,000-meter
depth range. But over the last year, the NSF has been putting much of its ocean exploration energy
into a new ROV developed by the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute known as Nereus, which,
according to Brian Midson, a technology operations specialist in the NSF's submersible support program,
is today the world's only vehicle proven to be able to reaching the bottom of the Mariana Trench.

NOAA is sufficient now it is constantly being innovated and has plans for exploration
Lubchenco, former NOAA administrator, 13
*Dr. Jane, 2013, NOAA, All Hands on Deck NOAAs Accomplishments: 2009-2012,
http://www.noaa.gov/pdf/NOAA_Accomplishments_2009-2012.pdf, accessed 7/13/14, GNL]

Day in and day out, NOAAs work impacts the lives of every American. From life-saving and commerce-
enabling weather forecasts to research on how our planet is changing to protecting natural resources
and sharing information broadly, NOAA personnel are developing solutions for some of our planets
most pressing challenges. NOAA enriches lives through science, services and stewardship. With roots
dating back to 1807, our agency has evolved to meet the needs of a changing nation and changing
environment.
During my nearly four years at NOAA, through daily interactions and challenging disasters, Ive had
occasion to get to know many of our nearly 13,000 employees and hundreds of contractors upon which
we rely. One thing that has impressed me immensely is the passion they feel for our mission. Ive also
been astounded at NOAAs breadthour mission takes us from the surface of the sun to the depths of
the ocean floor. And Ive seen NOAA adapt to changing circumstances and embrace new opportunities
and challenges, while staying true to its core values. An example of this adaptation is NOAAs embrace
of innovative ways to be more efficient or effective, whether its cloud IT solutions or social media.
Beginning with Facebook and Twitter in 2009, NOAA has developed a strong social media presence,
tweeting and posting to hundreds of thousands of followers around the nation and the world.
Because of the dedication and hard work of NOAA employees, and thanks to great partnerships, weve
been able to tackle some big issues. Ive often said that the diversity of our mission is one of NOAAs
greatest challenges, but its also a great strength: It enables timely integration across research, weather,
climate, oceans, coasts, satellites, ships, and planes to deliver useful services and stewardship. Through
an emphasis on transparency, integrity, innovation, team work and communication, we have made
significant progress on multiple fronts during the last four years.
So, what have we accomplished? During the past four years, NOAA employees have worked with our
partners to end overfishing and rebuild depleted fish stocks; helped create the first National Ocean
Policy that highlights the importance of healthy oceans; issued life-saving weather, water, and
tsunami warnings and worked toward a Weather Ready Nation; invested in coastal communities and
strived to make them more resilient through integrated conservation and restoration; strengthened
science through our first Scientific Integrity Policy; and created a new generation of climate services to
enable smart planning, adaption, and mitigation. This is just a small sample of NOAAs efforts to fulfill
its overall mission.
The following stories flesh out these and other successes. Far from an exhaustive list, this compilation
provides highlights from NOAAs impressive portfolio.
I am tremendously proud to have been part of the NOAA family and am confident that it will continue
to provide the services, science, and stewardship on which so much and so many depend. Enjoy
reading these stories and feel proud.

AT Ocean Collapse Solvency

Alternate causality Interior pollution causes ocean pollution
AND STREAMLINE OUR OCEAN BUREAUCRACY? Issue 3, Volume: 15, Pages 652-653 CK]

These recommendations are particularly pertinent in the context of marine pollution because an
ocean pollution problem is a national problem. Even landlocked regions contribute pollution to the
ocean, rivers, streams, and coastal waterways. For example, crop and soil fertilizers deposited in
agricultural regions travel through runoff or groundwater into rivers, streams, ponds, and lakes, and
ultimately, if not directly, into the ocean. If the NOC can effectively communicate this land-to-sea
connection across all states and the Federal Government, then perhaps local and regional bodies will
adjust their existing codes and ordinances to reflect the uniform goal of protecting coastal and ocean
ecosystems. In particular, these policies should focus on reducing the water quality impacts of land uses
and developmenta priority that both interior and coastal regions can afford to improve upon.

Alt causes to ocean ecosystem decline dumping, overfishing, ice caps
Brown, Council on Foreign Relations Program on International Institutions and Global
Governance Deputy Director, & Faisal Thaler, Council on Foreign Relations Associate
Director, 13
*Kaysie Brown and Farah Faisal Thaler, 6/19/2013, Council on Foreign Relations, The Global Oceans
Regime, http://www.cfr.org/oceans/global-oceans-regime/p21035, accessed 6/30/2014 CK]

And the oceans themselves are in danger of environmental catastrophe. They have become the
world's garbage dumpif you travel to the heart of the Pacific Ocean, you'll find the North Pacific
Gyre, where particles of plastic outweigh plankton six to one. Eighty percent of the world's fish stocks
are depleted or on the verge of extinction, and when carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere,
much of it is absorbed by the world's oceans. The water, in response, warms and acidifies, destroying
habitats like wetlands and coral reefs. Glacial melting in the polar regions raises global sea levels,
which threatens not only marine ecosystems but also humans who live on or near a coast. Meanwhile,
port-based megacities dump pollution in the ocean, exacerbating the degradation of the marine
environment and the effects of climate change.
Threats to the ocean are inherently transnational, touching the shores of every part of the world. So
far, the most comprehensive attempt to govern international waters produced the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). But U.S. refusal to join the convention, despite
widespread bipartisan support, continues to limit its strength, creating a leadership vacuum in the
maritime regime. Other states that have joined the treaty often ignore its guidelines or fail to coordinate
policies across sovereign jurisdictions. Even if it were perfectly implemented, UNCLOS is now thirty
years old and increasingly outdated.

Three things necessary to stop ocean collapse exploration alone isnt sufficient
Black, BBC environment correspondent, 11
*Richard, 6/20/11, BBC News, Worlds oceans in shocking decline,
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-13796479, accessed 6/28/14, BCG)

IPSO's immediate recommendations include:
stopping exploitative fishing now, with special emphasis on the high seas where currently there is little
effective regulation
mapping and then reducing the input of pollutants including plastics, agricultural fertilisers and human
waste
making sharp reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.
Carbon dioxide levels are now so high, it says, that ways of pulling the gas out of the atmosphere need
to be researched urgently - but not using techniques, such as iron fertilisation, that lead to more CO2
entering the oceans.
"We have to bring down CO2 emissions to zero within about 20 years," Professor Hoegh-Guldberg told
BBC News.
"If we don't do that, we're going to see steady acidification of the seas, heat events that are wiping
out things like kelp forests and coral reefs, and we'll see a very different ocean."

[NOTE IPSO = International Programme on the State of the Ocean, Hoegh-Guldberg = coral specialist at
the University of Queensland, Australia]

Exploration Bad

Exploration is a death sentence for marine mammals
Wines, New York Times, 14
*Michael, 2/27/14, The New York Times, U.S. Moves Toward Atlantic Oil Exploration, Stirring Debate
Over Sea Life, http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/28/us/us-moves-toward-atlantic-oil-exploration-
stirring-debate-over-sea-life.html?_r=0, accessed 6/30/14, GNL]

The Interior Department opened the door on Thursday to the first searches in decades for oil and gas off
the Atlantic coast, recommending that undersea seismic surveys proceed, though with a host of
safeguards to shield marine life from much of their impact.
The recommendation is likely to be adopted after a period of public comment and over objections by
environmental activists who say it will be ruinous for the climate and sea life alike.
The American Petroleum Institute called the recommendation a critical step toward bolstering the
nations energy security, predicting that oil and gas production in the region could create 280,000 new
jobs and generate $195 billion in private investment.
Activists were livid. Allowing exploration could be a death sentence for many marine mammals, and
is needlessly turning the Atlantic Ocean into a blast zone, Jacqueline Savitz, a vice president at the
conservation group Oceana, said in a statement on Thursday.
Oceana and other groups have campaigned for months against the Atlantic survey plans, citing
Interior Department calculations that the intense noise of seismic exploration could kill and injure
thousands of dolphins and whales.
But while the assessment released on Thursday repeats those estimates, it also largely dismisses them,
stating that they employ multiple worst-case scenarios and ignore measures by humans and the
mammals themselves to avoid harm.
Many marine scientists say the estimates of death and injury are at best seriously inflated. Theres no
argument that some of these sounds can harm animals, but its blown out of proportion, Arthur N.
Popper, who heads the University of Marylands laboratory of aquatic bioacoustics, said in an interview.
Its the Flipper syndrome, or Free Willy.
How the noise affects sea mammals behavior in the long term an issue about which little is known
is a much greater concern, he said.
A formal decision to proceed with surveys would reopen a swath off the East Coast stretching from
Delaware to Cape Canaveral, Fla., that has been closed to petroleum exploration since the early 1980s.
Actual drilling of test wells could not begin until a White House ban on production in the Atlantic expires
in 2017, and even then, only after the government agrees to lease ocean tracts to oil companies, an
issue officials have barely begun to study.
The petroleum industry has sunk 51 wells off the East Coast none of them successful enough to begin
production in decades past. But the Interior Department said in 2011 that 3.3 billion barrels of
recoverable oil and 312 trillion cubic feet of natural gas could lie in the exploration area, and nine
companies have already applied for permits to begin surveys.
President Obama committed in 2010 to allowing oil and gas surveys along the same stretch of the
Atlantic, and the government had planned to lease tracts off the Virginia coast for exploration in 2011.
But those plans collapsed after the Deepwater Horizon oil rig disaster in April 2010, and the government
later banned activity in the area until 2017.
Thirty-four species of whales and dolphins, including six endangered whales, live in the survey area.
Environmental activists say seismic exploration could deeply imperil blue and humpback whales as
well as the North American right whale, which numbers in the hundreds.
Surveys generally use compressed-air guns that produce repeated bursts of sound as loud as a howitzer,
often for weeks or months on end. The Interior Departments estimate said that up to 27,000 dolphins
and 4,600 whales could die or be injured annually during exploration periods, and that three million
more would suffer various behavioral changes.
But many scientists say death and injury are not a major concern. Decades of seismic exploration
worldwide have yet to yield a confirmed whale death, the government says.
It is quite unlikely that most sounds, in realistic scenarios, will directly cause injury or mortality to
marine mammals, Brandon Southall, perhaps the best-known expert on the issue, wrote in an email
exchange. Most of the issues now really have to do with what are the sublethal effects what are the
changes in behavior that may happen. Dr. Southall is president of SEA Incorporated, an environmental
consultancy in Santa Cruz, Calif.
Loud sounds like seismic blasts appear to cause stress to marine mammals, just as they do to humans.
Experts say seismic exploration could alter feeding and mating habits, for example, or simply drown
out whales and dolphins efforts to communicate or find one another. But the true impact has yet to
be measured; there is no easy way to gauge the long-term effect of sound on animals that are
constantly moving.
These animals are living for decades, if not centuries, said Aaron Rice, the director of Cornell
Universitys bioacoustics research program. The responses you see are not going to manifest
themselves in hours or days or weeks. Were largely speculating as to what the consequences will be.
But in my mind, the absence of data doesnt mean there isnt a problem.

Exploration techniques are harmful to organisms in the ocean
Oceana, non-profit organization committed to protecting oceans, No Date
[Oceana, No Date, Impacts of Offshore Drilling, http://oceana.org/en/our-work/stop-ocean-
pollution/oil-pollution/learn-act/impacts-of-offshore-drilling, accessed 6/30/14, GNL]

Factors other than pollutants can affect marine wildlife as well. Exploration for offshore oil involves
firing air guns which send a strong shock across the seabed that can decrease fish catch, damage the
hearing capacity of various marine species and may lead to marine mammal strandings.
More drilling muds and fluids are discharged into the ocean during exploratory drilling than in
developmental drilling because exploratory wells are generally deeper, drilled slower and are larger in
diameter. The drilling waste, including metal cuttings, from exploratory drilling are generally dumped in
the ocean, rather than being brought back up to the platform.

STEM Answers

Status Quo Solves STEM

STEM workers available
Sherter, Business Journalist, 7/11/14
*Alain, 7/11/14, MONEYWATCH, A shortage of scientists and techies? Think again,
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/a-shortage-of-scientists-and-techies-think-again/, accessed 7/15/14
CK]

But new federal data suggest that idea is largely a myth, and it raises questions for students who are
planning their careers. Roughly three-quarters of people who have a bachelor's degree in science,
technology, engineering and math -- or so-called STEM fields -- aren't working in those professions,
the U.S. Census Bureau said Thursday.
Citing statistics from its most recent American Community Survey, the bureau found that only about
half of engineering, computer, math and statistics majors in the U.S. had jobs in their chosen field.
Science grads fared even worse: Just 26 percent of physical science majors and 15 percent of those
with a diploma in biology, environmental studies or agriculture were in a STEM-related occupation.
It's worth noting that unemployment among people with STEM degrees is considerably lower than for
the general population of workers. As of 2012 (the latest year with available data), only 3.6 percent of
college graduates between the ages of 25 and 64 were without a job, according to the Census Bureau,
compared with 6.1 percent for the broader U.S. workforce.
Yet those grads aren't necessarily working in a STEM job, notes Liana Christin Landivar, a sociologist in
the Census Bureau's industry and occupation statistics branch.
Hal Salzman, a professor of planning and public policy at Rutgers University, has calculated that twice
as many STEM students graduate every year as are able to find jobs in their field. Some half a million
grads with these degrees emerge from U.S. colleges and universities annually, and they must compete
for roughly 180,000 job openings, he said in a 2013 article.
"Engineering has the highest rate at which graduates move into STEM occupations, but even here the
supply is over 50 percent higher than the demand," he wrote. "[Information technology], the industry
most vocal about its inability to find enough workers, hires only two-thirds of each year's graduating
class of bachelor's degree computer scientists."

Immigrants solve STEM crisis
Lee, Breitbard News, 7/12/25
*Tony, 7/12/14, Breitbard News, CBS: CENSUS DATA SHOW U.S. DOESN'T HAVE SHORTAGE OF STEM
WORKERS, http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/07/12/CBS-Census-Data-Show-US-Doesn-
t-Have-Shortage-of-STEM-Workers, accessed 7/15/14 CK]

After the Census Bureau reported on Thursday that "74% of those with a bachelor's degree in these
subjects don't work in STEM (science, technology, engineering, math) jobs," CBS News concluded that
the new data suggest that notion "is largely a myth."
Census sociologist Christin Landivar noted that though "STEM graduates have relatively low
unemployment," they are "not employed in STEM occupations."
The high-tech industry, like Mark Zuckerberg's FWD.us, has received largely a free pass on the issue in
pushing for drastic increases in the number of guest-worker visas in amnesty legislation. That has
puzzled some of the top scholars, especially in light of reports from liberal, nonpartisan, and
conservative organizations that have all shown that the country has a surplus--and not a shortage--of
American high-tech workers.
As Breitbart News has reported, a Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) report found that, from 2007-
2012, "the number of new immigrants with STEM degrees admitted each year [was] by itself higher
than the total growth in STEM employment." That report was "consistent with research from
Georgetown University, the Economic Policy Institute (EPI), the Rand Corporation, the Urban Institute,
and the National Research Council, which have also found no evidence that America has a shortage of
high-tech workers."
In addition, four nonpartisan scholars have also debunked the notion that there is a shortage of STEM
workers. Ron Hira, a public policy professor at the Rochester Institute of Technology, "said there are
50% more graduates than job openings in the STEM fields." He has also repeatedly emphasized that
the IT sector has been "an area of social mobility," and increasing the number of visas without questions
takes jobs away from American workers and lowers the wages of those who do find STEM jobs.

AT STEM Solvency

The ocean doesnt spark interest the interest required for STEM
Carlyle, Subsea Hydraulics Engineer, 13
*Ryan, 1/31/13, Forbes, Why Don't We Spend More On Exploring The Oceans, Rather Than On Space
Exploration?, http://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2013/01/31/why-dont-we-spend-more-on-
exploring-the-oceans-rather-than-on-space-exploration/, accessed 7/15/14 CK]

Despite the difficulty, there is actually a lot of scientific exploration going on in the oceans. Heres a
pretty good public website for a science ROV mission offshore Oregon: 2009 Pacific Northwest
Expedition
To reinforce my point about it being boring, heres a blog entry from that team where they talk about
how boring the sea floor is: 2009 Pacific Northwest Expedition
What IS really interesting in the deep ocean is the exotic life. You see some crazy animals that are
often not well-known to science. Something floats by the camera 5000 ft down, and you say what
the hell was that? and no one knows. Usually its just some variety of jellyfish, but occasionally we
find giant* isopods:
Unfortunately, deep-sea creatures rarely survive the trip to surface. Their bodies are acclimated to the
high pressures (hundreds of atmospheres), and the decompression is usually fatal. Our ability to
understand these animals is very limited, and their only connection to the surface biosphere is
through a few food chain connections (like sperm whales) that can survive diving to these depths.
Were fundamentally quite disconnected from deep ocean life.
Also, there is no hope of ever establishing human habitation more than about 1000 ft deep. The
pressures are too great, and no engineering or materials conceivable today would allow us to build
livable-sized spaces on the deep sea floor. The two times humans have reached the deepest part of the
ocean, it required a foot-thick flawless metal sphere with barely enough internal space to sit down. As
far as I can tell, seafloor living is all but impossible a habitable moon base would be vastly easier to
engineer than a seafloor colony. See my answer to International Space Station: Given the actual space
station ISS, would it be cheaper to build the equivalent at 3-4-5 miles deep underwater? Why?
To recap: we dont spend more time/money exploring the ocean because its expensive, difficult, and
uninspiring. We stare up at the stars and dream of reaching them, but few people look off the side of
a boat and wish they could go down there.

STEM training doesnt guarantee STEM workers
Wagstaff, NBC news, 7/11/14
*Keith, 7/11/14, NBC news, Does Not Compute: Most STEM Grads Don't Get STEM Jobs,
http://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/does-not-compute-most-stem-grads-dont-get-stem-
jobs-n153881, accessed 7/15/14 CK]

It's no surprise that a college student getting a degree in civil engineering has better job prospects than
someone majoring in, say, medieval literature. But not every STEM (science, technology, engineering
and math) graduate ends up in the field that they have a degree in. In fact, according to a new report
from the U.S. Census Bureau, nearly three out of every four people with STEM degrees have jobs in
other fields. That does not mean physics majors are all becoming poets. The STEM label can be kind of
misleading doctors are not technically considered STEM professionals, which excludes a lot of
science majors who end up in the medical field. But it does point to the desirability of STEM majors to
employers of all kinds. The report also found that many STEM fields are not very female-friendly, with
men making up 86 percent of engineers and 74 percent of computer professionals.

No solvency education has to be nation-wide and interconnective
ocean-policy-can-reduce-marine-pollution-streamline-ocean-bureaucracy/, Issue 3, Volume:15, Pages
653-654, accessed 6/26/14, CK]

Arguably one of the most important areas of the NOP is in the promotion and support for research
and education on marine issues. The JOC gave this category a C because although some progress
had been made, there had been funding and program cuts, as well as delayed implementation of
critical tools, weakened ocean science, research, and education. 170 One of the greatest
improvements in this area was the installation of the data portal, ocean.data.gov, which serves as a
clearinghouse for access to non-confidential federal ocean data and planning tools. 171 There have also
been strong regional efforts to coordinate on regional ocean and coastal research, observing, mapping,
and restoration priorities. 172
However, more is needed in terms of funding and support for further education. Investments in
research, science, and education on ocean and coastal issues are crucial, particularly in the context of
marine pollution, because it will produce a more informed citizenry; create better stewards of ocean,
coastal, and Great Lakes resources; and increase awareness of business opportunities related to these
resources. 173 With a greater knowledge base, people can participate in activities that address the
issues facing our oceans and coasts. Furthermore, an educational system that incorporates ocean and
coastal science is crucial to ensuring that the next generation of ocean scientists and engineers are
sufficiently trained to continue to lead an innovation-based global economy.174 Country-wide
education would also bring more awareness to the pervasive interconnectivity of land and marine
pollution, and hopefully illuminate the need for efforts across the nation, rather than just on the
coasts.

Interest is not key to STEM education People are already interested in science
studies prove
Atkinson, Innovation Foundation president, 12
[Robert D., President of IT and Innovation Foundation in Washington DC, Spring2012, Issues in Science &
Technology, Why the Current Education Reform Strategy Wont Work Vol. 28 Issue 3, p29-36, Ebsco,

The third myth is that more students would become STEM graduates if they knew how important or
cool STEM is. In other words, solving the pipeline problem is a marketing challenge. The National
Science Boards (NSBs) National Action Plan 2007 reflected this view when it called for the National
Science Foundation (NSF) to continue to develop and fund programs that increase public appreciation
for and understanding of STEM.
This view, however, ignores the fact that U.S. culture is already enthusiastic about science. For
example, one survey reported by the NSB in Science and Engineering Indicators 2010 found that 80%
of respondents stated that they were very or moderately interested in new scientific discoveries.
Most people hold scientists in very high regard, ranking them second (behind military leaders) in terms
of public confidence. Overall, the publics enthusiasm for science rivals (if not exceeds) that of people
in China and South Korea, while far outstripping that of Europeans, Russians, and the Japanese.
But that does not deter the make science cool effort, even though it has not been shown to work. In
1994, a survey by the National Action Council for Minorities in Engineering (NACME) found that only
6% of disadvantaged minorities were graduating from high school with the math needed for an
engineering or related degree. The survey also found that students did not recognize the importance of
math as a foundation for later achievement. To reverse these trends, NACME launched the public
service campaign Math is Power, which included targeted television advertisements emphasizing the
importance of math to jobs with higher wages. Four years later, NACME found in a follow-up survey
that Half of all students surveyed are aware of the campaign, with a majority of them familiar with at
least one of its key messages and that overall students had more favorable attitudes towards math.
However, its impact on behavior was negligible. In fact, students were less likely to think that the
decision to take math and science classes is an important one. They are also less likely to view math as
important for their careers than they were six years ago. The results suggest that using mass media to
reshape student attitudes may in fact work, but the changed attitudes do not necessarily translate to
changed behaviors.

AT Economy Internal Link

STEM doesnt solve the economy studies prove no shortage and STEM emphasis
wont change numbers involved
Atkinson, Innovation Foundation president, 12
[Robert D., President of IT and Innovation Foundation in Washington DC, Spring2012, Issues in Science &
Technology, Why the Current Education Reform Strategy Wont Work Vol. 28 Issue 3, p29-36, Ebsco,

The first myth is that in a globalized, technology-driven world, all students needs to learn STEM. In
this viewso widely held that it is virtually never questionedthe economy will be so innovation-
based that everyone, even those who will never become Ph.D. scientists, will need to learn as much
STEM as possible. The reality is quite different. Only about 5% of jobs are STEM jobs, and that share is
not expected to grow significantly. This is one of the findings that my colleague Merrilea Mayo and I
reported in Refueling the U.S. Innovation Economy: Fresh Approaches to Science, Technology,
Engineering, and Mathematics Education, issued in December 2010 by the Information Technology and
Innovation Foundation. Very few workers actually need advanced STEM education, and surveys of
employers reinforce that. One survey noted in our report found that although 70% of employers rated
oral communication skills as very important for high-school graduates, only 9% rated science skills as
very important. The rate was higher for four-year college graduates, but still only 33% of employers
rated science skills as very important, compared with 90% who rated writing skills as very important.
Saying that the nation should pour resources into K-12 because everyone needs to know STEM is akin
to saying that because music is important to society, every K-12 student should have access to a
Steinway piano and a Juilliard-trained music teacher. In fact, because very few students become
professional musicians, doing this would be a waste of societal resources. It would be far better to
find students interested in music and give them the focused educational opportunities they need.
STEM is no different.
The second myth is that focusing on K-12 will ensure that enough students graduate from college with
STEM degrees. The Some STEM for All view holds that the best way to increase college STEM graduates
is to boost STEM skills in the early years, as argued by many observers and reports, including the
National Academies 2007 report Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America
for a Brighter Economic Future. In this view, it is too late to focus on college, or even high school, for
promoting STEM.
This can be described as the leaky pipeline model, in which kids enter the educational flow but drop
out through leaks along the way. Norman R. Augustine, who chaired the committee that produced
Rising Above the Gathering Storm, described this leakage in another 2007 Academies report, Is America
Falling Off the Flat Earth? As one might suspect, he wrote, there is a great deal of leakage along that
extended educational highway. To begin with, about one-third of U.S. eighth-graders do not receive a
high school diploma. And of those who do, about 40 percent do not go on to college. About half who do
begin college do not receive a bachelors degree. Of those who do receive such a degree, two-thirds will
not be in science or engineering. And of those who are U.S. citizens and do receive degrees in either
science or engineering, only about 1 in 10 will become candidates for a doctoral degree in those fields.
And over half the doctoral candidates drop out before being awarded a Ph.D.
If the goal is to have every high-school graduate be able and ready to major in a STEM field in college,
then ensuring that the pipeline is completely full by the end of the eighth grade is critical. That is why
the Gathering Storm report so strongly declared that the U.S. system of public education must lay the
foundation for developing a workforce that is literate in mathematics and science. As the report
continued, The point is that it takes a lot of third-graders to produce one contributing research scientist
or engineer and a very long time to do it. In other words, if everyone has an equal probability of taking
the next step to become STEM-educated, then the best way to get more at the end of the pipeline is to
put a lot of students in at the beginning.
There are two problems with this logic, however. First, not everyone has an equal probability of
getting a graduate STEM degree. At the risk of violating political correctness, the fact is that being a
scientist or engineer requires above-average intelligence. But the nation is not a huge Lake Wobegon,
the fictional community where all the children are above average. Moreover, it is not just intelligence
that determines a students likelihood to go into STEM; it is also personality. There is a long tradition
of research exploring the link between personality characteristics and choice of occupation, including
STEM occupations. A new study, reported by Scott Andrew Shane in his 2010 book Born Entrepreneurs,
Born Leaders: How Your Genes Affect Your Work Life, has found that the choice of careers in physical
science and engineering was about 70% more influenced by a persons genetic makeup than were
choices in such areas as finance and sales. Assuming that exposing every student to a lot of high-
quality STEM education will make them want and be able to become a scientist or engineer is simply
wishful thinking, just as it would be to assume that every student exposed to high-quality music
education and a requirement to take four years of music in high school will want and be able to
become a professional musician.
The second problem, as noted above, is that the nation does not need everyone to gain a STEM
degree. In fact, the current pipeline produces enough high-school students able to get the needed
number of STEM college degrees. But society currently does a poor job in high school and college of
helping those students get all the way to a STEM degree. To use the pipeline analogy, replacing a
malfunctioning valve is likely to be a more effective, and much cheaper, strategy than increasing the
size of a five-mile-long pipe.

Empirically proven government funding of science has no effect on economy and
might actually hinder economic growth
Kealey, University of Buckingham vice chancellor, 97
*Terence, April 11, 1997, Cato Institute, End Government Science Funding,
http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/end-government-science-funding, Accessed: 7-15-14,
KMM]

Consequently, the quality of industrial science is remarkable. Current Contents magazine recently
reviewed the institutions that produced the largest number of cited papers in biology, and two of the
top seven were private companies: Genentech and Chiron. The others were charitable foundations.
One, the Howard Hughes Foundation, is totally private, while the others three (the Salk and Whitehead
Institutes and the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) do accept some government money.
That destroys another myth: that only governments will fund scholarship. The rich, as Nietzsche wrote,
have a need to give. Only last year David Packard, of Hewlett Packard, left $4 billion to his research
foundation. His thousands of philanthropic predecessors include Howard Hughes (whose foundation
spent $332 million on research in 1991); W. M. Keck ($95 million); John D. Rockefeller (whose
foundation funded both the discovery of DNA as the genetic messenger and the development of
penicillin); and Andrew Carnegie.
Ordinary people, too, will fund academic research. Witness the great charities such as the American
Heart Association ($105 million in 1991) and the American Cancer Society ($94 million).
Without government funding of science, the United States overtook Britain around 1890 as the richest
country in the world. So strenuously did Congress disapprove of federal involvement in research that
it refused James Smithsons bequest in 1829 and only grudgingly accepted it in 1846. (His gift helped
establish the Smithsonian Institution.)
War changed everything. The National Academy of Sciences was created in 1863, at the height of the
Civil War, to help build ironclads to beat the South. The Office of Scientific Research and Development,
which ultimately spawned the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health, was
created in 1941.
Then the USSR launched Sputnik, the first artificial satellite, in 1957. The Soviets were going to destroy
us from space! So in 1958 the National Aeronautics and Space Administration was created, and the
U.S. Congress passed the National Defense Education Act to pour money into higher education and
science. Yet, remarkably, U.S. economic growth was unaffected. The U.S. per capita gross domestic
product has grown at around 2 percent a year since 1820, and the government largesse of the last 50
years has not altered that. Why not?

Other Advantage Answers
AT Arctic

No Arctic war tensions de-escalate
Jones et al, Brookings Institution senior fellow, 14
[Bruce, Stanford University international studies professor, Thomas Wright, Brookings senior fellow and
University of Chicago public policy professor, Jeremy Shapiro, Brookings visiting fellow and MIT political
science PhD candidate, and Robert Keane, Brookings research assistant, University of Chicago political
science MA, Policy Paper number 33, Feb 2014, The State of the International Order
http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Research/Files/Reports/2014/02/state%20of%20the%20internatio
nal%20order/intlorder_report.pdf, p.23, accessed 7-3-14, TAP]

Developments on the Arctic have been much more encouraging. Despite the Arctics dangerous mix of
great power competition, unresolved territorial disputes, and increasingly accessible oil and gas
reserves, there has to date been little actual discord. Unlike in the South China Sea, which faces a
similar mix of uncharted energy resources and contested boundaries, Arctic states have pledged to
solve disputes in an orderly process, managed the peaceful resolution of a major territorial conflict,
and concluded a binding agreement to cooperate on search and rescue. More important still, the
Arctic states have agreed to use the dispute resolution mechanisms established by the Law of the
Seadespite the fact the United States, has not ratified that treaty.

Arctic cooperation is inevitableRussia proves
Arctic Journal, 14
*Kevin McGwin, Journalist, 3/6/14, Arktik Politik, http://arcticjournal.com/politics/arktik-
politik, accessed 7/15/14, PAC]
But, perhaps befitting Russias importance to the Arctic, what the region's leaders are being less open-
mouthed about is whether the invasion will have an effect on relations within their neighbor in the
east.
Even though the other Arctic states, all members of Nato or the EU or both, have sided against Russia in
the conflict in Ukraine, they appear at least for the time being to have prevented their
disagreements from spreading north.
One reason may be Russias military power: like in Crimea, Russia has the military upper hand, and no
Arctic power would be able to stand up to it, should it begin flexing its muscle.
More likely though, is the realisation of Russias dominance in the region. Theyre just so important,
Jon Rahbek-Clemmensen, an Arctic expert with the Danish Institute for International Studies, said.
Without them, you cant do anything.
One of the most widely mentioned moves suggested to punish Russia would be to kick it out of the G8
club of major economies. Russia also sits on the Arctic Council, a policy co-ordination group for the
region. Officially there has been no suggestion that it should be excluded from the group, but, even if it
came to that, throwing them out would be all but impossible, given the organisations more formal
structure. It would also be undesirable, Rahbek-Clemmensen said.
These countries have too much of an interest in keeping Russia in. What you have to keep in mind is
that there will be a time after Ukraine. In three months the conflict will be forgotten and then it is back
to normal.
While Russia frequently finds itself at odds with the West over things like gay rights, Syria and Iran, in
the Arctic the tone has been more conciliatory. Still, being on opposite sides in the Ukraine conflict will
have an inevitable impact on Arctic relations, according to Martin Breum, a journalist with Danish public
broadcaster DR and author of several books about the region.
Security is a critically important part of Arctic relations, he said. The situation in the Ukraine is a
serious crisis and that is going to have an effect on the overall confidence level between the West and
Russia.
Unlike trans-Atlantic relations, multi-lateral Arctic relations have a short history. The Arctic Council
only came into existence in 1996, and its permanent secretariat wasnt established until 2012. Those
nascent relations, Breum said, were going to be severely tested by the situation in the Ukraine.
This is likely to show that relations in the Arctic are not as simple as people had been hoping.
Even though Breum expected the pace of Arctic diplomacy to be slowed because of the situation in
Ukraine, Russias interests in the Arctic and its interests in maintaining peaceful relations were so
great that it would most likely work to avoid any long-lasting threats to peace in the region.
Russia needs the Arctic much more than the US or Canada or even Norway. It needs its oil and it
needs the Northern Sea Route and it needs both badly.

AT AUVs

AUVS fail - Cant replace staffed exploration they lack the technology to replace
human exploration
Mustain, Live Science, 11
*Andrea, June 8, Live Science, Mysteries of the Oceans Remain Vast and Deep,
http://www.livescience.com/14493-ocean-exploration-deep-sea-diving.html, accessed July 15, 2014, EK]

Seafaring robots are fueling some of that discovery. Remotely Operated Vehicles (ROVs), which are
tethered to ships, and more recently, Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (AUVs), which roam freely,
collecting visuals and samples during jaunts dictated by computer programs, have made exploration
more efficient, O'Dor said.
However, O'Dor told OurAmazingPlanet, even the best robots can't totally replace humans.
Pictures on computer screens are great, "but that's still not the same as having somebody come back
from the deep sea and having them describe it to you," O'Dor said.
Humans in the depths
Vechionne can do just that. In 2003, he was one of the first humans to descend into one of the deepest
spots on Earth, the Charlie-Gibbs Fracture Zone, a gash in the mid-Atlantic seafloor that is 14,760 feet
(4,500 meters) at its deepest.
During the dive he spied something out of the corner of his eye a dumbo octopus.
"I was able to tell the pilot to turn around, and we got some really great video," Vechionne said,
something that wouldn't have happened without humans aboard.
Although he witnessed the wonders of the deep sea firsthand, Vechionne said it's important to use all
the tools available for exploration, because much is lurking out of sight in the darkness. A new species of
squid, for example.
Vechhione pointed to the discovery of the bigfin squid about 10 years ago, a pale, leggy creature that
can reach up to 21 feet (7 meters) in length and would look right at home in a 1960's B-movie.
"It was exciting when we first discovered them," Vechionne said. "I was jumping up and down in my
office."
The squid were caught on film, thanks to ROVs. And if such huge creatures eluded discovery until
recently, both Vechhione and O'Dor said, what else is out there?
Yet sending anything to the ocean depths, human or machine, is expensive, and both scientists said
funding is a constant issue.

Sea floor mapping is a prerequisite and the AUV link is non-unique
Meade, RAND Corporation, et al, 1
[Charles, Robert J. Lempert, Fred Timson, James Kadtke, 2001, RAND Corporation, Assessing the
Benefits and Costs of a Science Submarine, Appendix D: Developments in AUV/ROV Technology,
http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1369z0/MR1369.0.appd.pdf,

Currently available autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs) and remotely operated vehicles (ROVs)
have important capabilities but can only operate in the vicinity of a host platform such as a surface
ship, submarine, or ice camp. Thus, as discussed in Chapters 2 and 3, currently available AUV and ROV
technology is an important complement to a dedicated science submarine and such vehicles do not
compete with any of the submarines unique capabilities. However, AUV technology is an area of rapid
development and the capabilities of these vehicles may increase significantly within a time horizon
relevant to decisionmakers involved with a dedicated science submarine. The decision problem posed
by these potentially rapid AUV developments and a scenario-based structure for assessing them is
sketched briefly at the end of Chapter 3. Here we provide a brief review of these ongoing technological
activities.
The number of researchers, institutes, and private companies developing AUVs and ROVs has grown
quickly this decade, and they have begun to establish organizations to coordinate activities.1 For
example, the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI), the U.S. Navy, the
IEEE Ocean Engineering Society, and the Marine Technology Society coordinate many efforts and are
extensive sources of information and contacts, and an Autonomous Undersea Systems Consortium is in
development. In addition, many western European countries, particularly the UK and France, as well as
a number of other countries worldwide, have ongoing AUV and ROV research programs. Many
university, governmental, and private research institutes exist in the United States, and many have
developed prototypes of vehicles or related systems.
The development of technical systems pertaining to AUVs can be divided into three broad categories:
platforms, communications, and sensors.2 Current platforms are already relatively robust, with a
developed engineering background. Typical lengths of various AUVs are on the order of one to two
meters, with bulk weights in the range of a few hundred pounds. Operational ranges are at least 1,000
km, and this is improving rapidly, and cruising speeds are on the order of a few knots. Depth ranges
extend to 6,000 m, making most of the ocean depths accessible worldwide. Currently, the two principal
technical challenges are power supply and navigation. The majority of existing platforms utilize various
battery technologies, such as high-efficiency lithium sources, although fuel cells and even solar power
sources3 are in development. Autonomous navigation capabilities appear to be more problematic,
since conventional methods such as dead reckoning, inertial guidance, and acoustic triangulation all
have accuracy or miniaturization constraints. Terrain-based navigation has potential and is being
explored, although this may be hindered by the lack of accurate topographic maps for most of the
Earths seafloor. However, even modest improvements in autonomous navigation capabilities could
yield significant improvements in AUV capabilities.
AT Climate

Warming is inevitable- no cooperation, and interest groups
Publius, AMERICAblog, 14
*Gaius, 4/2/14, AMERICAblog News, IPCC accidentally proves that international cooperation on
climate change is dead, http://americablog.com/2014/04/ipcc-accidentally-proves-international-
cooperation-climate-change-dead.html, accessed 7/13/14 CK]

International cooperation will never exist; the rich will never pay even U.S. costs
Your three take-aways from this material should be:
1. There will never be international cooperation, because the rich will never pay a dime to offset
anyones cost to deal with this crisis. Believe it. Anyone who goes down that path bless their heart
is chasing a dream that human souls live inside the monsters who are keeping this crisis going.
If the rich wanted to fix this, it would be fixed years ago. They will never want to fix this.
2. Any nation can embark on a Zero Carbon energy economy the minute it wants to. It doesnt need
permission (or help) from any other uncooperating nation. Denmark can do it alone. France can do it
alone. The U.S. can do it yes, alone. Abandoning the hunt for the unicorn of international
cooperation is freedom from the veto of other nations rich people.
In fact, any nation that does embark on a radical Zero Carbon economy carbon-free in five years or
less, with energy rationing and wealth confiscation will be hailed as a hero among nations and
people that care, and held as a light and a beacon. Thats true leadership in (and by) action.
3. The rich will have to be moved aside to solve the climate crisis. And by that I mean forcefully. They
will never surrender, never meet us halfway. They will only delay us while they cash their next checks
and sell more carbon.
As I wrote elsewhere regarding the current fetish for carbon neutral solutions Carbon-neutral is the
same as Keep Koch in walking change and will lead to the worst outcome. It hands us the nightmare,
since the hard and constant pushback against any restriction always comes from Money people
who own trillions in unmonetized carbon assets, plus all of their enablers.
These people dont do incremental or surrender. They do victory dances on the graves of their
enemies.
Barring some kind of general panic, the only incremental solution were going to get will have the
paper-thin illusory force of a politicians (or carbon industrys) PR campaign. Were seeing that now, in
the carbon-neutral admin dithering around Keystone, and in the industrys current messaging from
the woman Ive been calling lying pantsuit lady.

AT Diseases

No unique advantage funding for deep sea pharmaceuticals now and plan doesnt
resolve lack of profit incentive
Paddock, Scientific journalist for forty years, 13
(Catharine, 2/15/13, Medical News Today, Hunt for new antibiotics turn to Deep Sea Trenches,
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/256416.php, accessed 7/1/14, BCG)

"There hasn't been a completely new antibiotic registered since 2003," Marcel Jaspars, professor of
Chemistry at the University of Aberdeen, says in a statement to the press released on Thursday.
Jaspars is leader of PharmaSea, a project that will involve scientists from across Europe and other
parts of the world plunging up to 8km below sea level to retrieve samples from previously untapped
depths of the Arctic and Antarctic oceans.
The project is backed by 8m of European Union funding, and the 24 partners comprise academic,
industrial, and not-for-profit concerns in Belgium, Britain, Chile, China, Costa Rica, Denmark, Germany,
Ireland, Italy, New Zealand, Norway, South Africa, Spain and Switzerland.
No New Antibiotics In Pipeline Since penicillin, the first commercially available bug-busting drug that
Alexander Flemming discovered in 1929, antibiotics have saved million and millions of lives.
If nothing's done to combat the global shortage of effective new antibiotics, then we will be "going to
be back to a 'pre-antibiotic-era' in around 10 or 20 years, where bugs and infections that are currently
quite simple to treat could be fatal", says Jaspars.
Most experts agree that the global antibiotics crisis has come about because of overuse and misuse of
antibiotics, which has led to a rapid increase in drug-resistance in disease-causing microbes.
Plus, there are no new drugs in the pipeline.
"This is partially because of a lack of interest by drugs companies as antibiotics are not particularly
profitable," says Jaspars.
"The average person uses an antibiotic for only for a few weeks and the drug itself only has around a
five to ten year lifespan - so the firms don't see much return on their investment," he adds.
Cold, Deep Sea Trenches Home to Previously Undiscovered Bacteria The project scientists will be
collecting and screening samples of mud and sediment from deep sea trenches in a bid to uncover new
bacteria to produce novel antibiotics.

Disease can be solved for quickly and for little cost
Global Health Policy Blog, 6
*Global Health Policy Blog, 3/20/06, Center for global Development, Should we try to eradicate
diseases?, http://www.cgdev.org/blog/should-we-try-eradicate-diseases, accessed 7/13/14 CK]

Today's New York Times (free registration required) discusses whether the lesson of the campaign to
eradicate polio is that it is more effective to control than to try to eradicate diseases:
Today the struggling drive against polio has raised new questions about whether eradication of any
disease is achievable, and, if so, whether the cost in terms of effort and dollars would be worth it, given
all the other diseases that need attention.
The latest push began in 1993, when the International Task Force for Disease Eradication, a panel of
experts, was convened in Atlanta by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Emory University
and the Carter Center. The experts reviewed 95 diseases and identified a handful they believed could
be wiped out in a generation or less. Ancient scourges largely forgotten in rich countries, many of these
diseases continue to cause misery and drain resources in the developing world, despite the existence
of cures and vaccines.
Yet none have been driven into extinction, inflaming the debate over whether simple control was a
more reasonable goal that would allow donors and health professionals to spread their resources to
greater benefit for greater numbers.
Owen comments The eradication of smallpox cost a few hundred million dollars. The US recovers its
contribution - in vaccinations that it no longer has to give, health care it no longer has to provide -
every 26 days. If it is scientifically possible, there is clearly both political and economic attraction to
seeking eradication.
The basic reproduction ratio (R0) for measles is much higher than for smallpox or polio, which is a way of
saying that it spreads easily. so you would need to reach many more children in the population with
vaccination to have a high chance of eradicating the disease. Given that the donor community has had
the utmost difficulty finding either the resources or the political will to eradicate polio, it seems unlikely
that we could summon what it takes to eradicate measles.
The measles vaccination campaign has been a huge success, reducing deaths by a half over six years. It
may be better to continue the important, but less politically sexy, work of expanding the coverage of
measles vaccines to continue to bring down these avoidable deaths, and register a success for
international cooperation in global health, than to set ourselves a target that we may well fail to
achieve, and so chalk up a failure.

Multiple barriers to effective use of marine resourcesthe affs unsustainable
extraction turns the case
National Academies Reports, 1AC Author, 7
[National non-profit organization for science, engineering, and medicine, Oceans and Human Health,
http://dels.nas.edu/resources/static-assets/osb/miscellaneous/Oceans-Human-Health.pdf, p. 9-10,

The ocean is the most promising source of new drugs, yet there are multiple challenges in marine
exploration. At the heart of the challenges to ocean science lies the problem of the rights of a country
to its genetic resources, in general, and the intellectual property rights of commercially promising
discoveries, in particular. Complex legal and political issues involved with collecting marine resources
in the territorial waters of other countries can present a major obstacle for researchers.
Another challenge that researchers face is obtaining a sufficient quantity of new marine-derived
chemicals. On one hand, scientists need a sufficient quantity to determine whether a new chemical
has medical potential. On the other hand, protecting marine natural resources is essential.
Exploitation of marine plants, animals, and microorganisms must be avoided to ensure that marine
ecosystems and populations are not adversely impacted. The National Research Council report From
Monsoons to Microbes: Understanding the Oceans Role in Human Health (1999) recommends that
scientists pursue new ways to produce marine chemicals in a sustainable manner, such as aquaculture,
cell culture, and recombinant (molecular) techniques, to avoid depleting natural populations of marine
organisms.

Status quo solves anti-bacterial research
Pharmaceutical Technology 13
[Procurement and reference resource providing a one-stop-shop for professionals and decision makers
within the global pharmaceutical and biochemistry industry, 2-15-13, Scientists will explore Arctic
seabed to research new antibiotics, http://www.pharmaceutical-technology.com/news/newsscientists-
will-explore-arctic-seabed-to-research-new-antibiotics, accessed 7-15-14, PAC]
In a bid to discover much-needed new antibiotics, scientists from across Europe plan to search for new
bacteria in deep sea trenches around the Arctic, Antarctic and Pacific Ocean.
Led by the University of Aberdeen, the PharmaSea project will see scientists collect and screen samples
of mud and sediment from up to 8km below sea level, in a bid to find new bacteria that can produce
novel antibiotics.
It is hoped that if all goes to plan their findings could provide new treatments within a decade.
Marine organisms that live at such great depths are considered to be an interesting source of study as
they survive under extreme conditions.
The search to find new antibiotics is of increasing concern. Over-reliance and inappropriate prescribing
have led to rapid increase in drug-resistant bugs, causing experts to fear that effective antibiotics may
soon disappear, risking millions of lives.
University of Aberdeen chemistry professor and project leader Professor Marcel Jaspars said; "If
nothing's done to combat this problem we're going to be back to a 'pre-antibiotic-era' in around 10 or
20 years, where bugs and infections that are currently quite simple to treat could be fatal".
Jaspars adds that there hasn't been a completely new antibiotic registered since 2003, which he
believes is partially because they are not particularly profitable for drug companies.
The average person uses an antibiotic for only for a few weeks and the drug itself only has around a five
to ten year lifespan.
University of Leuven Laboratory for Molecular Biodiscovery lecturer, industrial research fellow and
project co-ordinator Dr Camila Esguerra said; "PharmaSea will not only be exploring new territory at
the bottom of the oceans, but also new areas in "chemical space".
This four-year project is said to be groundbreaking as only a handful of samples have ever been taken
from deep trenches in the sea.
Backed by 8m of funding from the EU, divers will use specialist equipment that costs upwards of
25,000 a day to use.
Once they have collected sediment, scientists will then attempt to grow unique bacteria and fungi from
the sediment that can be extracted and refined to discover new antibiotics.
The projects will bring together 24 partners in industry, academia and not-for-profit organisations
from 14 countries.

AT Exploration

USFG shouldnt be focused on ocean exploration Space exploration would have net
benefits not solved by OSEA
Zubrin, astronautical engineer, 12
(Robert, 4/23/12, Why we shouldnt wait to go to Mars, CNN,
http://lightyears.blogs.cnn.com/2012/04/23/why-we-shouldnt-wait-to-go-to-mars/, accessed 7/14/14,
BCG)

The idea that we need to suspend space exploration in order to provide the necessary resources to
probe the oceans is categorically absurd. So lets call it like it is: The argument that we should explore
the oceans instead of space is not a call to search the seas, but simply a disingenuous way to give up
our effort to reach the Red Planet.
But why should we try? There are three reasons.
Reason # 1: For the knowledge. We now know that Mars once possessed oceans in which life could
have developed from chemistry. But did it? If we could discover fossils on the Martian surface, or extant
life surviving in subsurface water today, it would show that the origin of life is not unique to the Earth,
and thus by implication reveal a universe that is filled with life and probably intelligence as well. From
the point of view of humanity learning its true place in the universe, this would be the most important
scientific enlightenment since Copernicus.
Robotic probes can help out in such a search and should be aggressively pursued but by themselves
are completely insufficient. Fossil hunting requires the ability to travel long distances through
unimproved terrain, to climb steep slopes, to do heavy work and delicate work, and to exercise very
subtle forms of perception and on-the-spot intuition. Astrobiological investigations require the ability to
drill, sample, culture and study life drawn from Martian groundwater. All of these skills are far beyond
the abilities of robotic rovers. Field paleontology and astrobiology require human explorers, real live
scientists on the scene.
Reason # 2: For the challenge. Nations, like people, thrive on challenge and decay without it. The
space program itself needs challenge. Consider: Between 1961 and 1973, under the impetus of the
moon race, NASA produced a rate of technological innovation several orders of magnitude greater than
that it has shown since, for an average budget in real dollars only about 10% more than today ($20
billion per year in 2012 dollars then, compared with $18 billion now). Why? Because it had a goal that
made its reach exceed its grasp. It is not necessary to develop anything new if you are not doing
anything new. The Apollo program also strongly stimulated the economy as a whole to rates of
economic growth that have not been seen since. Far from being a waste of money, forcing NASA to
take on the challenge of Mars is the key to giving the nation a real technological return and much
needed economic stimulus from its space dollar.
A humans-to-Mars program would also be an adventure challenge to every child in the country:
Learn your science, and you can become part of pioneering a new world. In its day, the Apollo
program caused a doubling of the number of American science and engineering graduates. That
intellectual capital continues to benefit the nation. There will be more than 100 million kids in our
nation's schools over the next 10 years. If a Mars program were to inspire just an extra 1% of them to
scientific educations, the net result would be 1 million more scientists, engineers, inventors, medical
researchers and doctors, making innovations that create new industries, finding new medical cures,
strengthening national defense and increasing national income for decades to an extent that utterly
dwarfs the expenditures of the Mars program.
Reason # 3: For the future: Mars is not just a scientific curiosity, it is a world with a surface area equal
to all the continents of Earth combined, possessing all the elements that are needed to support not
only life, but technological civilization. As hostile as it may seem, the only thing standing between Mars
and habitability is the need to develop a certain amount of Red Planet know-how. This can and will be
done by those who go there first to explore.
Mars is the New World. Someday, millions of people will live there. What language will they speak?
What values and traditions will they cherish, to spread from there as humanity continues to move out
into the solar system and beyond? When they look back on our time, will any of our other actions
compare in value to what we do today to bring their society into being?
Today, we have the opportunity to be the founders, the parents and shapers of a new and dynamic
branch of the human family, and by so doing, put our stamp upon the future. It is a privilege not to be
disdained lightly.

AT Marine Archaeology

Underwater archaeology is destructive to the environment, doesnt engage the public,
and is not cost effective
Meide, underwater and maritime archaeologist and currently the Director of LAMP, 13
*Chuck, 11/7/13, The Keepers Blog, Prominent investor blasts treasure hunting as a worthless
investmentUPDATED,
http://www.blogstaugustinelighthouse.org/blog/lamposts/prominent_investor_blasts_trea.php,

This morning we saw an article in Bloomberg Businessweek highlighting a report released by a Wall
Street short seller and investment activist. This report is a damning indictment of the treasure hunting
industry, and in particular Odyssey Marine, the well-known treasure hunting company based out of
Tampa:
Exploring shipwrecks may provide fun and adventure, but whether its a good business is a different
question. Perhaps the most well-known treasure hunter, Odyssey Marine Exploration (OMEX), has
made headlines for years, including last year when, as my colleague Susan Berfield reported at the time,
Odysseys brash chief executive officer led the money-losing company in an (ultimately unsuccessful)
battle to claim profit from coins found in a Spanish shipwreck. The companys now in the limelight
again, and not in a flattering way. Late last week, a young activist investor published a 66-page report
(pdf) outlining an argument for why Odysseys stock is worth $Zero. The investor, Ryan Morris, alleged
the company used offshore entities to obscure its true value, and the company let executives live a life
of glamor hunting the ocean while disappointed investors foot the bill.
As a team of maritime archaeologists, the treasure hunting industry is of interest to us, and it is
antithetical to our goal of preserving and studying shipwrecks for scientific knowledge. We have written
about treasure hunting many times before on our blog, including a reaction to the aforementioned
incident whereby Odyssey recovered tons of silver from a Spanish wreck (code-named "Black Swan"),
and then was forced by the courts to return all of the recovered material to Spain. You can read more of
our blogging on treasure hunting here, here, here, and here. The short version of the archaeologists'
argument is this: 1. the methods that treasure hunters use to work a site are destructive and not
scientific, systematic, and meticulous like those archaeologists use, and thus result in a significant loss
of knowledge that could otherwise be gained by proper excavation techniques; 2. Treasure hunters
sell recovered objects, making them inaccessible to both the public and scholars, which results in
further loss of knowledge that might otherwise be gained by future research. It has long been known
to archaeologists that treasure hunting results in a loss of information about the past; now it seems
that stockholders are learning that it can also result in the loss of a financial investment.

Agency Solvency Answers

Status Quo Solves

NOAA is able to solve effectively best at data management
Konkel, Business of Federal Technology, 3/17/14
*Frank Konkel, 3/17/14, The Business of Federal Technology, NOAA budget boost focused on data,
http://fcw.com/articles/2014/03/17/noaa-budget-breakdown.aspx, accessed 7/15/14, GNL]

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's 2015 budget request emphasizes
environmental intelligence, and includes increases for its data-intensive next-generation satellite
programs and IT infrastructure upgrades to fully utilize the raw data the agency produces.
Overall, NOAA's budget request totals $5.5 billion, a 3.2 percent over its 2014 enacted budget.
The largest request for NOAA's five offices is the National Environmental Satellite, Data and Information
Service, which manages the procurement, launch and operation of all civilian environmental satellite.
NESDIS would receive $2.2 billion under the budget request, an increase of about $165 million over last
year's totals, with the lion's share going to the development of its two next-generation satellites. The
Joint Polar Satellite System satellite is set for launch in early 2017, and the first Geostationary
Operational Environmental Satellite is on course to launch in early 2016. Combined, the next-gen
satellite systems will cost about $22 billion. The first GOES-R satellite alone will produce 40 megabytes
of data per second.
"NOAA is one of the most valuable service agencies in the U.S. government," said Kathryn Sullivan,
undersecretary of Commerce for oceans and atmosphere and NOAA administrator.
The National Weather Service, NOAA's second-largest office, would receive $1.06 billion, a $3.9 million
decrease from fiscal 2014. The decrease in funding will hinder some expected advancements in the
NWS' predictive capabilities, including an $8 million hit to its Hurricane Forecast Improvement Project,
"which will delay advancements in hurricane forecast track and intensity," according to budget
documents.
Yet NWS will receive $6 million in additional funding for its Ground Readiness Project, which is designed
to improve the NWS IT infrastructure. As it exists today, NOAA produces more data and that data
volume will grow significantly in the coming years than NWS systems can process.
NWS will also get an extra $5 million to re-architect its telecommunications gateway, which distributes
weather products to thousands of customers across the world. NOAA's transition to a new IT service
delivery model for forecast offices in fiscal 2014 realized the agency $10 million in efficiency savings,
according to the 2015 budget request.

NOAA is sufficient now it is constantly being innovated and has plans for exploration
Lubchenco, former NOAA administrator, 13
[Dr. Jane, 2013, NOAA, All Hands on Deck NOAAs Accomplishments: 2009-2012,
http://www.noaa.gov/pdf/NOAA_Accomplishments_2009-2012.pdf, accessed 7/13/14, GNL]

Day in and day out, NOAAs work impacts the lives of every American. From life-saving and commerce-
enabling weather forecasts to research on how our planet is changing to protecting natural resources
and sharing information broadly, NOAA personnel are developing solutions for some of our planets
most pressing challenges. NOAA enriches lives through science, services and stewardship. With roots
dating back to 1807, our agency has evolved to meet the needs of a changing nation and changing
environment.
During my nearly four years at NOAA, through daily interactions and challenging disasters, Ive had
occasion to get to know many of our nearly 13,000 employees and hundreds of contractors upon which
we rely. One thing that has impressed me immensely is the passion they feel for our mission. Ive also
been astounded at NOAAs breadthour mission takes us from the surface of the sun to the depths of
the ocean floor. And Ive seen NOAA adapt to changing circumstances and embrace new opportunities
and challenges, while staying true to its core values. An example of this adaptation is NOAAs embrace
of innovative ways to be more efficient or effective, whether its cloud IT solutions or social media.
Beginning with Facebook and Twitter in 2009, NOAA has developed a strong social media presence,
tweeting and posting to hundreds of thousands of followers around the nation and the world.
Because of the dedication and hard work of NOAA employees, and thanks to great partnerships, weve
been able to tackle some big issues. Ive often said that the diversity of our mission is one of NOAAs
greatest challenges, but its also a great strength: It enables timely integration across research, weather,
climate, oceans, coasts, satellites, ships, and planes to deliver useful services and stewardship. Through
an emphasis on transparency, integrity, innovation, team work and communication, we have made
significant progress on multiple fronts during the last four years.
So, what have we accomplished? During the past four years, NOAA employees have worked with our
partners to end overfishing and rebuild depleted fish stocks; helped create the first National Ocean
Policy that highlights the importance of healthy oceans; issued life-saving weather, water, and
tsunami warnings and worked toward a Weather Ready Nation; invested in coastal communities and
strived to make them more resilient through integrated conservation and restoration; strengthened
science through our first Scientific Integrity Policy; and created a new generation of climate services to
enable smart planning, adaption, and mitigation. This is just a small sample of NOAAs efforts to fulfill
its overall mission.
The following stories flesh out these and other successes. Far from an exhaustive list, this compilation
provides highlights from NOAAs impressive portfolio.
I am tremendously proud to have been part of the NOAA family and am confident that it will continue
to provide the services, science, and stewardship on which so much and so many depend. Enjoy
reading these stories and feel proud.

Efficacy

No solvency the plan functionally adds massive new layer of bureaucracy, as a
Trojan horse for costly regulation
Rep. Hastings, House Natural Resources Committee chair, 12
[Doc, R-WA, 6-19-12, Fox News, Obama's national ocean policy threatens jobs and economic activities
onshore and off, http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/06/19/obama-national-ocean-policy-
threatens-jobs-and-economic-activites-onshore-and/, accessed 7-10-14]

In the famous poem Paul Reveres Ride, Revere instructs his fellow patriots to use lanterns to signal
whether theres an attack coming by land or sea. While we may no longer have to fear the British,
Americans should be warned of a new threat coming by sea in the form of President Obamas
National Ocean Policy and ocean zoning initiative.
President Obama is using the ocean as his latest regulatory weapon to impose new bureaucratic
restrictions on nearly every sector of our economy. While marketed as a common sense plan for the
development and protection of our oceans, it is instead being used to create a massive new
bureaucracy that would harm our economy.
Established through Executive Order, Mr. Obama with a simple stroke of a pen took unilateral action to
impose a massive top-down federal bureaucracy with broad regulatory control over our oceans, Great
Lakes, rivers, tributaries and watersheds.
The Executive Order creates a tangled web of regulatory layers that includes: 10 National Policies; a
27-member National Ocean Council; an 18-member Governance Coordinating Committee; and 9
Regional Planning Bodies. This has led to an additional: 9 National Priority Objectives; 9 Strategic
Action Plans; 7 National Goals for Coastal Marine Spatial Planning; and 12 Guiding Principles for
Coastal Marine Spatial Planning.
Imposing mandatory ocean zoning could place huge portions of our oceans and coasts off-limits,
seriously curtailing recreational activities, commercial fishing, and all types of energy development
including renewable energy such as offshore wind farms.
Whats even more alarming is that the impact of this Executive Order is not limited to just our oceans. It
establishes regional planning bodies with the authority to regulate as far inland as necessary. All rivers
eventually drain into the ocean, which gives this policy the justification it needs to reach far inland.
For example, the Gulf of Mexico Regional Planning Body will make decisions to regulate activities
throughout the entire Mississippi River watershed if those activities have the potential to affect the Gulf
of Mexico. This means a policy billed as protecting our oceans will have the ability to regulate inland
activities that occur as far north as Minnesota. If farmers and ranchers thought having the EPA in their
backyard was bad, wait until the National Ocean Council comes sailing upstream for a visit too.
The American Farm Bureau Federation has raised serious concerns, stating that it could extend to the
regulation of every farm and ranch in the United States.
To make matters worse, taxpayers will be stuck with the considerable financial costs of implementing
this Executive Order and the vague and undefined objectives will no doubt be used as fuel for costly
frivolous lawsuits to stop or delay federally-permitted activities. Adding to these costs is the lost
economic activity and stifled job creation that will result from new restrictions and regulatory
uncertainly brought on by the policy.
Over the past year, the Natural Resources Committee has held multiple oversight hearings to
investigate the policy, its implementation and potential impacts. However, the Obama administration
has refused to answer important questions. Thats why I recently supported bipartisan efforts in the
House to pause funding for this policy until the true job and economic impacts are known. This pause
in funding was supported by over 80 organizations, including the US Chamber of Commerce, American
Farm Bureau Federation, National Association of Homebuilders, American Forest & Paper Association,
and the National Fisheries Institute.
Millions of Americans depend on the ocean for their livelihoods and there needs to be a balanced, multi-
use policy that recognizes both the importance of environmental stewardship and the responsible use of
our oceans.
Executive Branch agencies with jurisdiction over our ocean policy can, and should, work in a more
coordinated manner, to share information, and reduce duplication of their work. This would save
money and could be supported by all. Unfortunately, President Obamas Executive Order pushes far
beyond this common ground and uses the ocean as a regulatory tool to limit job-creating activities on
both land and sea.

Vagueness of the plan guts solvency adding more bureaucracy creates inefficiencies
and inhibits success
Marine Conservation Alliance 9
*Marine Conservation Alliance, August 18, 2009, COMMENTS TO THE INTERAGENCY OCEAN POLICY
TASK FORCE REGARDING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NATIONAL POLICY FOR THE OCEAN, COASTS, AND
THE GREAT LAKES. http://www.marineconservationalliance.org/wp-
content/uploads/2010/06/MCA_Comments_to_the_Interagency_Ocean_Policy_Task_Force_20090818.
pdf, page 2-3 accessed 6/27/14 CK]

There are significant difficulties with translating the goal of ecosystem based management into
practical reality. Issues of geographic scope, questions about the level of scientific information
required to design and implement such a management regime, and fiscal reality have all come into
play. Many of the proposals include elaborate new top down bureaucracies, with attendant costs,
increased regulatory burden, and significant economic impacts while at the same time providing
questionable ecosystem benefits. We have not supported such proposals in the past because we see
them as interfering with development of workable solutions to real world conservation needs.
As a general matter we would urge the Task Force to avoid developing a national policy that further
complicates an already daunting array of laws, regulations and policies that currently govern ocean
uses. Requiring agencies to define and implement a requirement to protect, maintain, and restore
the health of marine ecosystems will be a daunting task. Introducing new and ill defined terms for
application, such as the precautionary approach, marine ecosystem resilience and marine
ecosystem health compounds the problem due to their lack of precision and clear definition. Using
such terms to define U.S. oceans policy, and as a regulatory standard to gauge performance, introduces
a level of ambiguity that, in our opinion, will result in confusion, further gridlock, and eventually
litigation. From the perspective of a region that is interested in making real, on the water progress
this approach has a basic bottom line flaw. It sounds good, but is so ambiguous that it will make the
practical and real world work of managers virtually impossible.

No solvency additional layers of bureaucracy
De Allesi, Reason Foundation natural resource policy director, 4
[Michael, 4-26-4, Reason, Oceans Need Innovation, Not Bureaucracy,
http://reason.org/news/show/oceans-need-innovation-not-bur, accessed 7-10-14, AFB]

The 16-member U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy just released a nearly 500-hundred page preliminary
report, 2 1/2 years in the making, which is supposed to nurse our oceans back to health. Unfortunately,
apart from making a timely acknowledgement of the environmental, commercial and recreational
importance of the oceans, the report leaves much to be desired.
Instead of applying a comprehensive framework to oceans policy, the commission focuses on creating
more administrative offices such as the National Ocean Council and Presidential Council of Advisers on
Ocean Policy. Think Department of Homeland Security for our oceans. We're on orange alert, or is it
yellow today? As most taxpayers, especially fresh off tax day will attest, bureaucracy does not equal
"coordination," no matter how high it reaches or how small the minutiae it addresses.
In addition to layers and layers of added bureaucracy, the report recommends increasing federal
research dollars and security for shipping and oil and gas activities (hardly surprising proposals
considering the commission consists primarily of academics, federal agency representatives, and the oil
and gas industry all groups that would benefit).
At all levels, the heart of the problem is what is referred to in environmental circles as the "tragedy of
the commons" resources are depleted or damaged because they are free for the taking, whether fish,
clean water or habitat.
The commission still doesn't seem to realize that more regulation and more government agencies
won't beat man's ingenuity and the tragedy of commons. Consider Alaska: the state thought its halibut
stock was being overfished, so it slashed the halibut fishing season from almost 10 months to just 72
hours. The result? There was no significant decrease in the number of halibut caught because
fishermen and companies packed 10 months worth of fishing into three days.
The key to rehabilitating and sustaining our oceans is stewardship and property rights. The Alaskan
halibut fishery is now a success story, not because of new regulations, but because it is one of the few
fisheries in the United States managed on a property rights model. Fishermen have Individual Fishing
Quotas, which allocate the right to catch a specific percentage of the scientifically determined total
allowable catch. The quotas give fishermen both the incentive and the means to care more about the
health of our seas. Fishermen in New Zealand using this system have actually voluntarily reduced their
catch levels because they know the long-term health of the oceans is in their best interests.
Traditional societies in the Pacific Northwest and the Hawaiian Islands used these concepts to protect
marine resources. Native Americans often had complex arrangements within and between tribes to
allow salmon to move up and downstream in order to maintain the spawning runs and ensure a future
supply of fish. Native Hawaiians recognized triangular strips of property running from mountaintop out
to sea and respected the boundaries. According to a Hawaii Sea Grant study, this system was set up "to
sustain the pattern of Hawaiian life," and included strict limits on harvests of "species, types, sizes and
portions of fish."
In the eyes of the commission, property rights are valuable tools for solving specific problems, but not as
an overall framework for oceans policy. This is a mistake. Of course there is more to managing ocean
resources than fishing, but the fishery dynamic applies to every facet of oceans management. After all,
most Americans are far more concerned with the price and quality the fish at their local supermarket or
the health of their favorite fishing holes than they are about deep-sea topography or federal agency
hierarchies.
The health of our oceans deserves bold, forward-thinking policies that have proven highly successful
across the world, not another government agency promising more research.

Ocean agencies fail NOPP proves
Pomponi, Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution vice president and director of
research, 4
[Shirley, director of research and vice president of Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution which is a
nonprofit research institution, 5/5/04, U.S. COMMISSION OCEAN POLICY PRELIMINARY REPORT,
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-108hhrg93362/html/CHRG-108hhrg93362.htm, accessed
7/15/14, GNL]

Q1. In your testimony you expressed support for the Commission's recommendation to establish a
National Ocean Council. Why do you think this is a better approach to coordination than the existing (or
strengthened) National Oceanic Partnership Program (NOPP)?
A1. Agencies tend to look out for their own, wholly-owned priorities first, leaving promising,
cooperative programs such as NOPP to languish. NOPP's National Ocean Research Leadership Council
(NORLC) was intended as a forum that would bring together the leaders of the participating agencies
to discuss the great challenges and opportunities that faced the ocean science community. This has
not happened because NORLC meetings are rarely attended by agency leaders, thus making NORLC a
forum that can only present and discuss ideas and programs, but cannot make decisions. Moreover,
agencies do not budget major project funds to NOPP, because to do so would be relinquish those
funds to collective use rather than perhaps better defined, more urgent programs that indeed are
congressionally-mandated.

Ocean Policy Solvency Answers

Status Quo Solves

Status quo solves 1.8 billion dollars in funding and Obama pledging to change oceans
Hogan, ARKive, 6/19/14
*Ben, Environmental News Network, ARKive, 6/19/14, In the News: $1.8 billion pledged to protect
marine habitats, http://blog.arkive.org/2014/06/in-the-news-1-8-billion-pledged-to-protect-marine-
habitats/, accessed 7/15/14, GNL]

Over $1.8 billion has been pledged by various parties at the Our Ocean 2014 summit, and proposals
have been made to double the amount of protected marine habitats around the world.
Our Ocean 2014 brought together leaders from business, government and academic institutions, and
NGOs from over 80 countries to discuss how economic development and ocean conservation can be
reconciled. The oceans are extremely important for humans, generating more than 50 percent of the
oxygen we breathe, absorbing excess carbon dioxide, and providing a source of food and income for
millions of people worldwide.
The summit concentrated on several key themes in ocean conservation including sustainable fishing,
marine pollution, and ocean acidification. Perhaps one of the most significant announcements at Our
Ocean was President Obamas intention to expand and create new marine reserves in the Pacific Ocean,
while Kiribati announced it will expand its already vast Phoenix Islands Protected Area. If implemented,
these proposals will more than double the total area of legally protected oceans.
President Obama said in a video to participants at Our Ocean, Im going to use my authority to
protect some of our nations most precious marine landscapes.
Many of the worlds fish stocks are being fished at unsustainable levels, and it is thought that around 30
percent of the worlds fisheries are overexploited. The Our Ocean summit aimed to examine the steps
fishery management authorities need to take to reduce, and ultimately end, overfishing and to mitigate
adverse impacts on the broader marine environment. Initiatives proposed at the summit aim to end all
overfishing on marine fish stocks by 2020, through a series of measures including increased
transparency in allocating fishing rights, tougher enforcement of legislation and penalties for illegal
fisheries, elimination of excess capacity in fishing fleets and minimising bycatch.
To this end, President Obama has announced a comprehensive new national programme on seafood
traceability and openness which will allow customers in the United States to ensure that their seafood
has been harvested legally and sustainably. Additionally, the United States launched the mFish
partnership, which will provide mobile devices to small-scale fisheries in developing nations with apps
designed to access market and weather information and ensure accurate and easy catch reporting.
Norway also pledged more than $150 million to promote fishery management and development abroad,
including a new research vessel to train fisheries experts and managers around the world.
Significant advances have been made in addressing marine pollution from land- and ocean-based
sources, by individuals and local communities at the regional and global scale, although much more
needs to be done. Our Ocean 2014 has facilitated the development of initiatives to reduce total nutrient
pollution in the ocean by 20 percent and to significantly reduce the input of debris into the marine
environment by 2025. To help achieve this, Norway will allocate up to $1 million for a study on
measures to combat marine plastic waste and microplastics. Additionally, the United States announced
the Trash Free Waters programme, which aims to stop waste and debris from entering the ocean
though sustainable product design, increased material recovery and recycling, and a new nationwide
waste prevention ethic.
Due to ocean acidification, our oceans are approximately 30 percent more acidic than before the
industrial revolution, and the oceans chemistry is currently changing 10 times faster than at any other
time in the past 50 million years. Many organisms will not be able to adapt to the changes within their
habitat, which will negatively impact both biodiversity and the crucial services that the oceans provide
us. Initiatives to prevent further increases in ocean acidification were developed at the Our Oceans
summit, which aim to reduce carbon emissions and monitor ocean acidification on a global scale.
Norway announced that it will allocate over $1 billion to climate change mitigation and adaptation
assistance in 2015. The United States presented new projects to meet the challenges of ocean
acidification and marine pollution in Africa, Central America, and the Caribbean, as well as contributing
$640,000 to support the Ocean Acidification International Coordination Center in Monaco.

Stakeholders

No solvency competing stakeholders users, agencies, industries, environmentalists
*Juliet, May 4, 2009, The Washington Post, Finding Space for All in Our Crowded Seas
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/03/AR2009050301930.html,
accessed 6-25-14, CK]

The ocean is getting crowded: Fishermen are competing with offshore wind projects, oil rigs along
with sand miners, recreational boaters, liquefied gas tankers and fish farmers. So a growing number of
groups -- including policymakers, academics, activists and industry officials -- now say it's time to divvy
up space in the sea.
"We've got competition for space in the ocean, just like we have competition for space on land," said
Andrew Rosenberg, a natural resources and environment professor at the University of New
Hampshire who has advised Massachusetts on the issue. "How are you going to manage it? Is it the
people with the most power win? Is it whoever got there first? Is it a free-for-all?"
To resolve these conflicts, a handful of states -- including Massachusetts, California and Rhode Island -
- have begun essentially zoning the ocean, drawing up rules and procedures to determine which
activities can take place and where. The federal government is considering adopting a similar
approach, though any coherent effort would involve sorting out the role of 20 agencies that
administer roughly 140 ocean-related laws.
"It's really an idea whose time has come, and it's one of my top priorities," said Jane Lubchenco, who
chairs the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. "By focusing on different sectors, nobody
is paying attention to the whole -- in particular, the health of the system."
But conducting what experts call "marine spatial planning" presents scientific and political challenges,
since so little of the ocean has been mapped in detail, and so many interest groups want to use it. The
federal government has mapped only 20 percent of the "exclusive economic zone" that stretches from
the U.S. coast out 200 nautical miles, and that's just its geophysical bottom, not the habitats and
species that exist at varying levels.
Charlie Wahle, a senior scientist in NOAA's National Marine Protected Area Center, said the agency is
convening experts in California to chart how groups including kayakers, the Coast Guard and fishermen
use waters off the state's coast. "People have been surprisingly willing to engage and share their
information and knowledge of the way it really is, as opposed to how it may look on maps," he said.
"We're on the right path, but it's not a simple thing."
Marine ecologist Larry Crowder, one of several scientists at Duke University who have compiled data for
such plans, said the approach makes sense because ocean resources are not "equally distributed,
whether it's oil and gas, or fish, or corals." But he added that the sea has so many overlapping activities
that "when you begin putting these maps together, as we've done, it quickly becomes a train wreck."
The states pioneering this approach have charted different paths. California is establishing marine
protected areas along its 1,100-mile coastline under its 1999 Marine Life Protection Act, dividing it into
five regions and brokering agreements with interest groups. Massachusetts, which enacted its Ocean
Act only last year, is to finalize a comprehensive ocean management plan by Jan. 1 that exempts
fisheries but covers all other major activities.
Ian Bowles, Massachusetts secretary of energy and environmental affairs, said the state is working to
determine "what are the areas of particular ecological value that we should be protecting from other
uses" and what parts of the ocean can accommodate such diverse concerns as liquefied natural gas
offloading terminals, wind projects and sand mining for restoring eroding beaches.
While a few states are leading the way in the United States, the Europeans and Australians have done
this for years. Charles Ehler, a Paris-based consultant who is drafting a manual on the subject for
UNESCO, the U.N. Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, said the demand for offshore wind
farms and other activities has spurred countries such as Belgium, Germany, Norway and the Netherlands
to establish specific marine boundaries.
"There's a much greater intensity of demand for offshore space in Europe than in most of the United
States," said Ehler, noting Belgium's demand exceeds its available space by 200 to 300 percent.
Even though they have a head start, policymakers overseas are struggling with many of the same
questions Americans are contemplating, including how to reconcile new and traditional ocean uses,
and how climate change will affect where marine species live. With the exception of Norway, few
nations have been willing to subject fisheries to the same management regime as such activities as
renewable energy and gravel mining.
"The traditional users of the sea have been the most resistant to marine spatial planning, because
they've pretty much been free to go where they want to go and do what they want to do," Ehler said.
While California includes the fishing industry in its planning process, Massachusetts fishermen held up
passage of the state's Ocean Act until they were reassured they would be exempt. "We don't want to
be told, 'Oh, and this place -- you can't go here anymore,' because we were there all along," said Bill
Adler, executive director of the Massachusetts Lobstermen's Association. He added that the fishing
industry is already regulated separately by the state.
Some U.S. oil and gas executives have adopted a similar stance, arguing that any offshore drilling
projects must undergo a federal environmental assessment. "I don't think the overall process is
broken," said Marvin Odum, president of Shell Oil Co., adding that when he hears of calls for
additional ecological reviews, "From where I sit, some of it can just look like delay tactics."
But as the country appears poised for a new push in offshore oil drilling, advocates such as the Ocean
Conservancy's Vikki Spruill argue it needs to take a more serious look at how it coordinates activities
off its coasts. "We wouldn't put a coal plant in a national park," Spruill said. Philippe Cousteau,
president of the nonprofit EarthEcho International, said policymakers should put environmental
considerations "first and foremost" when deciding where to locate new drilling activities.
Mary Gleason, the Nature Conservancy's senior scientist and lead planner for marine protected areas in
California's central and north central coastal regions, said "there's a lot of drama" when the universe of
users is included in ocean planning. "There's been a negotiated solution in all of these cases, where
there's been a lot of give-and-take," she said.

[NOTE: Ehler = Charles Ehler, Ocean Visions Consulting president and marine spatial
planning consultant for UNESCO Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission]

Exploration Solvency Answers

Status Quo Solves

Status quo solves new plan for ocean exploration now
Bidwell, US News, 13
(Allie, Sept. 25, 2013, US News, Scientists Release First Plan for National Ocean Exploration Program,
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/09/25/scientists-release-first-plan-for-national-ocean-
exploration-program?page=2, accessed 7/15/14, AA)

scientists and researchers. Taking steps toward discovering what resources and information the seas
hold, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Aquarium of the Pacific released
on Wednesday a report that details plans to create the nation's first ocean exploration program by the
year 2020.
organizations, nonprofit organizations and private companies to discuss what components should make
up a national ocean exploration program and what will be needed to create it.
"This is the first time the explorers themselves came together and said, 'this is the kind of program we
want and this is what it's going to take,'" says Jerry Schubel, president and CEO of the Aquarium of the
Pacific, located in Long Beach, Calif. "That's very important, particularly when you put it in the context
that the world ocean is the largest single component of Earth's living infrastructure ... and less than 10
percent of it has ever been explored."

Time Frame

Research gathered from exploration takes decades to use
Avery, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution president and director, 13
*Dr. Susan K., 6/11/2013, DEEP SEA CHALLENGE: INNOVATIVE PARTNERSHIPS IN OCEAN
OBSERVATION, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-113shrg87852/html/CHRG-113shrg87852.htm,
ACCESSED 7/15/14, GNL]

In reality science is a continuum from basic through applied research and the integration of this
information into modeling and decision-making processes as well as technology development. This is
readily apparent in ongoing efforts to improve the translation of research to operations, or ``R20.'' A key
element to extracting the greatest value from investments in basic and applied research is ensuring
the continuity of data, implicit in which is funding support for the collection, synthesis, analysis and
delivery of this data in a useable form. The benefits of discovery driven research and databases
supporting this work often take years, or decades to be fully recognized and exploited for the benefit
of society. Maintaining the infrastructure responsible for the collection of scientific data has proven to
be a huge challenge, particularly in the ocean sciences where infrastructure construction and
operation and maintenance costs are high due to the harsh working environment and cost of
accessing the ocean.

Obstacles

Plan cant solve requires massive overhauls in resource expenditure, funding
method, research method, international scope and coop, multiple agencies,
integration across fields and industries
National Research Council, Committee on the Exploration of the Seas, 2003
*2003, Committee on Exploration of the Seas, National Research Council, Exploration of the Seas:
Interim Report, page 5-6, http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10630, accessed 6/26/14, GNL]

An ocean exploration program should emphasize observation and description of living and non-living
resources, rates, and processes (Step 1). Independent verification (Step 4) should not be included in an
exploration program, although it is an important role of more traditional ocean research programs. In
Steps 2 and 3, ocean exploration and research overlap; such an overlap is highly desirable and
demonstrates the value of exploration for fueling the next generation of hypothesis testing. Ocean
exploration should be an integral component of a continuum to ocean research and technology
development.
The success of U.S. ocean research programs is due in large part to longstanding support from the
National Science Foundation (NSF), Office of Naval Research (ONR), National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), and other government and private sources. Most research grants are funded
on a competitive basis, and proposals are evaluated based on a number of factors, including the
significance of the hypotheses to be tested and the methods proposed to test the hypotheses.
Commonly, ocean research proposals target well-defined, previously studied areas or sites, in an
effort to increase our knowledge and understanding of a particular habitat, biological community, or
process. Over the long term, this leads to extensive data sets and detailed theories in a certain scientific
discipline or geographic region. While the high quality of ocean research in the United States is
indisputable, the funding process does not generally encourage exploration. Proposals without
sufficient data to develop testable hypotheses, to drive specific investigations, and to predict specific
outcomes from the work are not easily funded (National Science Foundation, 2002). A successful ocean
exploration program will use a similarly stringent proposal process, within the framework of a large
scale, mission-driven program.
A coordinated, high quality, well-managed ocean exploration program would provide a unique
framework for discovery of new species, resources, historical artifacts, habitats, and processes. The
review process could allow for and encourage multidisciplinary efforts, and seek to capitalize on the
synergy of diverse researchers and techniques. It would provide initial observations and insights into
the habitats, geological structure, water column processes, air-sea interaction, biological communities,
and evidence of past human activities that can then be used to develop testable hypotheses for ocean
research.
Ocean exploration should be global in scope. Vast regions of the ocean remain unknown with respect
to high-resolution bathymetry, biologic and genetic diversity, chemistry, and geophysics. These poorly
studied areas extend beyond territorial waters.
Exploration should receive international support. Nearly half of the people on Earth live within 100 km
of the ocean (World Resources Institute, 2001) and demands on the ocean for resources and waste
disposal are increasing. Exploration in the coastal ocean requires the active participation of the coastal
nations that control the exclusive economic zone (EEZ). Moreover, given the considerable economic
investment and effort needed for global ocean exploration, the United States alone cannot explore the
vast regions of the ocean yet unexplored and beyond the control of any single nation.
Within the United States, existing and new mechanisms for interagency support should be exploited.
Exploration requires a breadth of approaches and integration of the interests and missions of several
government agencies, academia, and industry. While the variety of involved agencies fosters a robust
ocean research program, the lack of coordination among agencies can be problematic. A strong,
sustainable, effective ocean exploration program will require several government agencies to invest in
the program.
Ocean exploration should consider all three spatial dimensions, as well as the dimension of time.
Explorations of time dependent or times series data over time have typically not received sufficient
attention in the study of the ocean. Expeditions to new areas for short periods of time are not
adequate for understanding processes, changes, small signals in the presence of high noise, or transient
events.

No solvency Research fleet needs massive overhaul
*Operating arm of the National Academy of Sciences, Science at Sea: Meeting Future Oceanographic
Goals with a Robust Academic Research Fleet, http://dels.nas.edu/resources/static-
assets/osb/miscellaneous/Biennial-Report-2009-2010.pdf, pg.28, accessed 6/29/14, BCG)

Oceanographic research vessels are a critical component of ocean research infrastructure. Ship
demand for research needs is likely to increase in the future, but the nations fleet suffers from
insufficient capacity, as well as old and outdated vessels. Many academic research ships are nearing
the end of their service lives or are in need of refitting and upgrades. The University-National
Oceanographic Laboratory System (UNOLS) is a consortium of 61 academic institutions and national
laboratories involved in oceanographic research that coordinate the scheduling and operation of 22
academic research vessels owned by federal agencies or research institutions. In 2001, the interagency
Federal Oceanographic Facilities Committee issued a plan that addresses renewals, retirements, and
technology upgrades for those vessels within the fleet that are over 40 m long. Despite broad support
for the plan, the last decade has seen little progress on implementation and funding.
The committee was asked to review the scientific and technological issues that may affect the
evolution of UNOLS academic fleet over the next 25 years. Their overarching conclusion was that the
U.S. academic research fleet provides an essential, enabling resource for the nation, and that aging
ships and evolving technology require fleet modernization and recapitalization to maintain the
nations leadership in ocean research. They recommended that one comprehensive, long-term
research fleet renewal plan to retain access to the sea be implemented, and that both highly
adaptable general purpose ships and specialized vessels will be needed. A future fleet will need to
support increasingly complex, multidisciplinary, multi-investigator research projects, including those
in support of autonomous technologies, ocean observing systems, process studies, remote sensing,
and modeling. The committee recommended that all future UNOLS ship acquisitions, beginning with
the ONR-funded Ocean class vessels that were in the design stage during the writing of this report,
should involve the scientific user community from the preconstruction phase through post-delivery of
the ship. They also concluded that the UNOLS consortium management structure is sound and is of
benefit to research institutions, federal agencies, and state and private interests. The federal agency
partnerships that capitalize and support the academic research fleet, particularly between the Navy
and NSF, have a proven record of cost savings and asset sharing. However, there are many assets that
are not integrated with UNOLS, leading to suboptimal use of the full U.S. research fleet. This project
was funded by the Office of Naval Research.

No solvency Public engagement and support key to sustainable and effective
program

In 2020, ocean explorers are part of a coordinated communication network and have the tools they
need to engage the public.
The public clearly has a stake in federally funded ocean exploration, and their support is required to
create a sustained, successful, and comprehensive national program of ocean exploration. Forum
participants felt that we are falling short of effectively engaging the broader public in the excitement
and importance of ocean exploration and that this needs to change.
Participants were in strong agreement that we must enhance and expand existing efforts and find new
ways to communicate with the public about ocean exploration. We must provide better interaction
with scientists during expeditions, especially by taking telepresence beyond passive viewing and into
active participation.
Ocean Exploration 2020 participants agreed that we need a shared strategy to communicate effectively
and engage with the public about ocean exploration. Many ocean exploration scientists need more
experience and better resources, tools, and partnerships to implement this communication strategy
and to build public support for the national program.
Partnerships of ocean explorers with professional science communicators and with informal science
institutions, including aquariumswhich specialize in this domainhave the potential to expand the
size of the audience and to broaden it to include a larger cross section of society.

No sustainable funding private partnerships and resources key
Bidwell, World Report and US News Education Reporter, 13
*Allie, 9/25/13, US News, Scientists Release First Plan for National Ocean Exploration
Program, http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/09/25/scientists-release-first-plan-for-
national-ocean-exploration-program, 6/25/14, GNL]

scientists and researchers. Taking steps toward discovering what resources and information the
seas hold, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Aquarium of the Pacific
released on Wednesday a report that details plans to create the nation's first ocean exploration
program by the year 2020.
organizations, nonprofit organizations and private companies to discuss what components should
make up a national ocean exploration program and what will be needed to create it.
"This is the first time the explorers themselves came together and said, 'this is the kind of
program we want and this is what it's going to take,'" says Jerry Schubel, president and CEO of
the Aquarium of the Pacific, located in Long Beach, Calif. "That's very important, particularly
when you put it in the context that the world ocean is the largest single component of Earth's
living infrastructure ... and less than 10 percent of it has ever been explored."
In order to create a comprehensive exploration program, Schubel says it will become increasingly
important that federal and state agencies form partnerships with other organizations, as it is unlikely
that government funding for ocean exploration will increase in the next few years.
Additionally, Schubel says there was a consensus among those explorers and stakeholders who
gathered in July that participating organizations need to take advantage of technologies that are
available and place a greater emphasis on public engagement and citizen exploration utilizing the
data that naturalists and nonscientists collect on their own.
"In coastal areas at least, given some of these new low-cost robots that are available, they could
actually produce data that would help us understand the nation's coastal environment," Schubel
says.

Agency

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Agency

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Aff

You might also like