DDO TOC Round 1: Economics

Con: 1. The Grand Canyon is a National Park of vast geologic, cultural and ecological significance. a. "Well known for its geologic significance, the Grand Canyon is one of the most studied geologic landscapes in the world." http://www.nps.gov... The Grand Canyon is a vast scientific resource which would no longer be available were it to be privatized. As my opponent stated, a company's primary interest is profit, not non-profit scientific research. Further, the ecological harms to the Grand Canyon which would result would degrade its scientific value. Ultimately, we would certainly lose a scientific resource. b. "During prehistory, the area was inhabited by Native Americans who built settlements within the canyon and its many caves." http://www.talismancoins.com... The Canyon presents varied Indian settlements which are available for study. http://www.scenic.com... Limited scientific access to, and degradation of these sites (from tourism, industrialization, etc.) would be a great scientific loss. c. "The Park contains several major ecosystems. Its great biological diversity can be attributed to the presence of five of the seven life zones and three of the four desert types in North America...This is equivalent to traveling from Mexico to Canada. The Park also serves as an ecological refuge, with relatively undisturbed remnants of dwindling ecosystems...It is home to numerous rare, endemic (found only at Grand Canyon), and specially protected (threatened/endangered) plant and animal species." http://www.nps.gov... The Grand Canyon is also home to a California Condor reintroduction program. http://www.nps.gov... It is quite evident that we cannot allow such a valuable natural resource to be compromised, as would occur following privatization. It would be another loss to the scientific community and to the biodiversity of our nation. The detrimental effects of biodiversity loss are widely known. http://www.greenfacts.org... 2. The sale would compromise U.S. homeland security. a. My opponent makes the repeated assumption that the highest bidder would necessarily be a tourism company. However, this is patently false. Foreign countries would hold a vast military advantage by acquiring the Grand Canyon. Numerous wealthy nations, e.g. China, would more than welcome a vast tract of inland U.S. property. Noting the location of the Grand Canyon, it becomes apparent that the large cities of California would be hugely vulnerable to military assault. http://www.world-guides.com... Further, it would increase the ease with which China could gather military intelligence. China, along with many other nations, has the power to outbid any corporation. http://english.peopledaily.com.cn... 3. The sale violates the rights of Indian reservations. a. Multiple reservations have been established along the Grand Canyon. http://z.about.com... These reservations have substantial water rights, which could easily grow exponentially in size. http://ag.arizona.edu... "Still unquantified and conceded to be potentially huge, the Navajo Tribe's water rights claim could cut into the Colorado River apportionment of four states: Arizona in the Lower Basin and New Mexico, Colorado and Utah in the Upper Basin, with the major burden on Arizona. " Obviously, an increased tourist burden would result in an increase burden on the Colorado River, which could easily violate the water rights of Native Americans. b. Increased pollution in the area would further violate these rights, and prevent Native Americans from practicing traditional customs and lifestyles. 4. Grand Canyon National Park is a U.S. asset. a. "Grand Canyon National Park is a designated Federal Recreation Fee Area. Fees collected directly benefit the park, and the National Park Service. This program allows the park to keep eighty percent of the revenue from most fees charged." http://www.nps.gov... As my opponent stated, the amount of tourism traffic in the Grand Canyon results in a great deal of revenue. Ergo, the Grand Canyon has historically been, and will continue to be a strong U.S. asset. Its sale would deprive the U.S. of such. Pro: 1. "The Grand Canyon would be most profitably utilized as a tourist attraction." a. My opponents statement is entirely false. The Grand Canyon contains vast mineral resources. http://www.suite101.com... As these resources were mined up until the nationalization of the Grand Canyon, they would naturally continue following privatization. This would have severe ecological repercussions. Also, cross-apply my second contention. b. An increased tourist load would negatively affect the Grand Canyon, e.g. further damage to the water supply, the impacts of transportation. http://www.rff.org... c. My opponent does not warrant his claim of increased revenue, in fact, his link leads to a marketing company's home page. This hardly warrants the increase in revenue which he estimates. d. The quote, for one, is unwarranted. Further, it merely "suggests" that public land will be preserved to some extent. This is certainly not a point in favor of Pro, as the government already uses the Grand Canyon in an environmentally conscientious manner. 2. "Companies naturally make decisions to maximize profits." a. This is quite true. However, tourism is not necessarily the most profitable path, as I have stated. Even if it were utilized as a tourist attraction, industrialization, and possibly tourist traffic would increase. Both would have negative environmental consequences. b. "Just as tourism companies that own beaches keep their beaches clean, the company that owns the Grand Canyon would naturally protect it and its serenity." The tourism company would only protect those areas readily accessible by tourists. The most profitable route would be to industrialize and mine other areas. Ergo, this point is essentially a turn. 3. "Therefore, government ownership of the Grand Canyon is unnecessary and undesirable." a. My opponent has warranted this nowhere in his case. The above contentions only attempt to explain away the impacts of private ownership. b. My opponent does not warrant the sale price of the Grand Canyon. He then further states that much of his case is a wash. It will occur with or without the resolution's application. c. Finally, my opponent's last two statements are simply that...statements. They are fully unwarranted, and as such, should not be weighed in this round. Hence, my opponent has no warranted impacts, and his burden of proof is, thus far, not met. Thanks for the interesting topic idea. Back to you.