Exterminating Killer Whales

Now Ladies and Gentlemen, welcome back to The Pro. I feel like Pro has presented a stronger side for a few reasons. Con has given us only one reason why Killer Whales are good, he has only given us one reason why they are positive for their environment (That they decompose and spread their nutrients) and I'll be dealing with that shortly. The rest of speech was challenging me on what the causes of the environmental disasters I listed were. Unfortunately most of Cons speech was built of straw men. It's neither here nor there if humans are also committing much larger acts of mass murder of fish seals and otters, Killer Whales are also a cause in the drop of numbers and destruction of habitats. Cons speech in a sentence: I agree that they are harmful, but NOT as harmful as you make them out to be at all, you hyperbolise, and ignore all the other factors that lead to this problem. That may be true, but they are still harmful none the less. Just because humans pose a greater threat to the extinction of the Alaskan Cod than Killer Whales doesn't mean the whales aren't a problem. I didn't make this debate to talk about over-fishing, I made this debate to analyse the harmful effects Killer Whales have on their unstable Arctic environment. Con has only challenged me on the fact that they aren't as harmful as I make them out to be, but they are still harmful none the less. Con has only given one reason why the Killer Whale is good and I will deal with it now. "killer whales also play a fair role in recycling nutrients back into the ecosystem contrary to what the Pro states" I'll use Pros logic in this sense: A Killer whale consumes thousands of animals in its life time, turning their rich nutrients into useless waste. If Killer Whales were exterminated, every potential animal it didn't eat would have the chance to have their entire body recycled back into the environment when they died. That is to say more nutrients would be recycled back into the ecosystem if Killer Whales were exterminated. Cons only reason as to why Killer Whales are benifical in any sort of way has been dropped. So what are we left with? A species of dolphin that is harmful to populations of seals, otters, whales and Kelp Forests, but as con sais "Just not as much as humans are". In other words, Killer Whales offer nothing but only take. This justifies their extermination. Because of changing Arctic conditions they are unnatural in their environments, and play no positive roles in their eco system. We cannot afford the luxury of Killer Whales, we cannot afford species of animals that are counter productive to an eco system. The difference between Killer Whales and any other top predator, is that most top predators are involved in the endless, perfect cycle of nature. Killer Whales have fallen out of the loop, they bring about countless deaths of endangered whales, and their lifestyle is not sustainable. It doesn't matter that the human lifestyle is also not sustainable in this debate, it doesn't matter that Humans do 10X more damage than Killer Whales, because we have other purposes, our lives consist of so much more than the Arctic Eco-System, there are so many more arguments as to why we are good (Love, development, art) all that stuff that we have to offer. Killer Whales have no other purpose or motive, as long as they exist they do harm. Sometimes irreparable harm ( See the gray Seal population). The reason I have won this debate, is because there is no justification at this point as to why Orcas are good, why it benefits us to keep them alive. Yet there are reasons why it benefits us to exterminate all of them, why they solely present harm on their eco systems. There are no more rounds for me to debate so if Con starts new arguments why orcas are good I can't really deal with them. Orcas aren't the sole reason for the decline in seals, otters, and whales. But they are a reason. And in light of the fact that they do no good (as every other single animal on the Earth does), there is no justification for keeping them alive when they only present harm. We are probably going to hear tons of analysis on how the the minimal harms of killer whales justify their extermination, and tons of comparisons to similair circumstances, but remember, there is not one redeeming quality for Killer Whales that Con has showed us. When we have an unstable habitat such as the Arctic, every problem to it must be solved as quickily as possible. Killer Whales are part of the Problem, Pro is part of the solution. I beg, to propose.