Debate Case

Good afternoon, Ladies and Gentlemen. I am the second speaker for the affirmative team and I will be continuing my team's case tonight, "Overfishing: Ecosystem management ensures a future for fisheries."

I will firstly start with some rebuttal.

Speaker 1 of the opposing team said "(make sure to add a lot I need it)"

He/she also stated "(make sure to add a lot I need it)"

Now onto my debate. The first speaker from our team stated and explained why over fishing is a serious problem, why bottom trawling should be ban, and why we should expand the marine protected areas.

My teams plan is to have the united states expand networks of Marine protected areas under the supervision of the united states Department of Interior to include a minimum of 10% of ocean waters in the federal EEZ, to have the united states Department of Interior ban all commercial fishing in these Marine Protected Areas and establish guidelines and enforce regulations on the recreational use of marine protected areas, and to have the practice of bottom trawling banned in United states ocean fisheries.

The United states Department of interior will expand marine protected areas monitoring where we can and cannot fish. With the expansion, commercial fishing will be band and guidelines will be established, control what we can and cannot do. The United States department of interior will also help with the banning of bottom trawling. The United States department of Interior's federal EEZ includes waters around Alaska, the pacific coast, Hawaii / Hawaiian Islands and northern Marina Island, the north east and south east regions of the US, Puerto Rico, and other United States virgin islands. The United States will expand the marine protected area with funds from the department of interior. Based on previous funding, it can easily be implied that the United States department of Interior is very much so open to helping protect the oceanic ecosystems. (Their website, department of interior recovery investments tab.)

The protection expansion will allow for damaged ecosystems to restore and renew. Even though we cannot protect all of the oceans, we can start small, that way if there is still an excessive amount of overfishing, we can protect different areas and there will be areas that are already established and renewed. Like my partner stated, "if management goes wrong outside the reserves, and populations are overfished, there will still be protected animals left to kick start the recovery."

Our goal is to take action as soon as possible. The sooner the better. Over fishing has become a major problem and we plan to solve how we have previously explained it. If we continue at the rate we are going, we are going to end up fishing for more fish then there are in the oceans. At that point there may not be enough fish to restore complete oceanic ecosystems. It is completely necessary that we do more to protect the marine life in the oceans because United States fisheries need to broaden their horizons and need to focus on more than one species of fish and become more aware of the several different ecosystems. Expanding Marnie protected areas will provide the ability to explore.

It is entirely necessary that bottom trawling is banned because it is extremely harmful to the ocean floor and the marine life that live near it. It is utterly necessary that marine life is protected in advance, for we do not know what the future holds. The only way to protect this marine life is to expand the networks of Marine Protected Areas to include at least 10% of the earth's precious oceans. It's better to be safe and protect the animals, then to be sorry on the future because fish are near