Issue 29 • 1 August 2001 A publication of MAF Biosecurity Authority

Expensive produce: $200 instant fines introduced p4 Also in this issue: Should pig feeding be regulated? BSE: an international public health, animal health and trade issue Precaution and the management of biosecurity risks More resources needed for international plant work security Import risk analysis for Cordyline and Dracaena Painted apple moth response report released Sudden oak death – new disease identified in US Developing codes of welfare: a consultative process Pipfruit industry certification post deregulation

Biosecurity How to contact us: Contents Everyone listed at the end of an article as a contact point, unless otherwise indicated, is part of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry Biosecurity Authority. 3 Biosecurity takes a stand All MAF staff can be contacted by e-mail, FMD campaign wound up and the standard format for all addresses is 4 Cover story: Instant fines catch 454 travellers in first fortnight [email protected] For example Ralph Hopcroft would be New Zealand experts contribute to risk analysis text [email protected] (There are slight 5 Should pig feeding be regulated? exceptions for people with similar names, but these addresses are given where necessary.) 6 BSE: an international public health, animal health and trade issue 7 Varroa update: varroa control book published by MAF PO Box 2526, Wellington New Zealand 8 Biosecurity Council position statement on the application of precaution in managing biosecurity risks associated with the importation of risk goods under the Biosecurity (+64) 4 474 4100 (switchboard) Act 1993 most staff have direct dial lines which are listed where available 10 More resources needed to support international plant health standards work 11 Biosecurity people: John Hedley (+64) 4 474 4133 • Animal Biosecurity Group Cattle and deer ID changes proposed (+64) 4 470 2730 12 Import risk analysis for Cordyline and Dracaena cut flowers and branches • Biosecurity Policy International standard for wood packing Coordination Group • Border Management Group 13 Painted apple moth report released • International Agreements Group 14 Sudden oak death – new disease identified in the United States • Contracts Management Group 15 Developing codes of welfare – a consultative process (+64) 4 498 9888 16 Long-term response to southern saltmarsh mosquito incursion • Group Director and Business Services Manager, Biosecurity Biosecurity strategy update Authority 17 Pipfruit export certification in deregulated industry: plan early for change! • Director, Animal Biosecurity • Director, Plants Biosecurity Nursery stock industry informed over import health standards • Forest Biosecurity Group 18 African wildlife and veterinary experience shared • Animal Welfare Group 19 Aquarium seaweed a threat to marine environment (+64) 4 474 4257 • Plants Biosecurity Group ASB Bank House, 101 The Terrace, Wellington 19 New import health standards issued

Biosecurity is published 6-weekly by MAF 20 Import health standards revoked Biosecurity Authority. It covers biosecurity Draft import health standards for horses and animal health, animal welfare, plant 21 Draft guideline for approval of semen collection centres exporting ruminant semen health and forest health issues. It is of special from New Zealand interest to all those with a stake in New Surveillance standards reviewed Zealand’s agriculture, horticulture, forestry, animal welfare and environment. Used vehicle import health standard Codes of ethical conduct – approvals, notifications Enquiries about specific articles: Refer to and revocations since the last issue of Biosecurity contact listed at the end of the relevant article Icon Key Religious slaughter discussion paper General enquiries (eg, circulation requests or Animal Biosecurity information about MAF's biosecurity work): Biosecurity Magazine MAF Biosecurity Authority Plants Biosecurity PO Box 2526, Wellington 22 Biosecurity regulations notified internationally: Phone: 04 474 4100 publication through Biosecurity discontinued Forest Biosecurity Fax: 04 498 9888 23 New organism records: 12/5/01 – 22/6/01 Email: [email protected] Animal Welfare Editorial enquiries: Editor: Phil Stewart Issue 29 • 1 August 2001 Phone: 04 384 4688 Email: editor_biosecurity@ maf.govt.nz

2ISSN 1174 – 4618 www.maf.govt.nz/BiosecurityBiosecurity Issue 29 • 1 August 2001 Biosecurity takes a stand A pair of muddy gumboots, an x-ray stand, and Hugh Davies of the National machine and MAF’s hard-working Centre for Disease Investigation gave a detector dogs were among the presentation on the final day about drawcards at a highly successful lessons for New Zealand, and our biosecurity information stand at the preparedness to respond to a disease Mystery Creek National Agricultural emergency. Fieldays. It was promising to see a number of The recent outbreak of foot and mouth soon-to-be travellers, approaching disease (FMD) in the UK provided a people staffing the biosecurity stand to “Excuse me, sir – did you realise those were strong focus for biosecurity information check on their obligations when they dangerous goods?” A gumboot wearer at the Mystery Creek Fieldays sees his footwear in a at this year’s event. return to New Zealand. This contact was new light. a good opportunity to get the message on display. People were constantly amazed For the first time, MAF designed a out and to reiterate just how serious the at just how much could be seen in their generic biosecurity display site disease is. The FMD false alarm that bags; a display cabinet of seized goods hit representing all of the government occurred during the field days also home the lesson. ministries involved. sparked interest from the visiting media With the FMD crisis taking centre stage, a and general public and heightened The rain held off and the four days were a pair of large muddy gumboots marked as curiosity about the site. success. With the theme of next year’s Fieldays being New Zealand’s clean, green ‘dangerous goods’ topped off a 1.8m high While FMD formed a useful focus, the image, planning is already underway to pillar at the front of the site. The opportunity was taken to educate people make the most of it and to keep the gumboots were a sobering reminder to about the need to protect New Zealand biosecurity message in front of New visitors – many of them gumboot clad – from a whole range of exotic pests and Zealanders. that even a mundane item of farm diseases. footwear can carry a killer virus. Kelly Hawkins, MAF Biosecurity The MAF Quarantine Service beagle The recent FMD television Awareness Programme, dogs made a huge impact and pulled in phone (09) 356 9793, advertisements were screened at the the crowds, as did the new x-ray machine [email protected]

FMD campaign wind-up no excuse for complacency The public awareness campaign about disease in summerfruit, citrus canker At least 40 percent of the people carrying foot and mouth disease (FMD) may be disease for citrus fruit, Asian gypsy moth undeclared risk material were New winding up, but that’s no excuse for and pitch pine canker which could affect Zealanders. “This isn’t just a problem of complacency, according to Minister for our horticulture and forestry industries. uninformed foreigners. It’s our own people Biosecurity, Jim Sutton. not taking the dangers seriously.” “There are Newcastle disease and avian Reflecting on the campaign at a meeting influenza which affect birds, equine Federated Farmers President Alistair in Wellington last month, Mr Sutton said influenza and equine infectious anaemia Polson endorsed the FMD awareness the publicity about the increased danger which affect horses, as well as nasties campaign and the Government’s increased from FMD has acted as a useful bridge to such as anthrax and rabies. biosecurity measures. the ongoing $2.79m biosecurity “To that we can add the ‘hitchhiker’ “We’ve got the best biosecurity system in awareness campaign, due to be launched species – snakes, red fire ants, scorpions the world, but we need to be the best,” he in September. and mosquitoes.” said. “Two hundred thousand people are “Anecdotal evidence indicates that people employed in agriculture. A foot and mouth Mr Sutton said New Zealand is the only are much more aware of the risks of that outbreak in this country could directly country to x-ray 100 percent of incoming disease now,” he said. affect up to a million people. We’ve had a passenger luggage and mail. Seizures of let-off from foot and mouth for now, but However, he warned that the flurry of undeclared goods at Auckland, Wellington we must learn from the UK experience.” publicity surrounding the UK outbreak of and Christchurch international airports FMD should be kept in perspective. There were up 25 and 28 percent on the Mr Polson said he was disappointed that are many other biosecurity risks to previous year for April and May so many people were being caught since consider. respectively, while passenger volumes the instant fines had been introduced in had only risen by 6-7 percent. mid-June. “Perhaps we should look at “For example, there are several species of doubling the fine to $400,” he said. fruit fly, Pierce’s disease for grapes and This was a clear sign the increased the glassy-winged sharpshooter insect biosecurity measures are working, he which transmits that disease, plum pox said.

Biosecurity Issue 29 • 1 August 2001 3 Instant fines catch 454 travellers in first fortnight Instant fines for passengers who fail to offenders. Few people under 20 or over 60 declare risk items were implemented at have been fined. New Zealand’s international airports from Most of the infringements involved small 18 June 2001. items such as single pieces of fruit or small The infringement fee is applied when a plant items. The complete breakdown of passenger erroneously declares that they product types involved with undeclared are not in possession of goods specified in items for the first two weeks was: the declaration card. Non-declared products Within the first two weeks of Most of the instant fines imposed during the resulting in fines Percentage first two weeks involved small items. implementation 454 infringement notices Fresh produce 40% The infringement fees are designed to help were issued. The regional breakdown was: Contaminated used protect New Zealand’s environment and Auckland 323 equipment (boots, tents etc) 13% economy by encouraging passengers to be Christchurch 89 Stored products (herbs, vigilant in declaring risk goods when they Wellington 30 spices, cereals, nuts etc) 11% arrive in New Zealand. Hamilton 6 Meat products 8% Passengers who wilfully and knowingly set Bee products 6% Palmerston North 4 about to smuggle goods will not generally Dunedin 2 Seeds 5% receive infringement notices but will be All other product types 17% dealt with through the Courts, where fines Infringement fees will start at Queenstown up to $100,000 can be imposed. with the opening of the new terminal. The infringement offence is being applied Infringement fees are used in a number of Infringers may pay when the fee is issued across a wide range of nationalities and at countries for failure to declare items – most or at anytime within 14 days. The this stage there is no pattern to nationality. notably the United States and Australia. Department of Courts is responsible for For example, on the first day 15 people Michael Alexander, Programme collecting unpaid fines. representing 10 nationalities were issued Manager, Border Management, Initial statistics indicate that people in with infringement fees in Auckland. Four phone 04 474 4280, fax 04 470 2730, their 20s, 30s and 40s are the most regular of those were New Zealanders. [email protected] New Zealand experts make major contribution to risk analysis text The international standard text for experience in teaching the subject, or assessment) has largely been completed. because of their role at an OIE conducting risk analyses for imported A major section is about the collaborating centre. animals and animal products is on track communication of risk issues. At its first from completion in 2002. The participation of two MAF staff is meeting, the group had identified risk In 2000, the OIE, the World Organisation recognition of the high regard with which communication as one of the areas for Animal Health, convened an ad hoc New Zealand’s risk analysis expertise is needing major development and this has group to draft a handbook that will viewed internationally. New Zealander Dr now been achieved. Stuart MacDiarmid chairs the group and become the international standard text The last part of the handbook, dealing the bulk of the text is based on a New for veterinary services to carry out with quantitative risk assessment, was the Zealand risk analysis manual written by import risk analyses for animals and one that had received most attention Dr Noel Murray. animal products. since the last meeting. Dr Murray had The group met, for the second time, in From the outset, the group adopted done most of the work, but input had Italy in June. They are on track to accuracy, consistency with the also been received from outside experts. complete the handbook in 2002. International Animal Health Code and Group members will now review this text. clarity as guiding principles. Each section The seven members of the ad hoc group, Stuart MacDiarmid, National Manager, is reviewed against those criteria. including two experts from the MAF Risk Analysis, Animal Biosecurity, phone 04 474 4223, Biosecurity Authority, were selected for There are two parts. The first part of the fax 04 474 4133, handbook (context, terminology, their particular experience in conducting [email protected] animal health risk analyses, for their principles and qualitative risk 4 Biosecurity Issue 29 • 1 August 2001 Should pig feeding be regulated? MAF is seeking the views of industry and The recent foot and mouth disease disease transmission, a total ban on the public on the need for controls over (FMD) outbreak in the United Kingdom feeding of organic waste to pigs would the feeding of organic waste to pigs. has focused attention on possible risks to also have disadvantages. For example, it New Zealand. The consultation is an would mean that large amounts of food Feeding organic waste to pigs is opportunity to reconsider the risks from waste generated by food manufacturers sometimes referred to as ‘swill feeding’ or swill feeding and balance them against and presenting no disease risk would ‘garbage feeding’. MAF Biosecurity the costs of regulation. have to be dumped in landfills rather released a discussion paper at the end of than fed to pigs. An estimated 50,000 July discussing the issues and inviting Currently in New Zealand, swill feeding tonnes of food ‘waste’ annually is created feedback from interested parties. covers everything from people who keep from food processing plants in the a single pig in their backyard and feed it The paper will ask for views on a number Auckland region alone. It is desirable for on table scraps, to large well-managed of different options for regulation, the community and the environment that piggeries. Some pig farmers use food ranging from a complete ban on swill this product becomes a resource rather waste from restaurants, supermarkets or feeding, through treatment or control of than waste. factories to feed to their pigs. swill to continuing the current system of Intermediate options could permit the no regulatory control. The need for controls use of food waste in ways that do not add MAF is reviewing the practice of swill The current situation to disease risk. feeding because the practice can transmit In 1998, regulations controlling the disease. For example, if meat infected Principles feeding of organic waste to pigs were with a serious exotic disease such as foot MAF’s discussion paper suggests that the removed so that more effort could be put and mouth disease were brought into following principles should be used to into strengthening the border, to prevent New Zealand and fed to pigs in garbage, guide a decision about the best regulatory exotic diseases entering New Zealand in an outbreak of foot and mouth disease option: the first place. Previously, the regulations could result. required that organic waste fed to pigs • Risks of entry of exotic disease must was cooked to remove the risk of disease Foot and mouth disease probably entered be managed. transmission. the United Kingdom livestock population • Profitable industries, and through a poorly environmentally friendly industries, managed swill-feeding should be permitted as long as risks operation. This has can be managed. brought the lack of • Regulations should be enforceable. regulations to control (For some options, considerable swill feeding in New additional resources would be Zealand into question. required to ensure their The risk of FMD or other enforceability.) serious exotic diseases • The benefits of regulation should infecting New Zealand exceed the costs. livestock via this pathway Consultation is small. Nevertheless, the Interested organisations and individuals consequences of an will receive a copy of the paper direct. outbreak would be The paper will also be available from extremely serious. It MAF’s website, or on request, phone would damage the whole 04 498 9873. economy – not just the livelihoods of affected Allen Bryce, Programme Manager, farmers. All New Surveillance and Response, Zealanders need to phone 04 470 2787 fax 04 474 4133 consider whether the [email protected] benefits of permitting unregulated swill feeding www.maf.govt.nz are worth the risks. The closing date for submissions is 30 September 2001. While reducing risks of

Biosecurity Issue 29 • 1 August 2001 5 BSE: an international public health, animal health and trade issue International experts believe that BSE Recommendations appropriate tests on target animal populations. should be treated as an international The consultation adopted the following • The consultation considered that BSE- issue because potentially infected BSE main recommendations: contaminated MBM will have been fed to materials have been distributed • The original source and movement of some sheep and goats and that these throughout the world. animals and animal products, including species may have been infected with BSE meat and bone meal (MBM), can be agent. It is therefore recommended that In mid-June Dr Stuart MacDiarmid masked by international trading patterns individual countries assess the risk that (MAF Biosecurity Authority) and Dr which often include the processing and re- BSE infection is present in their indigenous Andrew McKenzie (MAF Food Assurance export of products. Consequently, importing sheep/goat population. All countries are Authority) joined around 150 experts countries should be aware of risks encouraged to require notification and generated by these existing trading patterns surveillance for TSE (transmissible from around the world in a technical and illegal trade. spongiform encephalopathy) diseases of consultation on bovine spongiform sheep/goats and to take steps to mitigate • Countries should not become complacent risks identified. encephalopathy (BSE). The consultation about their risk from BSE. The extremely was organised jointly by the World low initial incidence and limited clustering • In countries where sheep and goat Health Organisation, the United Nations of BSE cases, protracted latency and non- populations have been potentially exposed to BSE infectivity, measures should be Food and Agricultural Organisation, and specific nature of the disease’s early clinical signs tend to mask the severity of taken to minimise the exposure of humans the World Organisation for Animal the problem. to infectivity from sheep and goats. Health (OIE). • All countries are urged to evaluate their • Efforts to investigate the presence of natural BSE in sheep and goats should be In response to mounting international potential exposure through systematic assessment of trade data and possible risk continued. concern over the European BSE factors. In addition, countries should be • The research available to date indicates epidemic, the three organisations aware that their trading status may be that oral BSE challenge for pigs and poultry convened the technical consultation of dependent upon the risk assessment for does not result in disease and that there is veterinarians, food safety experts, health BSE. no evidence for residual infectivity present officials and other experts to address a • Additional resources should be made in tissues. number of key questions, including: available to assist nations, particularly in • Scientists should continue to be proactive, the developing world, in assessing their take the initiative to communicate new • What is safe to eat? potential exposure to BSE-infected information about BSE and its risks, as it materials and in identifying measures becomes available, even though it may be • Is enough being done to protect which may be necessary for managing the unsettling to the public. They should make human populations from BSE? risk associated with this exposure. clear what is being done to address these • How can spread of BSE to other • The OIE has developed guidelines for risks. countries be prevented? and assessing the BSE risk status of regions, Risks to people countries and zones. More specific • What can scientists do to improve guidance for conducting these risk The working group on risk assessment, communication about the risks from assessments, taking advantage of the chaired by Dr MacDiarmid, observed that BSE? experience of countries and other even where BSE is not present in the international organisations, is required. Dr MacDiarmid was invited to cattle population, cases of vCJD may be • Protection of public health is the expected to occur in humans. This may participate and chair a working group on overarching goal of BSE risk management. have been through exposure to BSE the basis of his expertise in BSE and in Risk management strategies must be the field of risk analysis. Dr McKenzie science-based, transparent and not more was invited in recognition of his expertise trade restrictive than necessary for health No evidence of BSE in animals other protection. Implementation of the chosen in the field of meat hygiene and public risk management options must be strictly than cattle health. enforced to protect global health and trade. The joint WHO/FAO/OIE Technical Efforts by authorities must be directed at Consultation on BSE considered the The consultation concluded that BSE, ensuring full compliance. likelihood of BSE being present in species and its human form variant Creutzfeld • Ruminant MBM and greaves should not be Jakob disease (vCJD), should be fed to ruminant animals. Monitoring of other than cattle. It concluded that to considered as an international issue compliance with the feed bans needs further date there is no evidence that BSE is because potentially infected BSE development of reliable certification present in European sheep and goats, programmes and screening tests to materials have been distributed although the extent of investigations has guarantee the absence of BSE infectivity in so far been limited. The experts also throughout the world through trade of ruminant feedstuffs traded internationally. concluded that the research to date live cattle, and certain cattle products and Emphasis must be placed on the by-products. The experts gathered at the development of rapid and reliable tests for indicates that oral BSE challenge of pigs OIE urged all countries to evaluate their the detection of ruminant protein. and poultry does not result in disease, nor is there any evidence for residual potential exposure and take appropriate • Countries should strongly consider, on the basis of the risk assessment, the use of infectivity in tissue of these animals. action to address identified risks.

6 Biosecurity Issue 29 • 1 August 2001 either during travel to countries where public health measures had been OIE follow-up the disease was endemic, or through recognised. Furthermore, a limited range As a result of this consultation the OIE foodstuffs imported in the past from such of food products potentially has scheduled a meeting in September of countries. The experts warned that vCJD contaminated with the BSE agent was its Ad Hoc Group on BSE, of which Dr in the human population does not imported into New Zealand prior to the MacDiarmid is a member. The Ad Hoc necessarily indicate BSE in the national Ministry of Health imposing restrictions Group on BSE will advise the OIE on cattle population. in early 1996. ways in which the International Animal Countries must be prepared to investigate While the recommendations of the Health Code should be revised to cases of vCJD but, if such investigation international technical consultation on implement the health protection indicates external exposures rather than BSE were far reaching, the experts measures recommended by the joint from local livestock, the implementation warned against irrational measures. WHO/FAO/OIE Technical Consultation of emergency measures relating to BSE They concluded that risk management on BSE. strategies must be science-based, may not be necessary. Stuart MacDiarmid, National Manager, transparent and not more trade Risk Analysis, Animal Biosecurity, This latter point is particularly important restrictive than necessary for the phone 04 474 4223, to New Zealand, a country whose cattle protection of health. Choice of specific fax 04 474 4133, population is recognised as BSE-free, but risk management strategies must [email protected] whose human population is likely to have consider the practicality of been exposed to BSE through travel to implementation and means of auditing Europe in the years before the need for compliance in each country.

Varroa control book published by MAF An information book, Control of Varroa: summarised the relevant findings in a survey is underway. Materials to test A Guide for New Zealand Beekeepers, is format that beekeepers will find easy to 29,000 hives situated on over 1,800 currently being printed and will be read and understand. apiaries have been distributed to trained distributed free of charge to all New Progress with registering organic beekeepers. More than 15,000 ‘sticky Zealand beekeepers. This is a major part treatments boards’ have already been removed from of the education component of the hives and returned to the laboratory for Government’s response to varroa. MAF Biosecurity Authority is waiting to examination. hear from the Agricultural Compounds When varroa was first detected in April and Veterinary Medicines (ACVM) Testing on a smaller scale is being carried 2000, MAF was surprised at the lack of Group of MAF about the applications to out in the lower North Island. High-risk appropriate information from overseas register formic acid, oxalic acid and areas are being targeted, including areas that could be readily distributed to thymol crystals for varroa control. The immediately south of the Movement beekeepers. Since there was no varroa formal applications to register these as Control Line, in apiaries along major book available for beekeepers, MAF generic compounds for varroa control roads, and in the vicinity of honey decided to write one. This task was were lodged in June and are being fast houses. contracted to AgriQuality New Zealand tracked. Paul Bolger, Varroa Programme Limited and HortResearch. Coordinator, Animal Biosecurity, These applications are part of MAF’s phone 04 474 4144, Authors Mark Goodwin and Cliff Van commitment to beekeepers to assist with Eaton conducted an extensive search of fax 04 474 4133, the registration of low-cost varroa [email protected] world literature on varroa control, then treatment products suitable for organic certification. HortResearch STOP PRESS was contracted to assist with the registration application process. Varroa found south of movement control line Varroa surveillance continues North Island surveillance has detected Surveillance to detect the spread of one infected apiary just south of the movement control line. MAF is discussing varroa is continuing in both the options with the beekeeping industry. North and South Islands. There have been no varroa detected in the In the South Island an extensive South Island to date. An extensive survey is underway in the South Island, covering over 1,800 apiaries. Biosecurity Issue 29 • 1 August 2001 7 Precaution and the management of biosecurity risks The Biosecurity Council has approved a 2. emphasises how precaution is an Environmental Risk Management position statement on how precaution inherent part of risk analysis Authority were represented in this group. is applied when managing biosecurity 3. describes how precaution is exercised A smaller drafting group worked to risks associated with the importation of separately in the recommendation of develop the position statement and risk goods. risk management measures based on document current practice in exercising The position statement, published in full that analysis precaution when using risk analysis and below, sets out the position of the 4. does not distinguish between this use making risk management decisions Biosecurity Council in applying of precaution and a separate related to the importation of risk goods. precaution when managing biosecurity ‘precautionary approach’ in This outline of how precaution is applied risks associated with the importation of biosecurity. in one area of biosecurity risk risk goods under the Biosecurity Act. It The application of precaution is a topical management will be an input to the does not deal with how precaution is issue. Various formulations of a development of the Biosecurity Strategy. applied when making other decisions precautionary approach or the It is hoped that this discussion of under the Biosecurity Act, nor decisions ‘precautionary principle’ are a subject of precaution will be followed by outlines of relating to new organisms under the considerable discussion. An how precaution is used in managing Hazardous Substances and New interdepartmental working group has other risks, for example in other Organisms Act. considered the issue of precaution in environmental areas or food safety. The position statement: biosecurity risk management in New Barry O’Neil, Group Director, 1. stresses how precaution is an Zealand. The Ministry of Agriculture and MAF Biosecurity Authority, inherent feature of our ‘positive Forestry (MAF), the Ministry of Foreign phone 04 474 4128, listing’ approach to biosecurity – that Affairs and Trade (MFAT), the Ministry fax 04 498 9888, is, goods not assessed as safe are of Fisheries, the Department of [email protected] automatically prohibited Conservation (DoC) and the Biosecurity Council position statement on the application of precaution in managing biosecurity risks associated with the importation of risk goods under the Biosecurity Act 1993 Scope Background environmental field because of lack of This document sets out the position of the Precaution is defined as “action taken information. Applying precaution is not new Biosecurity Council in applying precaution beforehand to avoid risk or ensure a good to biosecurity risk management; risk analysis when managing biosecurity risks associated result” (Oxford English Dictionary). Similar and application of sanitary or phytosanitary with the importation of risk goods under the terms include ‘prudence’ and ‘caution’. measures have long been undertaken from a cautious position in order to protect New Biosecurity Act 1993. It does not deal with the The concept of a ‘precautionary approach’ or application of precaution when making other Zealand’s flora and fauna. Application of ‘precautionary principle’ is an emerging decisions under the Biosecurity Act, or precaution does not remove the need for a principle of international environmental law, decisions relating to new organisms under the scientific risk analysis to be undertaken and especially since the incorporation of a Hazardous Substances and New Organisms progressively refined as further scientific precautionary approach in the Rio Act 1996. The document supports the MAF evidence becomes available. Declaration on Environment and Biosecurity Authority policy statement on Development. Principle 15 of the Rio Precaution in New Zealand’s conducting import risk analyses and applying Declaration1 states that “In order to protect biosecurity system them in the development of import health the environment, the precautionary approach standards (dated 9 February 2001), which Precaution is an integral part of New shall be applied widely by States according to contains a section (2.9) dealing with POSITION Zealand’s approach to biosecurity protection. their capabilities. Where there are threats of uncertainty or lack of knowledge that is based Under the Biosecurity Act “risk goods” serious or irreversible damage, lack of full on this document. This statement sets out the (broadly speaking anything that might pose a scientific certainty shall not be used as a 2 current position of the Biosecurity Council in biosecurity risk to New Zealand ) cannot be STATEMENTreason for postponing cost-effective measures applying precaution in the situations cleared for entry to New Zealand unless the to prevent environmental degradation”. included within the scope defined in this risks posed by the goods have been assessed paragraph; that position may need to be The use of precaution in biosecurity risk and can be effectively managed. Any risk revised following development of the analysis is not fundamentally different from a goods that do not meet the biosecurity Biosecurity Strategy. precautionary approach used in the conditions for import (set out in an import

8 Biosecurity Issue 29 • 1 August 2001 health standard), or which have not been Scientists do not usually provide a unanimous organisms posing a biosecurity risk. assessed, may not be cleared for entry to New body of opinion on a subject; there may be Biosecurity department risk analysts and Zealand. Goods that are or contain a new divergent scientific views on a subject. All other technical specialists will further address organism also may not be cleared for entry to relevant scientific opinion should be the risks posed by new and emerging pests New Zealand. considered in a risk analysis and judged on and diseases by ensuring they keep up to date Where there is insufficient information to the weight of available scientific evidence. with scientific developments in their fields, make a decision in the face of significant Restrictive regulatory measures will not be and revise risk analyses where necessary to potential risks, applying precaution may mean imposed simply on the basis of minority take account of new information. that additional risk management measures are scientific opinion about perceived risks. The precautionary approach and included in the import health standard, or Risk analyses must document their sources of the SPS agreement that an import health standard is not issued, information with references to scientific The Biosecurity Council considers the until adequate information is sought and literature and, where relevant, expert opinion. approach set out in this paper to be consistent obtained which adequately reduces Risk analyses should also document the with New Zealand’s obligations under the SPS uncertainty. uncertainties and assumptions made and, agreement3 . Although the status of the where possible, the effect of those on the final Application of precaution in risk precautionary principle in areas that affect risk estimate. analysis trade law is not particularly well defined, the Risk analysis is a management tool that Application of precaution in relationship between the precautionary recommending risk management incorporates scientific methods to enable principle and the SPS agreement was measures regulators to gather and assess information in considered by the WTO Appellate Body in the a thorough, consistent, logical and transparent In recommending risk management measures EC hormones case4 . The Appellate Body way. Risk analysis is essentially a tool aimed at based on the conclusions of a risk analysis, found that the precautionary principle does making predictions based on current precaution is incorporated by selecting find reflection in the SPS agreement in article knowledge and practice. measures known to deal with the variation 5.7 and other places, but that it does not expected in the situation under study and override the obligations in articles 5.1 and 5.2 The confidence that can be drawn from effectively manage risks to at least the levels of the SPS agreement (to base biosecurity risk predictions made in a risk analysis depends on desired (i.e. to achieve the level of protection management measures on a scientific the amount and reliability of the information considered appropriate in this situation). assessment of risk). Article 5.5 of that used. In the real world it is impossible to have agreement also contains obligations relating a perfect understanding of every situation and The acceptability of scientific uncertainty in to consistency in the levels of protection the amount of variation that exists. It is likely biosecurity risk management diminishes as considered appropriate in different situations, that all risk analyses will be conducted in the severity of potential negative effects POSITIONincreases. The extent of measures needed to and to avoiding arbitrary or unjustified situations where there is incomplete scientific distinctions in the application of SPS evidence, and a balance must be sought compensate for uncertainty must be measures in different situations. between trying to acquire complete commensurate with the potential risks. The knowledge and obtaining reasonable estimates measuresSTATEMENT also need to be based on what upon which predictions can be based with a pertinent scientific information is available, Footnotes: including that from relevant international reasonable level of confidence. 1 Declaration of the United Nations Conference organisations and the measures applied by Part of the risk analysis process is evaluating on Environment and Development, held at Rio other countries. de Janeiro 3—14 June 1992. scientific evidence, and making estimates of 2 Where biosecurity risk management measures “Risk goods” are defined in the Biosecurity risk that take account of (among other things) Act 1993 to mean “any organism, organic the comprehensiveness of that evidence. The are adopted in situations where there is not material, or other thing, or substance, that (by scientific evidence might, for example, include sufficient scientific evidence necessary for a reason of its nature, origin, or other relevant comprehensive analysis of risks, biosecurity factors) it is reasonable to suspect constitutes, information on the nature or impact of harbours, or contains an organism that may — organisms in other countries, with departments will take appropriate steps to (a) cause unwanted harm to natural and physical resources or human health in New assumptions made about the applicability of seek the additional information necessary for Zealand; or (b) interfere with the diagnosis, a more objective assessment of risk, and such information to New Zealand conditions. management, or treatment, in New Zealand, of review these measures accordingly within a pests or unwanted organisms”. Deciding at what point scientific evidence is reasonable period of time. 3 World Trade Organization (1994) Agreement sufficient is a judgement to be made by on the application of sanitary and phytosanitary New and emerging pests or diseases appropriately-qualified specialists, and will be measures. In The results of the Uruguay Round different for different situations. Biosecurity Under New Zealand’s biosecurity risk of multilateral trade negotiations: the legal texts. World Trade Organization; Geneva, management system protection against departments build a level of precaution into Switzerland; pp 69-84. such determinations. The key point is unknown (new or emerging) pests and 4 EC measures concerning meat and meat deciding when scientific evidence is sufficient diseases is achieved in several ways. Sanitary products. Report of the Appellate Body. WTO to be the basis for risk management measures; or phytosanitary measures are applied to documents WT/DS26/AB/R and WT/DS48/AB/R of 16 January 1998. science can never prove a complete absence of imported risk goods to deal with risks that are risk, but it can assist in assessment of risk and known; in many cases these same measures providing measures to manage uncertainty. can be expected to deal also with unknown

Biosecurity Issue 29 • 1 August 2001 9 More resources needed to support international plant health standards work By Dr John Hedley realise such an ambitious work elements of the FAO technical programme. Also, the help of my After nearly three years at the helm of cooperation programme and who colleagues in the Ministry of Agriculture therefore has very little time to devote the Interim Committee on Phytosanitary and Forestry and the Ministry of Foreign directly to the work programme of Measures (ICPM), MAF’s Dr John Hedley Affairs and Trade (in Wellington and the ICPM. believes the organisation is on the right Rome) – their time, advice, the financial track but needs more staff, resources, • There is a full-time administrative support to the activities of the ICPM – secretary typist. and participation by members to give have been essential to the success of the Under such circumstances, it is clear how the International Plant Protection ICPM programme. But even more of this hard the IPPC secretariat has worked. In Convention (IPPC) the international member-inspired and member- my view, this situation must change. I profile that it needs and deserves. supported activity is needed. believe that the secretariat needs a I have been asked to reflect on my three Secretariat under-resourced fulltime secretary and at least two more years as Chairperson of the Interim To return to the position of the IPPC fulltime scientific staff to deal with the Commission on Phytosanitary Measures secretariat: let us do some comparisons. development of standards. (ICPM). This sounds rather pompous, Begin by looking at the size of the OIE which certainly I do not want to be, but Sympathy and interest but no secretariat (about 28 staff) and the CBD perhaps I just might take the opportunity action secretariat (about 64 staff) and compare to make some comments and push a few I have discussed this with the Assistant it with the FAO staff directly concerned of my favourite barrows. Director-General in charge of the full time with the IPPC: Agriculture Department of FAO, Dr Three points come to mind immediately: • The IPPC Secretary is also the Chief Louise Fresco and also brought it to the • the tremendous efforts made by the of the Plant Protection Service of the attention of the ICPM. There has been understaffed IPPC secretariat Plant Production and Protection sympathy and interest, but so far no • the cooperation and help of IPPC Division in FAO. He has multiple significant response. In my opinion, FAO members responsibilities including the locust does not fully realise the importance of programme, the pesticide regulatory this particular programme within the • the great support and assistance I programme, the integrated pest spectrum of its activities. have received from my New Zealand management programme and the colleagues. What is the IPPC achieving? It is helping IPPC. Big effort by members and nations to protect their crops and natural secretariat • The coordinator, who is in principle resources, ensure food security for the only person devoted entirely to It is the because of the hard work of themselves and their animals, protect the IPPC, also spends a portion of his ICPM members and the secretariat that their forests and all the amenity plants time with other FAO duties. the IPPC has made some real progress in and trees, the plants of all natural • There is a full-time editor/ its development in the past two and a half environments from the alps to the information officer position that in years. I know the secretariat have pushed seashore … and this protection is the past three years has only had a themselves to the limit. In the past 18 undertaken while facilitating safe trade in permanent staff member for four months before the 3rd annual session of plants and plant products, which is so months. For the remainder of the the Commission, there was no let-up. important to the economic security of time the position has been vacant or Meeting followed meeting in a seemingly both developing and developed filled with various temporary never-ending stream. This has been a countries. replacements. huge contribution to the development of Scope of IPPC underestimated • There is a full-time (non-permanent) the ICPM and demonstrates the potential The development of appropriate and associate professional officer funded for the IPPC to meet countries’ effective systems for phytosanitary by the United States. expectations. This level of effort is not measures under the IPPC has wider sustainable within present resources, • The staff includes a professional implications. Many countries which are however. agriculture officer (plant pathologist) signatories to the Convention on who is able to devote about half of his Many ICPM members have offered their Biodiversity, and which have accepted the time to the IPPC, mainly in the area help, and all members when asked have Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, do not of information exchange. contributed willingly to working groups appreciate how the scope of the IPPC on standards, on administrative issues, • There is also a professional extends to cover measures for the technical assistance and information quarantine officer (entomologist), protection of plant biodiversity. The exchange. Only through these substantial devoted almost exclusively to IPPC offers a proven, existing framework contributions has the ICPM been able to supporting the phytosanitary – a system, a mechanism for plant 10 Biosecurity Issue 29 • 1 August 2001 protection that is important for, but not will not be able to achieve an effective significant progress with members’ limited to, traditional agricultural global plant protection system without support in technical assistance and ecosystems. There should be no question such a programme. information management. about the need to support its More committees and working I think the ICPM is on the right track development. groups needed and I am pleased to see it gaining needed I feel even more strongly than when I Although the participation by ICPM momentum. But more secretariat staff, started as Chair that the implementation members to date has been commendable, resources, and member participation are of international standards agreed under we need to increase the number and required to give the IPPC the the IPPC should receive much, much quality of participation for future international profile that it needs and more effort. I refer to technical assistance activities. Further, we should not be deserves. for capacity building in developing afraid to increase the number of If these remarks sound like soapbox countries. committees, ad hoc working groups and utterances, so be it. The protection of the We have started in the right place by other bodies to accomplish our critical health of our plant resources is developing the phytosanitary capacity objectives. Such bodies exist in all fundamentally important. It is an area to evaluation as a means to inventory and to international organisations. They are an which MAF should rightly remain analyse the strengths and weaknesses of essential means for ensuring broad committed and for which New Zealand is national phytosanitary systems. We hope participation and transparency within rightly a champion on the world stage. this will lead to the development of key areas of the work programme. These John Hedley, National Adviser, bodies do the work of the ICPM between national plans for phytosanitary International Agreements, development and the initiation and the annual meetings which are designed phone 04 474 4170, funding of phytosanitary capacity to plan and prioritise the work and fax 04 474 4257, building projects. This programme needs approve or criticise the results. In [email protected] a completely different level of input. We particular, I hope that we can make

Cattle and deer ID changes proposed

Changes are proposed to the Leadership of international commission acknowledged requirement that cattle and deer born before 1 July 1999 be ear-tagged for Tb MAF Biosecurity’s Dr John Hedley has control. spearheaded New Zealand’s close Currently cattle and deer over 30 days of involvement with the International Plant age must be identified before being Protection Convention (IPPC) during moved from their herd. However, this the past ten years. poses safety risks for farmers when He was appointed as the first tagging older animals leaving the Coordinator of the Secretariat of the property for the first time. MAF is IPPC and worked for a period at Food working on an extension to the time by and Agriculture Organization in Rome. which older animals need to be He continued to work closely with the identified. Dr John Hedley Secretariat during the recent revision of Consultation on the extension will occur the IPPC. In 1998 he was elected as the first Chair of the newly over the next few weeks. In the constituted Interim Commission on Phytosanitary Measures (ICPM). meantime, the Animal Health Board is At the conclusion of this term in 2001, John was elected as a vice- allowing cattle and deer born before 1 chair of the new commission. July 1999 to go directly to slaughter without identification. Identification is At the conclusion of his term as chair of the ICPM, John was still needed for animals sold directly to presented with a commemorative plaque marking his time with the other farmers or through saleyards. organisation. On it was inscribed the message: “Members of FAO/ Animals without ear-tags will be ICPM wish to express their gratitude for your outstanding leadership excluded from some overseas markets. as first ICPM Chairperson (1998-2001). Your dedication, expertise and energy have been instrumental in setting the immediate and Ashley Edge, Policy Adviser, long-term direction for the ICPM. Under your guidance, we have Biosecurity Policy Coordination, phone 04 474 4213, built a solid foundation from which to meet the phytosanitary fax 04 470 2730, st challenges of the 21 century.” [email protected]

Biosecurity Issue 29 • 1 August 2001 11 Import risk analysis for Cordyline and Dracaena cut flowers and branches The import risk analysis for Cordyline the potential to be similaris), a serious pest and Dracaena cut flowers and branches imported on cut flowers on the fruit of citrus has now been issued for consultation. or branches of species of trees and a host of a The document is available on the MAF Cordyline and Dracaena. trematode that, in other web site at: www.maf.govt.nz/ Of those pests, 15 were countries, infects biosecurity/imports/forests/ considered potentially domestic chickens. capable of having a The import risk analysis Details of the development process for significant economic identified treatments this import risk analysis were outlined in and/or environmental Imported Dracaena cuttings being tested that would be effective Biosecurity 27:19. As indicated then, the for viability, MAF Quarantine Service. impact should they against many of the risk analysis would become available for become established in New Zealand. unwanted pests. Further research may be stakeholder comment after peer review Examples of these higher impact pests needed, however, to establish a reliable by three independent experts. The review included: method of devitalising (i.e. rendering team comprised: • the Kanzawa mite, an important crop incapable of propagation) the imported • Dr Peter Buchanan, plant pathologist, pest in Japan cut flowers and branches. Imported cut Landcare Research Ltd flowers or branches that can not be • a number of serpentine leaf miners, propagated are unlikely to act as a pathway • Dr Trevor Crosby, entomologist and serious pests of vegetable crops in for ‘hidden’ pests such as fungi to become curator of the New Zealand temperate regions Arthropod Collection, Landcare established in New Zealand. • a pyriform scale (Protopulvinaria Research Ltd pyriformis), a serious pest of Comments on the import risk analysis • Dr Geoff Ridley, forest mycologist, ornamentals and fruit trees should be sent to: Forest Research Ltd. • the ambrosia beetle and island Dr Mike Ormsby, National Adviser The review completed, the risk analysis is pinhole borer, bark beetles that are (Import Health Standards), now available for stakeholder considered highly polyphagous (have MAF Forest Biosecurity, Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, consultation. many hosts) and are endemic to PO Box 2526, Wellington North America The import risk analysis identified over fax 04 498 9888, 250 pests recorded in literature as having • the Asian trampsnail (Bradybaena [email protected] International standard for wood packing Development of an international standard group to develop an International Standard in volume than was exported from New for wood packing should help simplify for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPM): Zealand in that same year. Guidelines for regulating non-manufactured the wide array of standards currently in Solid wood is the packing material of wood packing in use for the transport of use, while reducing the biosecurity risk choice due to its low cost, structural commodities. Dr Ruth Frampton, Director associated with this material. properties, functionality, versatility, and Forest Biosecurity, was an invited expert on Under the auspices of the International ability to be recycled. It is estimated that the working group. Plant Protection Convention (IPPC), the about 50 percent of maritime shipments IPPC Secretariat established a working The definition of wood packing proposed and 10 percent of air shipments entering by the working group covers “all wood or countries such as New Zealand, Australia wood products (excluding paper and the United States are accompanied by products) used in supporting, protecting wood packing material. or carrying cargo”. This includes crates, Serious pests intercepted on wooden packaging and dunnage. wood packaging Large world-wide industry Wood packing is frequently made of non- There is a surprisingly large world-wide manufactured, inexpensive low quality industry associated with wood packing. It wood that has not had sufficient is estimated that nearly 450 million new processing or treatment to eliminate and 220 million rebuilt wood pallets are pests such as insects, nematodes or fungi. used annually in North America alone. In Examples of pests intercepted on wood 1999 the wood packing industry in the packing include the Asian long-horned New Zealand quarantine officer inspecting United States consumed more solid wood beetle (Anoplophora glabripennis) and, imported wood packing. Continued on page 13 12 Biosecurity Issue 29 • 1 August 2001 Continued from page 12 by most countries. As a result, there is will be coordinated through the Forest more recently, the Japanese pine sawyer now a confusing array of standards Biosecurity Consultative Committee. beetle (Monochamus alternatus), concerned with wood packing. The More information intercepted entering Australia on wood profusion of standards has led to the Further information about non- packing in containers from China. Both current effort to develop an international manufactured wood packing can be of these pests have been intercepted on phytosanitary standard for wood packing. wood packing entering New Zealand. found on the following websites: The draft ISPM for non-manufactured • International online workshop Risks In 1996, the Asian long-horned beetle was wood packing currently under discussion of exotic forest pests and their impact on discovered in New York and is believed to proposes a treatment that requires all trade. http://exoticpests.apsnet.org/ have entered the area on large wood wood packing to reach a core packing crates. The U.S. Department of temperature of 50OC for 30 minutes, and • Pest risk assessment for importation Agriculture is currently waging a US$365 to be marked as treated. The universal of solid wood packing materials into million war on the Asian long-horned application of this treatment on wood the United States, USDA, August beetle in New York, hoping it will be packing would significantly reduce the 2000. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ppq/ eradicated by 2009 before it spreads to biosecurity risk of such material. pra/swpm/. New England and threatens its forests and Dr Mike Ormsby, National Adviser The earliest possible date for approval of world-famous maple trees. (Import Health Standards), the ISPM is April 2002, following a Profusion of standards MAF Forest Biosecurity, consultation round incorporating all Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Given the global statistics, it is not member states of the Food and PO Box 2526, Wellington surprising that wood packing is Agriculture Organisation (FAO). In New fax 04 498 9888, considered a significant biosecurity risk Zealand, comments on the draft ISPM [email protected] Painted apple moth report released MAF has been praised for its quick forestry industry concerns that not Recommended ways response to the recommendations in a enough was being done technically and to improve MAF’s review of its painted apple moth (PAM) managerially to deal with the painted response include: apple moth (PAM). The review found, control programme. • establishing an however, that the ‘overall PAM In May 2001 Dr Sandy Liebhold, an additional painted apple eradication strategy appears to have been entomologist with the USDA Forest moth colony primarily to appropriate’ and prospects for Service in West Virginia and Dr Bruce supply female moths for the eradicating the insect still appear good. Simpson, a New Zealand-based trapping programme and aid the biosecurity consultant, reviewed MAF’s Painted apple moth was discovered in development of a pheromone; approach to the painted apple moth (Teia Auckland in 1999, firstly in Glendene and • strengthening the existing controls on anartoides) incursion. then in Mt Wellington. The report movement of risk material from concluded that the pest could still be The forest industry and other properties in infested areas; eradicated in the West Auckland suburbs stakeholders have applauded MAF’s • developing a plan allowing for the use of Glendene, Avondale, Glen Eden, quick response to the recommendations of targeted aerial spraying as an Kelston and Titirangi, having apparently in the review report. The Forest Owners option for future control; been eliminated from Mt Wellington. The Association, in a statement to the press reviewers noted that painted apple moth • developing a communication strategy on 29 June, “commended the Ministry of may not be as serious a threat to New to ensure all those involved in the Agriculture and Forestry for its Zealand as some other exotic pests, as control programme are consulted; constructive response to the independent females cannot fly and the moth and report on its handling of the painted therefore has limited potential for natural • improving MAF’s coordination of the apple moth incursion”. spread. programme. Eradication strategy ‘appropriate’ Many recommendations already Widespread aerial spraying MAF’s Acting Director-General Larry implemented unlikely Fergusson said the report had Many of the actions recommended by the The most sensitive recommendation, as been commissioned reviewers had been implemented by MAF far as residents of West Auckland suburbs following before it received the report, and further are concerned, will be the proposal to initiatives are being investigated. MAF develop a plan for the use of targeted will continue to work closely with the aerial spraying as an option for future west Auckland communities, the forest control. The Auckland and Waitakere industry and other interested groups City Councils have been advised by MAF throughout the response process. Continued on page 14

Biosecurity Issue 29 • 1 August 2001 13 Sudden oak death – new disease identified in United States A new disease of oaks (Quercus spp.) trees and occasionally in woodlots movement of spores, as the sporangia are has recently been identified in the United (Salmon, JT 1999). While there are deciduous; however this has not been States. While this disease could become almost 800 species of oaks in New tested through research. Nursery stock, established here, the immediate threat to Zealand, most species (including the oaks infested wood with attached bark, and New Zealand oaks is low. known to be susceptible to sudden oak cut flowers and branches of host plants death) are not widely planted. Examples are the most likely means of long- Known as sudden oak death, the disease of oak species commonly grown in New distance transport of this fungus. It is not causes crown dieback, stem bark lesions, Zealand include the common or English known if the pathogen is soil-borne. basal cankers, and rapid mortality in oak (Quercus robur), the first oak to be Oospores and chlamydospores of other tanoak (Lithocarpus densiflorus), coast live planted in New Zealand in 1824 at Paihia, Phytophthora species are long-lived and oak (Q. agrifolia), Californian black oak the sessile oak (Q. petraea), the red oak can survive in soil and dead host material (Q. kelloggii) and Shreve oak (Q. parvula (Q. rubra), the pin oak (Q. palustris), and under adverse conditions. var. shrevie) found along the coastal belt the turkey oak (Q. cerris). in California. MAF considers that, while this disease Sorensen et.al. (2001) hypothesised that could become established here, the Fungus implicated the Phytophthora implicated in sudden immediate threat to New Zealand oaks is An unknown species of the fungal genus oak death co-evolved with Rhododendron low. MAF will continue to monitor the Phytophthora has been isolated from bark species in the Oriental/Himalayan region. progression of the disease in California lesions in trees showing disease They believe the fungus was first and Europe and, if appropriate, restrict the symptoms and is believed to be the transported to Europe and then to extent to which host material is imported principle disease-causing agent. This California (possibly via the Pacific into New Zealand from these areas. pathogen has also been found to infect Northwest), through the movement of References rhododendrons (Rhododendron spp.), Rhododendron material. The fungus was Sudden oak death Phytophthora sp. pest risk huckleberry bushes (Vaccinium ovatum) first noticed in Europe in 1993 and, assessment (2001). USDA Forest Service. and Pacific madrone (Arbutus menziesii) subsequently, in California in 1995. There www.exoticforestpests.org next to infested oaks in California, and are no known control measures for rhododendrons and a Viburnum species sudden oak death. Sorensen, JT, Hrusa, F & Tyler, T (2001). (honeysuckle family) in Germany and the Origin of the sudden oak death (SOD) Phytophthora is a cool temperate Netherlands. pathogen and its potential impact: a working O organism, with optimum growth at 20 C. hypothesis. California Plant Pest & Disease To date, sudden oak death has not been Cultures of the fungus produce Report, 19 (3-6), June-December 2000. found in other oak species, although the numerous sporangia. The pathogen is pp 49-57. susceptibility of other Quercus spp. has typically in phloem tissues of infected not been tested. The lack of any recorded plants, but commonly extends to the Salmon, JT (1999). The Trees in New Zealand. Exotic Trees. The Broadleaves. impact of this disease on oaks in Europe outer portion of the xylem. To date, the Reed Books. pp 372. suggests that European oaks may not be pathogen has not been isolated from susceptible. below-ground host tissues or from soil. Dr Mike Ormsby, National Adviser (Import Health Standards), Susceptible oaks not common in Mechanism of spread not New Zealand MAF Forest Biosecurity, understood Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Oaks are popular throughout New It is not yet clearly understood how PO Box 2526, Wellington Zealand and can be found in parks, sudden oak death spreads. One theory is fax 04 498 9888, streets, private gardens, on farms as shade that it spreads through the airborne [email protected]

Continued from page 13 virtually no impact on aquatic implemented many of the that any aerial spraying, should it be invertebrates or fish. Furthermore, Bt has recommendations in the report. necessary, will likely involve tactical use a history of success – it was used in the Bill Dyck, phone 025 742-161, of helicopters rather than the widespread eradication of gypsy moth in North [email protected] aerial application seen during the white America and the white spotted tussock spotted tussock moth eradication moth in New Zealand in 1997. programme in 1997. The manager of the PAM response, Dr The review report recommends the Ruth Frampton, is confident that the application of Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) painted apple moth can still be eradicated for an aerial spray programme, as it has from Auckland and has already

14 Biosecurity Issue 29 • 1 August 2001 Developing codes of welfare – a consultative process Codes of welfare are an account to ensure that it is integral part of the Animal meaningful, i.e., those Welfare Act 1999. The Act consulted must be given a imposes obligations of care reasonable opportunity to on animal owners and state their views, and sufficient animal care givers; it also information and time must be establishes standards of provided to those being conduct expected towards consulted so that they are animals generally. adequately informed. Consultation is a key stage However, NAWAC may still in the development of codes. act if those consulted do not avail themselves of the The obligations of care under opportunity to respond, or if the Act consist of a number they disagree with the of positive core obligations submissions. Consultation required to meet an animal’s does not mean negotiation, as physical, health and this implies agreement or behavioural needs. These consensus. needs are further defined by the NAWAC must be satisfied that this Following consultation, NAWAC must internationally recognised ‘five consultation has been carried out before consider submissions. Before it can freedoms’: it submits the draft code for the second recommend to the Minister of • proper and sufficient food and water; phase: the public consultation process. Agriculture to issue the code, the • adequate shelter; The draft code must be publicly notified committee must be satisfied that the code • the opportunity to display normal in one or more daily newspapers in complies with the Act, and takes into patterns of behaviour; Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch and account good practice and any relevant • appropriate physical handling; and Dunedin. The draft code will also be scientific knowledge or technology. • protection from, and rapid diagnosis notified in Biosecurity, Rural Bulletin and Priorities for deemed codes of injury and disease. on the MAF website. NAWAC has given top priority to the Codes of welfare flesh out the five In addition, NAWAC will also notify review of the six codes which were freedoms with specific detail on how to individuals or organisations that have deemed as codes of welfare under the Act meet the provisions of those freedoms – expressed interest in a particular code – – pigs, layer hens, broiler chickens, zoos, for example, how much food is sufficient, or alternatively they will be notified if circuses and rodeos. These codes remain or how much shelter is adequate in a NAWAC considers they may have an as deemed codes for a transitional period given situation. Codes may also contain interest in that code. The Act allows for of three years from the commencement educational material and additional consultation such as face-to- of the Act (i.e. until 31 December 2002). recommendations for best practice. face meetings. The public consultation The first codes to undergo the initial A code may be drafted by any individual period is a minimum of 30 working days. round of consultation are the Broiler or organisation but it must be then NAWAC may extend that period or Code and the Pig Code. They are likely to submitted to the National Animal require further consultation if the draft be submitted to NAWAC at the beginning Welfare Advisory Committee (NAWAC) code was significantly amended following of August 2001. These will be closely which has a legal responsibility to ensure public consultation. followed by the Animals in that the draft code meets criteria Consultation ensures that the full range Entertainment Code (incorporating the specified in the Act. For example, it must of views held in the community is circus and rodeo codes) the Zoo Code be clear, comply with the purposes of the canvassed. It also ensures that codes are and the Layer Hen Code. Act and be subject to consultation. practical and that there will be For copies of codes of welfare please visit Consultation canvasses all views stakeholder ownership and compliance. our website. Consultation is also significant given that Consultation is a two-stage process. An Wayne Ricketts, National Adviser, failure to meet minimum standards in a initial consultation must take place Animal Welfare, phone 04 474 4726, code could lead to legal action. before the draft is submitted to NAWAC. fax 04 474 4133, This consultation must be with those Consultation is not just a formality – a [email protected] most likely to be affected by the code. number of factors must be taken into www.maf.govt.nz/animalwelfare

Biosecurity Issue 29 • 1 August 2001 15 Long-term response to southern saltmarsh mosquito incursions The Government has announced new practice, and to finalise national information on entry pathways before funding of $6 million over four years to delimiting surveys. Once complete, the making any decision to eradicate or to combat the southern saltmarsh future of all aspects of the response will involve local government in any changing mosquito (Aedes camptorhynchus). The be reviewed. The review will involve response in the Kaipara and Mangawhai money will be used to eradicate the consultation, and possibly partnerships, area. with local government and other exotic mosquito in Napier, Gisborne, The presence of southern saltmarsh interested parties. Mahia and Porongahau and to contain mosquito in New Zealand was confirmed and control the spread of the mosquito Until pathway and surveillance work has in 1998. The mosquito is thought to be a in the Kaipara and Mangawhai areas. It been completed, the Ministry of Health main carrier of Ross River virus in will also enable enhanced disease considers that containment and control is Australia. protection measures in Auckland and the most realistic and economic option Sally Gilbert, Ministry of Health, Northland. for the large Kaipara and Mangawhai phone 04 496 2256, area. The Government agreed it was Further urgent work is required to fax 04 496 2340, necessary to strengthen the quality and determine mosquito entry pathways, [email protected] reliability of surveillance and to seek review surveillance requirements and Biosecurity strategy update New website launched seeking ways to improve both its “The willingness of these participants to Engaging people’s interest in the appearance and content. We would be become involved, get on with the job, biosecurity strategy, and providing a interested to hear what other people donate their time and be constructive, is quick and easy means for them to think. Obviously, we are encouraging very pleasing,” says Dr Crawley. people to visit the site and to register to participate in its development, are two Stakeholder working group members receive more information about the key aims of the new Biosecurity have networked with colleagues in their strategy development project. Strategy Development website. sectors and interest areas, participated in “The website provides for people to workshops and meetings, and provided The website, up and running since 1 July identify issues that they think should be issues for the strategy development team 2001, is set to be a key communications considered during strategy development. to incorporate into an issues paper. tool for developing the biosecurity At a later stage in the process there will be Government biosecurity agencies have strategy, which must be completed by opportunities for people to make also provided sets of issues for the team. December 2002. submissions on the Issues Paper (October Currently the team is collating and “The website will be the principal means – December 2001) and Draft Strategy integrating all the issues. The next steps by which we can tell people about the (May – July 2002). Both of these will be are to confer with major sector strategy, and the principal way in which posted on the site, as well as distributed organisations, interest groups and people with an interest in biosecurity can widely in paper form.” agencies to ensure that all their issues communicate with us. It’s definitely our Biosecurity stakeholders keen to have been covered, and then to write an main portal for developing the strategy,” get involved issues paper to be used as the basis for Project Manager, Dr Malcolm Crawley, nation-wide public consultation during says. The Biosecurity Strategy Development team is commending the way biosecurity October – December 2001. “The website has been designed to stakeholders in sector organisations, Malcolm Crawley, Biosecurity Strategy stimulate people’s interest, tell them interest groups and government agencies Development Team, about the project and provide a way for are contributing to the initial stages of phone 04 460 8778, them to contribute. We have tried to strategy development. fax 04 460 8779, capture the diversity and scope of [email protected] biosecurity with the information and About 100 expert and experienced people www.biostrategy.govt.nz imagery we have used. from various parts of the country are on the several stakeholder working groups “Our aim was to make the site attractive, established to identify issues to be interactive, easy to navigate, and useful. considered during strategy development We are pleased with the site, but will be (Biosecurity 27:14).

16 Biosecurity Issue 29 • 1 August 2001 Pipfruit export certification in deregulated industry: plan early for change! The pipfruit industry will be operating in Accreditation will be required In addition, MAF believes the pipfruit a deregulated environment as of In a deregulated environment, packhouses industry should plan to accommodate 1 October 2001 following the revoking and other exporters wishing to undertake reasonably high volumes of fruit having of the Apple and Pear Export inspection activities on behalf of MAF to be cleared for export via various Regulations. MAF strongly recommends outside ENZA’s system will either have to official end-point inspection processes in good planning by the industry to prepare gain MAF accreditation or have packed at least the 2002 export season. It is for the changes. fruit certified through an end-point recommended that any operators likely to want to use this option inform an IVA as The MAF Plant Exports Team is inspection process. soon as possible to allow an estimation of encouraging the industry to address the It is essential that everyone in the pipfruit likely volumes needing to be inspected. effects of deregulation on export industry finds out what they will need to MAF can then work with the IVA and the certification and is promoting a proactive do to gain export phytosanitary pipfruit industry to ensure appropriate approach to help minimise potential certification for fruit in the coming staffing levels are available to handle difficulties for the 2002 export season. season and beyond. these requests. For over 10 years, export phytosanitary MAF is aware that a number of MAF Plants Biosecurity resources are certification of apples and pears has been packhouses/exporters will want to gain likely to be put under pressure leading up provided through ENZA’s quality accreditation of export fruit through an to and during the 2002 export season as a assurance system which is accredited by end-point inspection process. It is result of handling day-to-day issues. MAF MAF Plants Biosecurity. The ENZA essential that these operators begin to encourages everyone likely to be involved quality system revolves around: discuss their options for certification in exporting pipfruit in the future to with an Independent Verification Agency • packhouses undertaking fruit contact their local IVA as soon as possible (IVA) immediately and gain an inspection for the detection of pests to discuss the implications for their understanding of what will be required. • ENZA’s coolstore facilities managing business. Delays possible post product security and segregation Matthew Spence, Technical Adviser requirements. The accreditation process can require (Export Operations), Plants Biosecurity, Within the existing ENZA system the significant time to finalise, and with a phone 04 474 4182, packhouses themselves are not accredited likely increase in the number needing to fax 04 474 4257, [email protected] by MAF, but the staff undertaking the be processed before next season, there phytosanitary inspections are. could be delays. Nursery stock industry informed over import health standards A consultation meeting with the nursery to take action immediately. their associated pest lists. In an effort to stock industry in June was convened by cope with the more urgent risks, the The meeting was organised mainly for recently developed country/commodity Richard Ivess, Dr Veronica Herrera and ornamental nursery stock importers, as IHSs for nursery stock will be placed with other members of the Plant Imports team the development of import health all other prioritised genera in a nursery to discuss the review of the importation standards (IHSs) for nursery stock fruit stock standard with separate page entries of nursery stock import health standards. species has been progressing over a few for each genus on a global basis. Initially Several recent new disease interceptions years and remain a high priority. A review the focus will be on researching the risks in nursery stock undergoing post-entry of major bulb genera within the nursery of any associated viruses, phytoplasmas, quarantine, combined with the increasing stock IHS was initiated earlier this year. bacteria and viroids. awareness of plant health risks from Changes to the current nursery stock MAF will prioritise this work by alternative hosts, prompted this meeting. IHSs are necessary to address consideration of the following criteria for In particular, the risk of Pierce’s Disease of international requirements, the each genus: grapes (Xyllela fastidiosa) associated with alternative host problem and the • the value of the crop (fruit and cut imported alternative hosts (approximately development of a workable format for flower species, consequences of 360 species in 41 genera, including many managing the complexities of the pest associated pests) ornamentals) and also with the exotic information. An explanation was given of vector glassy-winged sharpshooter the problem of how to deal with 27,000 • the more frequently imported genera (Homalodisca coagulata) has caused MAF species within about 2500 genera and Continued on page 18 Biosecurity Issue 29 • 1 August 2001 17 African wildlife and veterinary experience shared Arriving from recent field work in Africa, of New Zealand hosted this seminar in Professor John Cooper and his wife Wellington. The Coopers highlighted the Margaret Cooper recently gave two very problems they encounter in wildlife practical seminars on twin topics: the conservation, including: role of veterinary forensics in criminal • how to prioritise species for and civil proceedings; and the legal, conservation, for example large ethical and welfare aspects of working mammals versus small invertebrates with wildlife. • spread of farming into national parks John (left) and Margaret Cooper catch up with MAF Director of Animal Welfare, David Bayvel, Their first presentation was at the • relocation of animals during their recent visit. Mrs Cooper holds a photo of David Bayvel and Professor Cooper UNITEC/Animal Welfare Institute of • wildlife culling with their peers during a period of postgraduate New Zealand Veterinary Forensics in • the impact of the CITES legislation study at the University of Edinburgh Centre for Tropical Veterinary Medicine. Criminal and Civil Proceedings conference and IATA (International Air in Auckland, held during May. Professor Transport Association) regulations on solicitor and lecturer on animal law and Cooper discussed the background to the export of live animals and conservation, Mrs Cooper has extensive comparative forensic medicine, medical biological samples. experience in Africa and has been a and veterinary approaches to member of the UK Farm Animal Welfare Both the Coopers are uniquely qualified investigation and enforcement, and Council and a member of the (British) to speak on these topics. Professor specific features of animal welfare and Department of the Environment Zoo Cooper is a highly skilled veterinary wildlife crime cases. Sample taking, Standards Review team. Her work at pathologist with extensive experience in recording, clinical and post-mortem present focuses on the veterinary tropical medicine, avian medicine and examinations were also covered. Mrs profession in developing countries, pathology, comparative pathology and Cooper provided a British perspective on CITES, and zoo legislation. biology. Much of his practical teaching animals and the law. Kate Horrey, Policy Adviser, and fieldwork has been in East and Animal Welfare, The second seminar covered the legal, Central Africa. phone 04 471 9496, ethical and welfare aspects of working Margaret Cooper forms the other half of fax 04 495 8447, with wildlife. MAF and the Royal Society their wildlife health consultancy team. A [email protected] Continued from page 17 (about 100) followed by genera for diseases in genera reported to be • communication pathways. imported in the last two years (about associated with pests, regardless of The meeting was advised that there 530 genera) presence/absence of symptoms. would be no major changes before the • alternative hosts. Where tests are required, the size end of October, when a further meeting Other genera outside of this ‘pool’ will be (quantity) of consignments and the will be convened to discuss samples of suspended but may be added where there quarantine period will be determined by draft nursery stock IHSs. Importers are is sufficient reason or demand. the availability of tests, accredited encouraged to view the nursery stock page of the MAF web site and the For insect and fungal concerns, preventative laboratories (offshore or onshore) and Biosecurity Index at: www.maf.nz/Plants/ mandatory insecticide (systemic and the time necessary to undertake the tests. import/index.htm or for enquiries to contact) and fungicide treatments will be It is likely that in the future work on email: [email protected] introduced. These new treatments will be in quarantine diagnosis for high impact addition to any existing treatments required pests will be linked with the current Dr Veronica Herrera, National Adviser and may replace the existing treatments development at the National Plant Pest (Plants Transitional Facilities), where they are known to be effective for the Reference Laboratory of diagnostic Plants Biosecurity, phone 04 470 2767, fax 04 474 4257, pests concerned. capability for incursion and response [email protected] management. More examples were presented of the Dr Dave Nendick, National Adviser Importers’ enquiries at the meeting alternative host problem and recent (Plant Imports, Seed and Nursery quarantine interceptions. As assessments centred on: Stock), Plants Biosecurity, are carried out for genera, measures will be • the timing of changes to requirements phone 04 474 4200, fax 04 474 4257, developed where disease risks are identified. • illegal importations [email protected] In some cases, exporting countries’ • viral diagnostic capacity in New Michele Dickson, Technical Adviser additional declarations will be accepted. In Zealand (Plant Imports), Plants Biosecurity, other cases, quarantine facility • quarantine treatment advice phone 04 498 9631, fax 04 474 4257, [email protected] requirements may include the ability to test • diagnostic problems at the border

18 Biosecurity Issue 29 • 1 August 2001 Aquarium seaweed a threat to marine environment The Ministry of Fisheries is taking steps under the Biosecurity Act the wild. The aquarium to minimise the risks from Caulerpa 1993. This should increase strains grow in deeper and taxifolia. This species is an attractive the chances of detecting it at colder waters than the tropical seaweed that is a popular the border and in aquarium tropical populations, and in aquarium species. It is a serious threat shops. The Ministry is also a wider range of habitats. to biodiversity, as it forms dense developing an incursion Aquarium-reared C. taxifolia meadows that displace other species response plan for use if it is propagates from fragments and is unpalatable to most herbivores. discovered. and grows extremely rapidly Although not present in New Zealand, if Recent events in the (up to 2.5 cm per day!). C. taxifolia was imported and released, Mediterranean, California, Debra Wotton, Scientist – there is a high risk of it establishing here. and Australia have shown Marine Biosecurity, Ministry of Fisheries, The Ministry intends to determine that aquarium-reared Caulerpa taxifolia. Photo phone 04 470 2595, C. taxifolia as both an unwanted C. taxifolia becomes highly courtesy of the Australian fax 04 470 2669, invasive when released into Institute of Marine Science. organism and a notifiable organism [email protected]

Marine fisheries products for human consumption from all countries This standard, dated 18 June 2001, has been amended to include clause 6.3, referring to requirements for private and New import health standards issued commercial consignments of fish. References to the Animal Products Act 1999 and Director of Animal Biosecurity have also Cats and dogs on yachts been added. Lebanon has been removed from the list of eligible countries. Bovine semen from the United Kingdom and Channel Islands Specified bee products This import health standard now requires that semen for export The following amendments have been made to the standard: to New Zealand must have been collected prior to 1 June 2000. • Clause 6.4 has been amended to clarify that mustard Bovine semen from France, Eire and the Netherlands containing honey (except those listed in clause 6.5) can not Cervine semen and embryos from Eire be imported. These standards, dated 22 May 2001, were amended to replace • Propolis has been added to the eligible items in clause 6.7 those dated 27 September 1999, which were revoked on FMD safeguards in animal product import health standards 14 March 2001 due to the FMD outbreak in Europe. The following animal product import health standards, dated 18 The bovine semen IHSs have also been amended to require that June 2001, have been amended to include requirements for area semen for export to New Zealand must have been collected prior freedom from foot and mouth disease: to 1 June 2000. • returned New Zealand origin eggs and egg products Since this date Eire, France and the Netherlands have become • scoured, uncarded animal fibre from the United Kingdom recognised as being free from foot and mouth disease. As such, • bovine/porcine blood products for human consumption from the safeguard in the import health standards has been amended the Netherlands to recognise this freedom by allowing the importation of semen • dairy products not for human consumption from the collected prior to 1 January 2001 or after 1 July 2001. Netherlands The current IHSs are dated 29 June 2001. • dairy products not for human consumption from France BSE safeguards added to import health standards • dairy products not for human consumption from Ireland These import health standards have been updated to • dairy products for human consumption from the Netherlands accommodate the OIE requirements (OIE Animal Health Code • dairy products for human consumption from France 2000) for BSE. • dairy products for human consumption from Ireland In addition, New Zealand MAF now considers France, Eire and • scoured animal fibre from France the Netherlands as being free from foot and mouth disease • scoured animal fibre from the Netherlands (FMD). As such, their standards for bovine embryos have been • scoured animal fibre from Ireland altered to recognise their freedom. These three import health • hides and skins from Ireland standards were previously revoked on 14 March 2001 due to • hides and skins from France. FMD in Europe.

Biosecurity Issue 29 • 1 August 2001 19 • bison from Canada Inedible tallow from Australia • bison embryos from Canada and the USA This IHS has been revoked as it is now covered by stock food • cattle from Canada, New Caledonia and the USA containing tallow from Australia. • bovine embryos from Austria, Belgium , Denmark, Eire, Buffalo (bubalus bubalis) semen from Italy Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, New Caledonia, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Canada and the USA Bovine embryos from Sabah • dairy products not for human consumption from Australia These standards have been revoked, as the safeguards included • sausage casings from USA and Canada in the IHSs are outdated and have not been in use for a number • inedible tallow from Australia, USA and Canada. of years. Llamas and alpacas from United States of America Kerry Mulqueen, National Adviser (Import Management), Animal Biosecurity, phone 04 498 9625, fax 04 474 4132, The following clauses in the import health standard dated [email protected] 29 June 2001 have been amended: • Clause 13.1.1 now clarifies that the animals have been in the Palm products from Malaysia and Papua New Guinea country/region for the 3 months prior to ‘entering pre-export The IHSs listed below have been taken over by the Plants isolation’, not ‘export’. Biosecurity Group. The conditions are similar, with the addition • Clause 13.1.1.1 has been has amended to remove the of no viable seeds in the product: requirement that the importing country be free of • palm kernel cake from Malaysia Trypanosoma spp, as T. cruzi is endemic in the USA. No testing is required for T. cruzi as the organism has not been • palm kernel cake from Papua New Guinea reported to occur in lamoids in USA. • palm oil from Malaysia Removal of the requirement for vacuum fumigation of products Michele Dickson, Technical Adviser, Plant Imports, These product import health standards have been amended to phone 04 498 9631, fax 04 474 4257, remove the requirement for vacuum fumigation: [email protected] • scoured rabbit fibre • ornamental animal products Draft import health standards • feathers for commercial fly-tying and ornamental purposes for horses

• equipment used with animals The following draft import health standards (IHSs) for horses are • private consignments of animal fibre available for consultation. These IHSs were previously notified for • animal fibre for testing consultation in Biosecurity 18:2 (15 March 2000). Due to the • unprocessed rabbit fibre. delay in their implementation, they are being notified again prior Deer velvet from Australia to their proposed implementation on 1 October 2001. This standard has been reformatted and additional certification Of particular practical interest to importers is the included to address traceability problems that have been recommendation for post-arrival quarantine (PAQ) as a risk identified by MAF Food. management measure for a number of diseases for which a high The new IHS, dated 16 May 2001, replaces the IHS dated 11 level of protection is considered appropriate. This April 2001. recommendation means that all live horse imports, with the exception of those from Australia, will be required to undergo a Dairy product samples for evaluation period of PAQ. This IHS, dated 16 May 2001, has been updated to include MAF no longer owns and operates facilities for PAQ. Any France, Netherlands and Eire as countries considered free of individual or company may apply to have a facility approved FMD. The definition of ‘samples’ has also been clarified. under the Biosecurity Act 1993. In order to become approved, Specified products for human consumption containing dairy the facility must be built, operated and supervised according to products, eggs and meat the appropriate transitional facility standard. This IHS, dated 16 May 2001, has been updated to include The original article about the risk analysis on which these import France, Netherlands and Eire as countries considered free of health standards are based can be found on the MAF website in FMD. Spain has been removed from a clause relating to pig meat Biosecurity 18:2, at: products because of an outbreak of classical swine fever. Kerry Mulqueen, National Adviser (Import Management), www.maf.govt.nz/biosecurity/publications/biosecurity-magazine/ Animal Biosecurity, phone 04 498 9625, fax 04 474 4132, biosecurity-18.pdf [email protected] The draft IHSs available for consultation are: • horses from Australia Import health standards revoked • horse semen from Australia The following import health standards have been revoked by the • horses from the USA Director of Animal Biosecurity: • horse semen from the USA

20 Biosecurity Issue 29 • 1 August 2001 • horses from Canada Roger Poland, Programme Coordinator, Surveillance, • horses from the EU phone 04 498 9820, fax 04 474 4133, [email protected] • horse semen from the EU Jessie Chan, Technical Adviser, International Trade, Used vehicle import health standard phone 04 478 9897, fax 04 474 4227, [email protected] A revised import health standard for used vehicles, based on the www.maf.govt.nz/biosecurity/consultation.htm draft distributed at a meeting of interested parties in February this year, is currently being prepared for issue. Due to extended Draft guideline for approval of semen consultation with some individual organisations and required collection centres exporting ruminant reporting to the chief executives of other departments, MAF semen from New Zealand Forest Biosecurity expects the new import health standard to In order for ruminant semen to be eligible for export from New have been issued by the end of July. Interested parties will be Zealand, it must have been collected, processed and stored in a duly notified and will be able to view the standard on the MAF semen collection centre approved by an official veterinarian and website. registered by MAF and, where required, accompanied to its www.maf.govt.nz/forestry/ destination by a correctly completed export certificate in the form agreed between MAF and the importing country. Codes of ethical conduct – approvals, This document sets out proposed guidelines to be used by notifications and revocations since official veterinarians when inspecting semen collection centres the last issue of Biosecurity seeking registration to export ruminant semen. All organisations involved in the use of live animals for research, Comment is sought on this document from interested parties, testing or teaching are required to adhere to an approved code of including exporters of ruminant semen, centre veterinarians and ethical conduct. official veterinarians. Codes of ethical conduct approved Nil Sarah Peters, Technical Adviser, International Trade, Notifications to MAF of minor amendments to codes of ethical phone 04 474 4116, fax 04 474 4227, [email protected] conduct Nil www.maf.govt.nz/biosecurity/consultation.htm Notifications to MAF of arrangements to use an existing code The deadline for submissions is 15 September 2001. of ethical conduct • Invitrogen NZ Ltd Surveillance standards reviewed Codes of ethical conduct revoked or arrangements terminated • Life Technologies Ltd The Director Animal Biosecurity recently reissued three animal Approvals by the Director-General of MAF for the use of non- disease surveillance standards. human hominids Nil The first two standards are for an expert veterinary pathologist Approvals by the Minister of Agriculture of research or testing and an expert parasitologist. They outline the expert services in the national interest Nil required so that New Zealand’s animal health surveillance and Linda Carsons, Senior Policy Adviser, Animal Welfare, exotic disease response programmes meet trading partners’ phone 04 470 2746, fax 04 498 9888, [email protected] requirements and our legislative, international reporting and international treaty obligations. The standards also define Religious slaughter discussion paper operational requirements to ensure the services are credible. Submissions on the National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee The standard for veterinary laboratories undertaking export (NAWAC) discussion paper, The animal welfare standards to testing specifies the technical requirements for non-government apply when animals are slaughtered in accordance with religious veterinary diagnostic laboratories that wish to undertake requirements, have now closed. Forty submissions were received. serological testing for animals being exported from New Zealand. An independent analysis of the submissions was provided to The Director Animal Biosecurity approves each laboratory to NAWAC in early July, and NAWAC is expected to finalise its perform nominated serological tests for endemic diseases. position by the end of August 2001. The committee’s The laboratories work closely with the government-owned and recommendations will be incorporated in a draft code of welfare operated National Centre for Disease Investigation, which applying to the commercial slaughter of animals. This will also undertakes the testing for all exotic organisms. be available for public comment in due course. The standard sets out the accreditation requirements for both the For further information contact: laboratories and the third party accreditation agencies. This is to ensure organisational commitment to quality assurance and NAWAC Secretary, c/o MAF, PO Box 2526, Wellington, international acceptance of the competence of each laboratory to phone 04 474 4296, fax 04 498 9888, [email protected] perform tests.

Biosecurity Issue 29 • 1 August 2001 21 Biosecurity regulations notified internationally Publication of biosecurity regulations The WTO offers two electronic methods HOW TO SUBSCRIBE notified internationally will no longer be to access information on draft biosecurity To subscribe to the list, send an e-mail done through Biosecurity magazine’s regulations – through its website or by message to “[email protected]” with ‘Directory’ section. email. the following in the body of the message (leave the subject line blank): Since 1996, MAF has published details of Website access draft regulations proposed by other Documents Online is a searchable SUBSCRIBE SPS your full name World Trade Organization (WTO) internet-based system that contains all Example: SUBSCRIBE SPS mickey mouse members in the biosecurity field. Initially, unrestricted documents released by the Your e-mail address will be automatically these draft regulations were only in the WTO. The WTO has had, since 1996, a registered. animal health area but have since policy of circulating most of its expanded to incorporate both plant and documents in unrestricted format in the HOW TO GET OFF THE LIST forest health. The feature was started to interests of transparency and To unsubscribe from the list, send an inform stakeholders of draft regulations accountability. Restricted documents email message to “[email protected]” proposed by other countries and allow such as working documents are not with the following in the body of the them to comment on them if necessary. available on the public site but they are message (leave the subject line blank): Following a reassessment of this feature, considered for derestriction after a six- it has been decided to discontinue month period. Documents Online can be UNSUBSCRIBE SPS your full name publication in its present form. found at: Example: UNSUBSCRIBE SPS mickey There were several reasons why the http://docsonline.wto.org mouse present form of publication is no longer Email service Your email address will be automatically appropriate. The first is a matter of removed from the list. As explained in Biosecurity issue 22, timeliness. Due to the magazine’s six- unrestricted biosecurity (sanitary and weekly publication cycle and additional HOW TO AMEND THE ADDRESS phytosanitary, or SPS) documents ON THE LIST pre-publication planning phase, the (including notifications and memos) are comments period for the draft To amend your address on the list you available via subscription to a twice- regulations that appear has already will have to unsubscribethe previous weekly email service (see instructions expired. This significantly reduces the address from the list and to subscribe below). Any and all of the unrestricted ability of stakeholders to comment on the new one (as explained above). documents from the SPS committee are other countries’ proposed regulations. It Keawe Woodmore, sent. There are currently no options to also compromises the utility of this Coordinator, receive documents in only one area such feature. SPS New Zealand, as plant health. These emails include phone 04 474 4226, It is now more practical for this monthly summaries of all SPS fax 04 470 2730, information to be accessed electronically. notifications made in a calendar month. [email protected]

22 Biosecurity Issue 29 • 1 August 2001 New organism records: 12/5/01 – 22/6/01

Biosecurity is about managing risks – protecting the New Zealand environment and economy from exotic pests and diseases. MAF Biosecurity Authority devotes much of its time to ensuring that new organism records come to its attention, to follow up as appropriate. The tables below list new organisms that have become established, new hosts for existing pests and extension to distribution for existing pests. The information was collated by MAF Forest Biosecurity and MAF Plants Biosecurity during 12/5/01 – 22/6/01, and held in the Plant Pest Information Network (PPIN) database. Wherever possible, common names have been included. Forest Biosecurity records 12/5/01 – 22/6/01 Validated new to New Zealand reports Organism Host Location Submitted by Comment Lepidosaphes pallida Cryptomeria japonica Auckland Landcare Research When discovered in March this year, no damage to the host plant was apparent. This scale is (Maskell scale) (Japanese cedar) unlikely to be a significant problem. Coryneum betulinum Betula pendula Wellington Forest Research No indication in the literature that this fungus is a pathogen. Therefore unlikely to be a (no common name) (silver birch) significant problem. Winterella betulae Betula pendula Wellington Forest Research No indication in the literature that this fungus is a pathogen. It is often reported from small (no common name) (silver birch) dead, but attached twigs of Betula species. Therefore unlikely to be a significant problem. New host reports Organism Host Location Submitted by Comment Fusarium merismoides Corokia cotoneaster Wanganui Forest Research Other host records include: Cotoneaster sp., Hoheria sp., Paulownia tormentosa, Podocarpus (corokia) totara and Prumnopitys ferruginea. Acrocercops laciniella Eucalyptus pulchella Auckland Forest Research Other PPIN host records include: Eucaluptus sp., E. bridgesiana, E. calophylla, E. ficifolia, E. (black butt leaf miner) (white peppermint) nitens, E. sideroxylon and E. globulus ssp. globulus. Acrocercops laciniella Eucalyptus melliodora Auckland Forest Research Other PPIN host records include Eucaluptus sp., E. bridgesiana, E. calophylla, E. ficifolia, E. (black butt leaf miner) (yellow box) nitens, E. sideroxylon, E. globulus ssp. globulus and E. pulchella.

Acrocercops alysidota Acacia decurrens Coromandel Forest Research Other PPIN host records include Acacia schinoides. (black butt leaf miner) (green wattle) Extension to distribution reports Organism Host Location Submitted by Comment Stegommata sulfuratella Banksia integrifolia Hawke’s Bay Forest Research Other PPIN distribution records include Bay of Plenty, Coromandel and Wellington. (banksia leaf miner) (coastal banksia) Holocola sp. cf. Acacia longifolia Wanganui Forest Research Other PPIN distribution records include Auckland. triangulana (pink (Sydney golden blackwood leaftyer) wattle) Stegommata sulfuratella Banksia integrifolia Gisborne Forest Research Other PPIN distribution records include Coromandel, Bay of Plenty, Wellington (banksia leaf miner) (coastal banksia) and Hawke’s Bay.

Acrocercops laciniella Eucalyptus sp. Hawke’s Bay Forest Research Other PPIN distribution records include Auckland, Bay of Plenty, (black butt leaf miner) Coromandel and Waikato. Plants Biosecurity records 12/5/01 – 22/6/01 Validated new to New Zealand reports Organism Host Location Submitted by Comment Sphaerographium Camellia sasanqua Auckland MAF National Plant This newly described fungus is a saprophyte associated with petal rot on camellia, and is of no tenuirostrum (sasanqua camellia) Pest Reference known economic significance. Laboratory (NPPRL) Erysiphe howeana Oenothera biennis Auckland NPPRL Originally detected in 1999, this wind dispersed fungus has a widespread distribution (evening primrose) throughout New Zealand. It has probably been in New Zealand for a long time and is of no concern to the industry.

Pseudocercospora sp. Libertia ixioides Auckland NPPRL This fungus is a potential new species. MAF has informed DoC of its presence in New Zealand. (new species) (no common name)

Chaetomella raphigera Marattia salicina Auckland NPPRL This fungus is associated with dead areas on leaves. MAF has notified DoC of the presence of (no common name) (king fern) this fungus. Beet pseudo-yellows Cucumis sativus Auckland NPPRL This disease is transmitted only by greenhouse whitefly. MAF is consulting with industry about crinivirus (BPYV) (cucumber) this detection. Yucca bacilliform Yucca sp. Auckland NPPRL The virus was detected in a yucca collected during general surveillance. Yucca bacilliform badnavirus (yucca) virus is known only from Yucca sp. Symptoms include necrotic or chlorotic spots on leaves. Xanthomonas arboricola Corylus avellana Nelson NPPRL This bacterium has also been detected in Mid Canterbury and Wellington. MAF is consulting pv. corylina (bacteriosis (hazel nut) with the industry about this detection. of hazel nut) New host reports Organism Host Location Submitted by Comment Irenimus albosparsus Vitis vinifera (grape) Central Otago NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include wheat. Nectria haematococca Eriostemon North NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include kiwifruit, kauri, onion, asparagus, capsicum, chestnut, cucurbits, (stem rot) myoporoides Canterbury citrus, kaka beak, pear, cabbage tree, orchids, tamarillo, carrot, olive, pea, avocado, bean, (waxflower) Prunus spp., rose, eggplant, potato, wheat, tulip, grape, persimmon, strawberry, tomato.

Phoma sp. Eriostemon North NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include kiwifruit, onion, asparagus, Capsicum sp., Citrus sp., field myoporoides Canterbury bindweed, cucurbits, tamarillo, carrot, pansy, persimmon, feijoa, apple, strawberry, perennial (waxflower) ryegrass, tomato, olive, passionfruit, avocado, bean, pea, Prunus spp., pear, nashi, azalea, wheat, sandersonia, potato, grape, Trifolium spp., blueberry, and calla lily.

Biosecurity Issue 29 • 1 August 2001 Continued on back cover 23 Continued from inside back cover.

Organism Host Location Submitted by Comment Oidium sp. Solanum melongena Auckland NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include courgette, Eucalyptus spp., Rhododendron sp., (eggplant) and lamb’s ear. Pseudomonas Primula sp. Mid NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include onion, capsicum, tamarillo, carrot, passionfruit, pea, fluorescens (primrose) Canterbury potato, and calla lily. Itersonilia perplexans Gerbera jamesonii Auckland NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include camellia and chrysanthemum. (petal blight) (gerbera) Fusarium Festuca Mid NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include kiwifruit, onion, asparagus, oats, capsicum, chrysanthemum, culmorum arundinaceae Canterbury cucurbits, cymbidium orchid, tamarillo, carrot, carnation, echinacea, strawberry, barley, (root rot) (tall fescue) ryegrass, tomato, lucerne, yam, passionfruit, pea, Prunus spp., rose, potato, spinach, wheat, broad bean, grape, calla lily, and sweet corn. Otiorhynchus sulcatus Begonia sp. Southland NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include carrot, peach and grape. (black vine weevil) (tuberous begonia) Phytophthora Pericallis x hybrida Mid NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include Clematis sp., confetti bush, Sydney blue gum, cryptogea race A2 (cineraria) Canterbury Eucalyptus sp., Grevillea sp., passionfruit, sage, potato, and spinach. (phytophthora root rot) Pythium sp. Pericallis x hybrida Mid NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include kiwifruit, garlic, asparagus, oats, capsicum, apple, pea, bean, (pythium root rot) (cineraria) Canterbury chrysanthemum, watermelon, kaka beak, cucumber, carrot, rose, carnation, feijoa, wheat, strawberry, perennial ryegrass, tomato, Narcissus sp., olive, avocado, tulip, parsley, Phaseolus sp., lemonwood, Prunus spp, sandersonia, potato, blueberry, and grape. Botryotinia fuckeliana Primula sp. Mid NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include strawberry, barley, tomato, apple, olive, passionfruit, (botrytis blight) (primrose) Canterbury avocado, bean, pea, blackcurrant, Rubus sp., wheat, blueberry, kiwifruit, Brassica sp., asparagus, capsicum, Citrus spp., feijoa, macadamia, Prunus spp., pear, grape, potato, rose, carrots, rhododendron, onion, orchid, and cucurbits,.

Fusarium culmorum Leucospermum Mid NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include kiwifruit, onion, asparagus, oats, cauliflower, rose, yam, (root rot) sp. Canterbury capsicum, pea, wheat chrysanthemum, cucurbits, cymbidium orchid, bean, tamarillo, carrot, carnation, echinacea, strawberry, barley, ryegrass, tomato, lucerne, passionfruit, grape, Prunus spp., potato, spinach, blueberry, calla lily, and sweet corn. Tomato spotted wilt Pericallis x hybrida Mid NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include tamarillo and tomato. tospovirus (TSWV) (cineraria) Canterbury Pythium sp. Rhopalostylis Nelson NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include kiwifruit, garlic, asparagus, oats, capsicum, pea, rose, (pythium root rot) sapida (nikau watermelon, kaka beak, cucurbits, carrot, carnation, feijoa, strawberry, olive, palm) gypsophila, rye grass, tomato, apple, bean, Narcissus sp., avocado, parsley, Phaseolus sp. lemonwood., Prunus spp., potato, wheat, tulip, blueberry, and grape. Pseudomonas Rhopalostylis Nelson NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include onion, capsicum, tamarillo, carrot, passionfruit, pea, fluorescens sapida (nikau potato, primrose and calla lily. (no common name) palm) Glomerella Rhopalostylis Nelson NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include kiwifruit, onion, pear, cherimoya, asparagus, capsicum, cingulata sapida (nikau Capsicum sp., cucurbits, Citrus sp., kaka beak, tamarillo, carrot, persimmon, (anthracnose) palm) feijoa, olive, strawberry, tomato, apple, orchids, guava, rose, passionfruit, avocado, Prunus spp., nashi, azalea, blueberry, Rhododendron sp., and grape. Itersonilia perplexans Anethum North NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include camellia, chrysanthemum and gerbera. (leaf spot) graveolens (dill) Canterbury

Phytophthora Viola x Marlborough PlantWise Other PPIN hosts include chestnut, clematis, feijoa, strawberry, apple, Prunus cactorum wittrockiana spp., pear, nashi and rose. (crown and root rot) (pansy) Extension to distribution reports Organism Host Location Submitted by Comment Xanthomonas Corylus avellana Wellington, NPPRL Other PPIN distributions include Nelson. arboricola pv. corylina (hazel nut) Mid (bacteriosis of hazel nut) Canterbury Potato spindle Lycopersicon Nelson NPPRL Other PPIN distributions include Auckland. tuber pospiviroid esculentum (PSTVd) (tomato) Forestry records: Ruth Frampton, Director Forest Biosecurity, MAF Forest Biosecurity, phone 04 498 9639, fax 04 498 9888, [email protected] Plants records: George Gill, Technical Adviser (Pest Management), MAF Plants Biosecurity, phone 04 470 2742, fax 04 474 4257, [email protected]

Exotic disease and pest emergency hotline: 0800 809 966 Animal welfare complaint hotline: 0800 327 027 www.maf.govt.nz/Biosecurity/index.htm