Issue 37 • 1 August 2002 A publication of MAF Biosecurity Authority

Black Ferns on the ball for biosecurity: p4 Also in this issue New Zealand risk analysis expert honoured by OIE Protect New Zealand week gets rolling Biological diversity and biosafety protocol Container survey update security Giant African snails Lettuce aphid spreads OIE animal welfare mandate Increased sheep and goat surveillance for TSEs Options for varroa management How to contact us: Everyone listed at the end of an article as a contact point, unless otherwise indicated, is Contents part of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry Biosecurity Authority. All MAF staff can be contacted by e-mail, and the standard format for all addresses is 3 Award underlines key role of risk analysis [email protected] 4 Protect New Zealand Week spreads the message: Keep pests & diseases out! For example Ralph Hopcroft would be 5 Putting their hands up for biosecurity [email protected] (There are slight 6 Biological diversity involves species and their environments exceptions for people with similar names, but these addresses are given where necessary.) 7 Biosafety protocol a framework for regulating GMO trade PO Box 2526, Wellington Biosecurity People: International Animal Trade Team – Rachel Gordon New Zealand 8 Container survey results due in September (+64) 4 474 4100 (switchboard) TOR review for Forest Biosecurity Consultative Committee most staff have direct dial lines which 9 Protection against Giant African snails stepped up are listed where available 10 Review of ruminant protein regulations (+64) 4 474 4133 Draft Biosecurity Strategy nears completion • Animal Biosecurity Group 11 Lettuce aphid marches on (+64) 4 470 2730 Biosecurity Magazine well regarded • Biosecurity Policy Kudzu vine an unwanted organism Coordination Group • Border Management Group 12 Visitors provide update on international animal welfare trends • International Agreements Group 13 OIE animal welfare mandate agreed • Contracts Management Group 14 UK animal welfare perspective (+64) 4 498 9888 Kiwi achievement in animal welfare examinations • Group Director and Business 15 NZ contributes to ethics dialogue Services Manager, Biosecurity Authority Follow-up on human case of Brucella suis • Director, Animal Biosecurity Accredited reviewers for organisations with a code of ethical conduct • Director, Plants Biosecurity 16 Increased sheep and goat surveillance to reinforce TSE-free status • Director, Forest Biosecurity • Director, Biosecurity Coordination 17 Long term management of varroa • Animal Welfare Group 18 Feeding food waste to pigs (+64) 4 474 4257 Veterinary diagnostic labs change hands • Plants Biosecurity Group 19 Imports of honey bee hive products and used beekeeping equipment (+64) 4 470 2741 Biosecurity People: International Animal Trade Team – Jennie Brunton • Indigenous Flora and Fauna Group • Forest Biosecurity Group

ASB Bank House, 20 New import health standards 101 The Terrace, Wellington Draft import health standards for consultation Biosecurity is published 6-weekly by MAF Codes of ethical conduct – approvals, notifications Biosecurity Authority. It covers biosecurity and revocations since the last issue of Biosecurity and animal health, animal welfare, plant 21 Animal welfare publications available health and forest health issues. It is of special Cost recovery for facilitating export interest to all those with a stake in New of live animals and animal germplasm Zealand’s agriculture, horticulture, forestry, Attack on painted apple moth continues animal welfare and environment. Amended import health standards for seed Enquiries about specific articles: Refer to Icon Key contact listed at the end of the relevant article. Animal Biosecurity General enquiries (eg, circulation requests or 22 New organism records: 18/05/02 – 28/06/02 information about MAF's biosecurity work): Biosecurity Magazine Plants Biosecurity MAF Biosecurity Authority PO Box 2526, Wellington Forest Biosecurity Phone: 04 474 4100 Fax: 04 498 9888 Email: [email protected] Animal Welfare Editorial enquiries: Issue 37 • 1 August 2002 Editor: Phil Stewart Phone: 04 384 4688 Email: editor_biosecurity@ maf.govt.nz

ISSN 1174 – 4618 www.maf.govt.nz/biosecurity Award underlines key role of risk analysis by Barry O’Neil safety (for diseases of operates, and in doing so Group Director, MAF Biosecurity animals that are enables protection of New Authority transmissible to Zealand’s unique biodiversity humans), and also for and facilitates exports by Earlier this year, MAF veterinarian animal welfare. While managing risks to plant and Stuart MacDiarmid received the OIE is responsible for animal health and animal international recognition for his international standards welfare. contributions to veterinary public related to animal health, health and animal disease control. As attested by Dr MacDiarmid’s other international award, New Zealand is making Dr MacDiarmid, who works as MAF’s organisations exist for extremely valuable contributions National Manager Risk Analysis, is the plant health (IPPC) and Barry O’Neil. to the operation of the OIE, and first New Zealander to receive the food safety (Codex the other international standard setting prestigious World Animal Health Alimentarius). organisations, with this being a critical Organisation (OIE) Médaille du Mérite Clearly, risk analysis is the basis by component of New Zealand’s (medal of merit). which MAF’s Biosecurity Authority biosecurity and future prosperity. The award pays tribute to Dr MacDiarmid’s years of work in International vet award a first for New Zealand developing a robust risk analysis Last month, MAF’s National Manager various OIE working groups you begin to methodology as the basis for ensuring Risk Analysis Dr Stuart MacDiarmid was see how it has contributed to the OIE’s safe trade in animals and animal recognised for his outstanding technical, development and acknowledgement as products. Dr MacDiarmid’s technical scientific and administrative contribution the WTO-recognised, science-based expertise of transmissible spongiform to the field of veterinary public health standard setting organisation for encephalopathies (TSEs) has also been and animal disease control. zoosanitary measures.” used by OIE to assist in the development MAF’s Director Animal Biosecurity Derek of specific technical standards to manage Mr Belton says Dr MacDiarmid’s Belton says that for over 20 years Dr the risks of introduction of BSE and contribution to the OIE has injected real MacDiarmid had been putting his ideas, scrapie. strength into the foundation and work and reputation on the line in a very framework of the organisation from I would personally like to congratulate public international arena. which New Zealand could manage Stuart for this award, and acknowledge “This is demanding in itself, but to get biosecurity risks. the significant contribution he has made these ideas accepted and adopted by the both domestically and internationally in Dr MacDiarmid was awarded the Médaille power brokers of the world from this little du Mérite in May at the General Session these and other areas of animal corner of the South Pacific takes an of the OIE in Paris by OIE president, Dr biosecurity. enormous amount of skill and effort. Romano Marabelli. The New Zealand His award also serves as a timely “When you look at Stuart’s work in the ceremony took place in July at the reminder that world trade would be a development of risk analysis and the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. perilous business without the existence of an organisation dedicated to ensuring transparency of countries’ animal disease status, and to developing technical standards enabling safe trade between countries. The mission of the OIE, an intergovernmental organisation with 162 member countries, is to guarantee the safety of world trade by developing rules for international trade in animals and animal products. In essence, it provides the framework and specific standards for managing the risk that opening doors to trade also potentially opens for unwanted pests and diseases. Pictured from left to right: MAF Director General Murray Sherwin,National Manager Risk Analysis Dr Stuart MacDiarmid,Director Animal Biosecurity Derek Belton,and Associate The OIE has recently expanded its role Minister for Biosecurity Hon Marian Hobbs. to include setting standards for food

Biosecurity Issue 37 • 1 August 2002 3 Protect New Zealand Week spreads the message: Keep pests & diseases out! The people organising and supporting Protect New Zealand Week, in the second week of July, popped up all over the place in their efforts to raise awareness of biosecurity. The week started with Max the Beagle spending a ‘Max Day’ in Wellington, joined by a colourful range of costumed ‘pests’.After greeting morning rail commuters, the next stop was the Wellington Zoo holiday programme, followed later in the day by visits to Civic Square and Wellington Airport. ‘Max Day’ also saw the first appearance of the B-Train (large truck and trailer The Owens Group B-Train made a high-profile billboard spreading the biosecurity message unit) sponsored by transport company to New Zealanders. Owens Group. Star animal photographer debate held in partnership with Resplendent in its Protect New Zealand Judy Reinen donated the the New Zealand National signage, the B-Train later made its way photographic work for the Parks and Conservation back up to Auckland before embarking collectible cards. This Foundation, an entertainment on an Auckland-Dunedin-Auckland involved a posed scene for event at the Otara Markets and round trip. By all accounts this made it each dog, such as Booker lastly a series of “beagle walks”. New Zealand’s most mobile billboard of (real name) next to a stack Due to inclement weather the the month and actively spread the of books, with the reverse only official walk was at message en route and at stop-offs in of the cards carrying a Auckland’s Cornwall Park, Hamilton, Taupo, Palmerston North and short story about each although beagles and their Christchurch. dog’s working life. carers also made a brave Max the Beagle makes some As a key sponsor of Protect New Zealand Other public events during new friends during a Protect showing at Wellington's Week the RadioWorks network (Radio Protect New Zealand Week New Zealand Week Botanic Gardens and walkabout in Wellington’s Pacific, The Edge, The Rock, Solid Gold) were a successful celebrity Civic Square. Christchurch’s Hagley Park. mounted an intensive radio campaign, featuring commercials, live phone-outs Rugby champs pack in and interviews. This represented an behind the biosecurity audience reach of more than 1.3 million message New Zealanders aged 15 and over. MAF Quarantine Assistants Monique Continuing with a common element of Hirovanaa (left) and Suzy Shortland, the overall campaign, the Protect New both members of the world champion Zealand team organised a strong range Black Ferns women’s rugby team, were of events and activities for children. more than happy to pack in behind last These included providing biosecurity month’s Protect New Zealand week. Here awareness activities for school holiday they show a clean pair of heels as they programmes at Auckland Zoo and demonstrate an X-ray view of their well- Auckland International Airport. Before, scrubbed sports gear. “It’s a privilege to represent your country during and after the week, two “We’ve both travelled overseas with the at sport but in our jobs here it’s competitions were aimed at primary and Black Ferns,” says Suzy. “We hope disappointing to see how many people secondary school children. The first was anyone arriving in New Zealand from forget that every privilege has a a Royal Canin Colouring Competition, overseas – and that includes the many responsibility. Bringing back the World with the first 5000 entrants sports people we see here every day – Cup was the best buzz. The last thing automatically receiving a beginner’s set does the right thing and doesn’t bring in we’d ever want to bring back is any of specially designed biosecurity soiled gear without declaring it. harmful pest or disease.” detector dog swap cards.

4 Biosecurity Issue 37 • 1 August 2002 Putting their hands up for biosecurity The people pictured in the montage on this page represent a cross-section of regions, industries and communities in New Zealand. They all have a common interest in biosecurity and they all stepped forward in July to become the first group of ‘biosecurity advocates’. So what is a biosecurity advocate? The idea came in part from a successful campaign being run by Animal Health Australia, called ‘Protect Australian Livestock’ (see www.aahc.com.au/palc). The concept of gathering together supportive spokespeople was taken a step further here, given the greater breadth of Protect New Zealand. Nominated advocates were approached ‘out of the blue’ to be interviewed for an advocate’s profile and to be available for contact by the media during Protect New Zealand Week. Completed articles and accompanying photos were then loaded to the Protect New Zealand website at www.protectnz.org.nz Project manager Melissa Wilson said the number of names to choose from underlines how far interest in, and recognition of, biosecurity has come in recent years. “We were extremely fortunate to receive such a high level of genuine cooperation from our 12 advocates. Each one had a meaningful biosecurity tale to tell, and their stories almost wrote themselves. At the same time we know that the amount of concern and the number of valuable stories, have barely been tapped,” says Melissa. Protect New Zealand week may be over, but the concept will live on. Along with a series of related ‘impact snapshots’, there are plans to approach further advocates in the future. July’s Protect New Zealand Week brought together a range of collaborative projects at inter-agency level. ERMA targeted pest plants, DOC published some allied fact sheets and the Ministry of Fisheries joined MAF in producing a “Let’s Give Biosecurity Threats The Boot!” poster which stemmed from material targeting young New Zealanders. The Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service (AQIS) also declared its support for the approach. “As New Zealand’s Top to bottom: Top to bottom: Basil Goodman – Chairman Michelle Richardson – major neighbour we have a mutual interest in promoting the of Summerfruit New Zealand, Award Winning Wine Maker, same messages that the Protect New Zealand campaign is all Central Otago. Villa Maria,Auckland. about,” says AQIS public relations manager David Finlayson. Brodie Stevens – Paul Lupi – Executive Officer Owens Global Logistics. of the New Zealand Mussel “The volume of traffic in terms of both trade and travel Davey Hughes – Industry Council,Marlborough. between our two countries means we virtually share the same Swazi Apparel,Levin. Percy Tipene – Organic border. This gives each quarantine service common ground Dr Mick Clout – Chair of producer and member of Te Waka Kai Ora,Northland. for supporting each other’s operational and awareness needs.” Invasive Species Specialist Group and Associate Professor Petra Bagust – Television Stephen Olsen, MAF Biosecurity at the University of Auckland. personality and host of lifestyle series travel.co.nz phone 04 470 2753, [email protected] Frank Lindsay – Secretary of the National Beekeepers Rob McLagan – Chief Executive www.protectnz.org.nz Association,Wellington branch. of the NZ Forest Owners Gene Roberts – Wrightson Association,Wellington. www.maf.govt.nz/biosecurity Agmardt Young Farmer Steve Garner – of the Year 2001,Te Puke. NZ Biosecure,Napier. Biosecurity Issue 37 • 1 August 2002 5 Biological diversity involves species and their environments One hundred and eighty countries have eradicate, those species that threaten guiding principles on invasive aliens. resolved to take biosecurity measures ecosystems, habitats or species. Parties were not able to agree on against species that threaten Parties meet regularly to develop non- references to the precautionary approach ecosystems, habitats or species. binding policy guidance, with the aim of and risk analysis that were not consistent with the SPS Agreement. The debate and At the Rio Earth Summit in 1992, 150 assisting them in their domestic context procedures followed at the meeting will governments signed the Convention on and improving coordination and require further clarification. Biological Diversity (CBD), to promote cooperation in regional and three objectives: the conservation of international contexts. The CBD parties At the conference, New Zealand also biodiversity, the sustainable use of its have decided that alien species hosted side events to discuss the Islands components, and the sharing of benefits management is a ‘cross-cutting’ issue Initiative for Alien Invasive Species (see arising from genetic resources fairly that impacts on biodiversity work- side bar) and the biosecurity risks posed and equitably. programmes for marine and coastal by hull-fouling on boats. environments, forests, agriculture, The CBD came into force the same year Next steps for the CBD will include inland waters, and dry and sub-humid and 180 parties, including New Zealand, implementing the decisions of the April lands. This means that alien species are have ratified to date. This year marks the meeting, such as undertaking further to be addressed both in those specific tenth anniversary of the convention and assessments of the gaps and contexts and as a universal issue. the parties to the convention met in inconsistencies in the international April for their sixth biennial conference. Recently, the parties have considered a regulatory framework, strengthening gap analysis of measures to prevent and links with other international bodies, ‘Biodiversity’ encompasses every non- manage invasive aliens in the marine and gathering information for a global human life-form on the planet. But the and coastal environment, reviewed the information network. CBD recognises that biodiversity is not efficiency of existing prevention and only the variety of plants, animals and Kristina Ryan, Policy Officer, management measures generally, and micro-organisms. It is also about the Environment Division, developed guiding principles for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, ecosystems and environments they live prevention and mitigation of damaging phone 04 473 2189, in – and balancing conservation for the impacts. The parties decided against a fax 04 494 8507, future with present-day economic and binding protocol for invasive alien [email protected] social needs such as food security, clean management in favour of non-binding, environments, access to medicines, consensus-based policies. recognition and preservation of traditional knowledge, and shared Meshing with other agreements benefits from the use of knowledge. CBD activities interface with other The islands initiative Relationship to biosecurity international agreements, particularly New Zealand’s most recent the WTO Agreement on the Application contribution to the CBD was The CBD is a high-level, framework of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures launching the Islands Initiative for agreement and so the obligations on its (the SPS Agreement), the Global Alien Invasive Species – a parties are broadly defined: Invasive Species Programme, codes of cooperative effort between the New • to develop national strategies conduct and practice produced by the Zealand Government (in consultation (New Zealand’s strategy was Food and Agriculture Organisation, and with other island states) and published in 2000) the International Plant Protection academic experts, the Invasive • to integrate the conservation and Convention. One challenge for the CBD Species Specialist Group and the Global Invasive Species Programme. sustainable use of biological diversity is ensuring that its policy is consistent The islands initiative is a compelling with planning and policy-making with, and does not duplicate, these agreements and programmes. model for technical cooperation, • to take action for conservation, recognising particular risks and sustainable use, and benefit-sharing. Focus on invasive alien species opportunities for islands. It will help Most importantly from the biosecurity The sixth conference of the parties to islanders to share information and perspective, parties are required, as far as the CBD was held in The Hague in April experience of alien invasive species possible and appropriate, to prevent the 2002. From the biosecurity perspective, at minimal cost and maximum speed. introduction of, and to control or the key matter was the adoption of the

6 Biosecurity Issue 37 • 1 August 2002 Biosafety protocol a framework for regulating GMO trade

In April this year, New Zealand officials exports of seeds for planting and live biosafety protocol. At the April meeting, attended the third intergovernmental fish for farming. Importing parties will the intergovernmental committee committee of the Cartagena Protocol take a decision in accordance with their welcomed the completion of the on Biosafety. domestic regulatory frameworks. biosafety clearing house pilot, which went live earlier this year, and the good This agreement is a protocol to the There is a separate, simpler procedure progress on a project assisting Convention on Biological Diversity for LMOs intended for use as food, developing countries so that they can (CBD, see article on page 6). animal feed or for processing. When a ratify the protocol. Many countries, party decides whether or not to permit The protocol provides a binding including New Zealand, are also domestic use of these LMOs, it must framework for regulating international participating in the ‘roster of experts on inform other parties of its decision via trade in ‘living modified organisms’ biosafety’ to provide technical advice the biosafety clearing house, an (genetically modified organisms that are and support to developing countries. electronic database of decisions and capable of transferring or replicating national legislation. However, there are several critical issues genetic material) that may have adverse still to be resolved, including effects on biodiversity. The protocol aims The advance informed agreement compliance measures, liability and to promote the environmentally sound procedure does not apply to LMOs in information/documentation use of LMOs, while minimising possible transit, or destined for contained use or requirements. The intergovernmental risks to the environment, also taking field trials, but parties can regulate such committee has developed into account risks to human health. shipments, provided they ensure that recommendations on these issues, which measures are taken to prevent or reduce Advance informed agreement will need to be progressed for the the risks to biological diversity, taking protocol to become operable. The The regulatory mechanisms established also into account risks to human health. by the protocol include an ‘advance intergovernmental committee does not informed agreement’ procedure that NZ taking part in roster of expect to have any further meetings so experts exporting parties must follow before the these issues will be taken up by the first intentional shipment of particular Over the last two years, parties to the parties to the protocol after it comes LMOs to another party, for deliberate CBD have met three times, as an into force. introduction to the environment. This intergovernmental committee, to Update on ratification and procedure would apply, for example, to negotiate preparatory work for the implementation The protocol was adopted by parties to the CBD in 2000. It has been signed by 110 countries and ratified by 21. The European Union has announced that it intends to ratify the protocol before the International Animal Trade Team World Summit on Sustainable Development meets in August this year. Rachel Gordon, a veterinary graduate of Massey University has recently joined the That will bring the total number of International Animal Trade section of Animal Biosecurity, as a National Adviser. parties to 36. The protocol will come After acquiring experience as a small animal clinician, Rachel joined MAF’s into effect when the 50th ratification is Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines (ACVM) group as a technical received. The protocol’s bureau assessor. She was responsible for evaluating the technical data packages that estimates this will occur in the first half support applications for registration of new veterinary medicines and in 2000 of 2003. she gained membership of the Australian College of Veterinary Scientists by Kristina Ryan, Policy Officer, examination in Veterinary Pharmacology. Environment Division, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Rachel then returned to clinical practice for two years as a core veterinarian for phone 04 473 2189, the Wellington Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA), and as a fax 04 494 8507, locum veterinarian throughout the region. [email protected] In her new role back in MAF, Rachel will be responsible for the avian, aquatic, For the biosafety clearing house pilot: small mammal and zoo animal portfolios, as well as welfare aspects of international animal trade. http://bch.biodiv.org/Pilot/Home.asp

Biosecurity Issue 37 • 1 August 2002 7 Container survey results due in September Shipping containers are a significant made regarding changes to the import Mechanised container washing risk pathway into New Zealand for health standard for sea containers as risk trial proof of concept unwanted pests and diseases. A mitigation measures. The trial confirmed that it is possible container survey and related research Three container decontamination to remove contaminates from the projects on treatment methods for research projects have been completed: complicated surfaces underneath containers will help New Zealand containers with a mechanised wash A ‘proof of concept’ heat refine measures needed to manage system. this risk more effectively. treatment of containerised goods The expected cost of the combined The trial confirmed the viability of heat The inspection and collection of projects is $750,000. disinfestation for loaded (for those contaminants from the twelve month goods capable of withstanding the Ken Glassey, survey of imported containers has been required temperature) sea containers Programme Coordinator completed. The final number of (Border Management), once improvements to air movement containers surveyed was slightly under phone 04 498 9610, within the container are carried out. (by 10%) the target of 13,500 but this is 025 249 2318, unlikely to have any significant bearing Review of treatment of sea [email protected] on the accuracy of the final results. containers and cargo for snakes Over 1000 organisms and seeds have and reptiles been collected and identification will The review confirmed the current rates take some time. The data gathered using methyl bromide in New Zealand during the survey should be reported are effective and demonstrated that on in September. This, combined with a phosphine and sulphuryl fluoride (not risk analysis of pests found during the yet registered in New Zealand) could survey, will enable some decisions to be also be used.

TOR review for Forest Biosecurity Consultative Committee The Forest Biosecurity Consultative has discussed and advised the CTO on to facilitate the distribution of biosecurity Committee was established by the matters such as international and information and the implementation of Forest Biosecurity Group of MAF in domestic standards, legislation, biosecurity programmes. surveillance and response programmes, 2001 as a forum for industry to advise Dr Mike Ormsby, from MAF Forest MAF policies, and Forest Biosecurity the Chief Technical Officer (CTO) of Biosecurity, explained the operation operational plans. forestry, and for the CTO to advise the procedures employed by MAF in the committee, on forest biosecurity At the recent meeting of the committee identification of pests intercepted at the issues. A review of its terms of on 20 June, members received three border, the types and quantities of goods reference (TOR) has been proposed. presentations on issues previously intercepted and the types of pests found The first meeting of the committee was identified by the committee as matters on wood produce. While interception on 25 July 2001 with the intention of of interest. rates on imported wood produce at the having a meeting every four months. At Melissa Wilson from Protect New Zealand border were higher than in the past, the the inaugural meeting participants agreed started the meeting by giving an overview number of pests identified had reduced to the membership of the committee and of the Protect New Zealand programme significantly over recent years. The the terms of reference under which the with a summary of the achievements to committee agreed that a review of the committee would operate. The Forest date, lessons learned, and future activities. pest identification system and Biosecurity Consultative Committee has Of special note was the importance of requirements should be undertaken, and now met four times. At those meetings it building partnerships with industry both the results reported back.

8 Biosecurity Issue 37 • 1 August 2002 Protection against Giant African snails stepped up Import conditions for shipping light brown, with alternating brown and • Soft-top containers and flat-racks, containers are being strengthened to cream bands on young snails and the whether full or empty, are also help protect New Zealand from the risk upper whorls of larger specimens. included. posed by Giant African snail. New import conditions for high- • Containers landed in New Zealand Giant African snail (GAS) would pose a risk containers for transhipment are also included in threat to agriculture, the environment The conditions and procedures for these measures. and human health if it become importation of containers from high risk • The external inspection will be established in New Zealand particularly areas infested with giant African snail carried out within 24 hours of the upper North Island. It are about to change and will discharge before the container leaves is considered to be one of be implemented at ports the wharf. the most damaging land around the country as soon • All empty containers must also be snails in the world. The as resources allow. The internally inspected either on the snail can also act as a vector high-risk areas are most of wharf or at a transitional facility of human disease such as the Pacific islands and (after external inspection on the eosinophilic meningitis Eastern Africa. The wharf) approved for that purpose. which is caused by the rat Giant African snail, Achatina conditions include the • Restows from GAS countries are not (Lissachatina) fulica Bowdich. lungworm parasite. following: to be mixed with non-GAS Identifying the species • All sea containers (FCL, LCL/FAK, containers without prior inspection. GAS is easily distinguished from New MTs), being imported into New • A container washing machine Zealand snails. It is readily identified by Zealand from high risk countries will capable of cleaning all six sides to its large size and relatively long, narrow have all six sides of the container MAF’s requirements could be used in conical shell. Although it can reach a (including forklift tine holes and lieu of manual inspection of every length of up to 200 mm the shell is more twist locks) inspected for all life container from a GAS area. commonly 50-100 mm long. The colour stages of GAS prior to leaving the Procedure where snails can be variable but is most commonly wharf. are detected Where live snails are detected, the container will be further inspected for snail eggs and may require fumigation. If Dr Robin Janson, from the University of other government departments to the infested container is full it will be Waikato, presented results from two review the terms of reference for the directed to a transitional facility for MAF operational research projects Forest Biosecurity Consultative devanning and inspection. Where a snail investigating interception and Committee and suggest ways in which is detected during inspection, all identification of fungi on imported the operation of the committee can be containers that have been transported in wood packaging. The projects raised a improved to better meet its goals. the same hold as that container will be number of new and potentially very For a copy of the current terms of required to be inspected. important factors related to fungi types reference: and distributions in wood packaging MAF is reviewing (due to new incursions that will aid the review of border Moira Burdan, Programme and eradication campaigns) the world- Coordinator, Forest Biosecurity, interception and identification. wide distribution of GAS with the phone 04 498 9635, updated procedures and countries list to Also tabled at the meeting was a fax 04 498 9888 be included in the import health proposal by MAF to review the [email protected] standard for sea containers later this year. committee’s terms of reference in light Dr Michael Ormsby, National Adviser of the meetings held since its inception. Import Health Standards Ken Glassey, Programme Coordinator A review could enhance the effectiveness Forest Biosecurity (Border Management), of the committee as a forum for good phone 04 474 4100, phone 04 498 9610, 025 249 2318, [email protected] dialogue between industry and the CTO fax 04 470 2741 [email protected] of forestry on forest biosecurity issues. Giant African snail Exotic Pest www.maf.govt.nz/forest-imports Information Sheet: MAF encourages stakeholders in industry, Crown research institutes or www.maf.govt.nz/giant-african-snail

Biosecurity Issue 37 • 1 August 2002 9 Review of ruminant protein regulations Should the ban on feeding ruminant programme. The internationally programmes (required in multi- protein to ruminants be extended to recognised feed test relies on detecting species feed mills to minimise the other animal proteins to make it easier bone fragments under a microscope and risk of cross-contamination) to detect contaminated feed? distinguishing ruminant bone from any • classifying existing absolute liability That is one of the questions being other animal bone that may be present. offences in the regulations as strict considered in MAF’s review of the Prohibiting the use of protein from non- liability offences ruminant animals could improve the ruminant to ruminant feed ban. The • exempting from the feed ban certain test, but would reduce the range of Biosecurity (Ruminant Protein) highly processed ruminant products Regulations 1999 prohibit the feeding of protein ingredients that could be used in ruminant feed. • ensuring that only protein-free tallow ruminant protein to ruminant animals may be included in ruminant feed. because of the associated risk of Land treatment of slaughter The public discussion paper will be sent amplifying and spreading transmissible wastewater to renderers, feed mills, feed merchants, spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs). The review will clarify the regulatory and farming, fertiliser and meat industry The review includes the following framework for the disposal by irrigation organisations. Copies will be available in matters for public consultation, and of wastewater from the slaughter and August 2002 from the MAF website, or potential regulatory controls. processing of ruminants. The ruminant on request. Non-ruminant animal protein protein regulations are not intended to Ashley Edge, Policy Adviser, The present regulations do not prohibit prohibit this practice. MAF wishes to Biosecurity Coordination, the use of protein from pigs, poultry and make that policy explicit. phone 04 474 4213, fish in ruminant feeds, but the presence Other proposals fax 04 470 2730, of this material could compromise [email protected] The review will also cover: testing feed for illegal ruminant protein. Ruminant feed is subject to random • introducing a charge for registering testing under a MAF-industry sampling ruminant protein control Draft Biosecurity Strategy nears completion The strategy development team hopes • more work was required to develop serve to increase biosecurity awareness to submit the completed Draft some aspects of the draft strategy, with stakeholders and the general public. Biosecurity Strategy to the Biosecurity notably the sections on ‘mission, The draft strategy is the culmination of four Council later this year. goals and principles’,‘priority- processes undertaken since March 2001: setting, decision-making and risk- With the approval of the Biosecurity • biosecurity issues identified by management frameworks’ and Council, the Minister for Biosecurity stakeholders and the public ‘governance, accountabilities, and Cabinet, the draft strategy could (March–August 2001) leadership and co-ordination’. be released for public consultation in • matters raised during public late 2002. The strategy development team has since consultation and in submissions on the revised all draft material and prepared Issues Paper (October 2001–March 2002) Companion documents proposals for the structure and content • the work of four Issues Groups and a At its meeting on 11 June, the of the two documents. The team has also Maori Focus Group (March–May 2002) Biosecurity Council decided that: facilitated the work of groups • discussions with biosecurity agencies, the • the draft strategy should comprise established to develop the sections Strategy Advisory Group and the two documents: a short (20-25 pages) specified by the Biosecurity Council. Biosecurity Council (May–August 2002). ‘high-level strategic document’ and a The draft strategy Malcolm Crawley, Biosecurity Strategy more substantial ‘resource document’ The Draft Biosecurity Strategy includes a Development Team, phone 04 460 8710, • the existing draft (of 4 June) should mission, goals, objectives and fax 04 460 8779, be revised to incorporate comments measurable targets for New Zealand’s [email protected] received from the Strategy Advisory biosecurity programmes. It looks to the For updates on the biosecurity strategy: Group, the Biosecurity Council and future, provides direction and guidance biosecurity agencies to all involved in biosecurity, and should www.biostrategy.govt.nz

10 Biosecurity Issue 37 • 1 August 2002 Lettuce aphid marches on Several new infestations of lettuce to obtain clearance for a wider range of aphid (Nasonovia ribisnigri) have been chemicals, and to provide growers with Biosecurity Magazine confirmed. The latest detection was advice on immediate control. well regarded made on a property in the Aniseed “While the spread of this pest has been A recent readership survey of Valley, northwest of Nelson, with faster than expected, MAF had always Biosecurity showed that overall readers further detections at Pukekohe and known it was only a matter of time. are very happy with the magazine’s Outram near Dunedin earlier in June. “Eradication of the lettuce aphid is not content, purpose and design. Barney Stephenson, MAF’s National feasible and the lettuce industry now Over 100 readers were telephone Adviser on Plant Pest Surveillance needs to take steps to manage the pest. interviewed during May 2002 to find and Response, says these This would include short out whether the magazine achieves its latest findings show the term control measures and purpose as a consultation and aphid is now distributed the development of a long information vehicle in a manner and over a wide area. term integrated approach.” style that is easy to understand. The known distribution of Barney says the lettuce lettuce aphid is now Overwhelmingly, respondents found the aphid also infests Auckland, Dunedin, Nelson, articles and information in the The aphids are particularly blackcurrant and and Mid-Canterbury. damaging to lettuces. magazine accessible, easy to read, and gooseberry bushes, but is Within two weeks of the first detection attractively presented. Over half said in mid-Canterbury, it was found over an particularly damaging in lettuces where they had contacted authors regarding area covering 1,000 square kilometres. it gets into the hearts, and high numbers specific articles and more than 90 develop inside. Once in the lettuce’s percent regarded the magazine as an Barney says VegFed has been very heart, it is difficult to control. opportunity to keep abreast of, and proactive in alerting growers to the consult on, biosecurity issues. existence of the aphid as well as Barney Stephenson, National Adviser providing them with information on (Plant Pest Surveillance and Many respondents also said they would Response), Plants Biosecurity, controlling the pest. welcome the inclusion of articles from phone 04 474 4102, other government departments which “VegFed is working with Crop and Food fax 04 474 4257, have a biosecurity function. Research and chemical companies in order [email protected] Kudzu vine an unwanted organism Kudzu vine (Pueraria montana var. another management have the environmental lobata) has been declared an unwanted option in protecting our conditions that have led organism by MAF in consultation with environment from this to the problems the Department of Conservation under tree-smothering vine. experienced in the the Biosecurity Act 1993. southern states of Kudzu vine is a the USA. George Gill, MAF Plants Technical deciduous vine capable “Given that Kudzu vine Adviser, Pest Management says that of smothering other was deliberately under the Act it is an offence to plants and trees. The Kudzu vine infestation. introduced to some propagate, distribute or offer Kudzu vine root system can weigh parts of New Zealand in for sale. Regional councils will now have up to 200kg, and as many as 30 vines the 1940s, it has had ample opportunity access to powers under the Act to can grow from a single root crown. ascertain the presence and distribution to establish and become a significant of the vine. Unwanted organism status There are currently four known problem. This has not happened. also provides regional councils with the infestations. The largest of these is in the However, the Bay of Plenty infestations option of implementing small-scale Bay of Plenty and covers about 3000 demonstrate the plant’s potential to management programmes. square metres. become invasive in the warmer frost-free areas of New Zealand, so it has been George says while there have been no “If conditions are suitable Kudzu vine is declared an unwanted organism.” further detections of Kudzu vine, other quite capable of overwhelming and George Gill, Technical Adviser, Pest than the original infestations discovered destroying native bush,” George says. Management, MAF Plants Biosecurity, in the Bay of Plenty and Northland “However, Kudzu vine thrives when phone 04 470 2742, earlier this year (see Biosecurity 36:15), temperatures and rainfall are very high, fax 04 474 4257, the new classification will provide and New Zealand fortunately does not [email protected]

Biosecurity Issue 37 • 1 August 2002 11 Visitors provide update on international animal welfare trends

When a ‘big cat’ – someone’s escaped and publishing it via the pet – was found wandering through an internet for public comment. American neighbourhood recently, no The Commission’s Executive agency could be found that would Branch then begins to draw accept responsibility for its capture together legislation, informed or welfare. partly by actual farming Notwithstanding the immediate alarm practices and overseas trends. this caused the residents, it also illustrates This involves 21 separate some of the gaps and anomalies in ministries and consultation Dr Andrea Gavinelli,Dr David Bayvel,Dr Chester Gipson United States animal welfare legislation. with the general public via and Professor John McInerney. the European Parliament. Welfare a consumer issue The example was one of a number recounted by USDA Deputy Dr Gavinelli said the Council of He said animal welfare is now seen largely Administrator Animal Care, Dr Chester Ministers will then vote on a proposal. as a consumer issue in Britain. Animal Gipson, one of three speakers at a recent Voting is weighted by country, according welfare assurances are lined up alongside seminar on international animal welfare to the economic impact a directive may other quality issues such as labelling and trends hosted by MAF Biosecurity’s have. This process can be lengthy – for food safety. Animal Welfare Group. example it took 18 months to complete “There are a number of welfare issues in Back seat role the voting process on a directive about the public domain now, but poultry is the cages for layer hens. Dr Gipson said federal animal welfare predominant one.” legislation in the United States mainly Once this process has been completed, it Professor McInerney said large UK poultry covers use of animals in research and is up to individual countries to companies could well be forced to pack up entertainment, but animal welfare in implement the directives, a process that and move offshore if pressure from welfare farming is generally left to state is audited by the European Commission’s advocates continues to grow. legislatures. He said the fast food Food and Veterinary Office. A number of other farm animal welfare industries in the United States have FMD outbreak catalyst for change issues are simmering in the UK, he said. recently tended to drive animal welfare Poultry welfare was also featured by the These include: standards, with the Government taking a final speaker, Professor John McInerney, back seat role. • the fate of farm animals at the end of Emeritus Professor of Agricultural Policy, their productive lives However, there is pressure for the USDA University of Exeter and a member of the • religious slaughter methods to take a more proactive role and to UK Government’s Farm Animal Welfare • transport of animals long distances to extend its responsibilities to cover some Advisory Council (FAWC). areas such as dog- or cock-fighting which centralised markets and abattoirs He said the foot and mouth outbreak in are unregulated at present. A number of • disease control on organic farms Britain last year had marked a watershed welfare-related lawsuits against the • conflicting food safety and animal in public attitudes towards animal USDA is adding to the pressure. welfare priorities, e.g. difficulty in welfare and farming. Although such controlling Salmonella in free range Dr Gipson noted that there are also gaps incidents were rare, news footage of poultry. in some definitions in current US white-coated officials pursuing livestock legislation. “Pain is defined, but not for on-farm slaughter struck a chord Professor McInerney said FAWC had distress,” he said. “We are currently with a population that has little or no always been strongly science driven, but reviewing this.” contact with farming in the 21st century. this approach was difficult to reconcile Complex path for regulations with the consumer view of food safety and “The old UK MAFF has now gone. The animal welfare, which is “driven by Disney Dr Andrea Gavinelli, Administrator with Department for Environment, Food and and Beatrix Potter”.He said science cannot the European Commission, explained to Rural Affairs which replaced it does not always provide a sound basis for decisions the seminar the path which animal even mention farming in its seven about welfare, and since BSE emerged, the welfare regulations are required to follow objectives,” Professor McInerney said. credibility of science has suffered. in Europe before they are implemented “Agriculture accounts for less than one Linda Carsons, Senior Policy Adviser, within individual countries. percent of the country’s GDP and less Animal Welfare, The process begins with the Scientific than two percent of the population is phone 04 470 2746, Committee for Animal Health and involved in farming, which is seen only fax 04 498 9888, Animal Welfare collating information as an accessory to the economy.” [email protected]

12 Biosecurity Issue 37 • 1 August 2002 OIE animal welfare mandate agreed

The 70th General Session of the OIE • animals used in agriculture and following specific roles and (Office International des Epizooties) aquaculture for production, functions: was held in Paris during May 2002. breeding and/or working purposes • development of standards and The Director-General, Dr Bernard Vallat • companion animals including guidelines leading to good animal presented specific recommendations to exotic (wild-caught and non- welfare practice; the International Committee concerning traditional) species • provision of expert advice on the scope, priorities and modus • animals used for research, testing specific animal welfare issues to operandi for the OIE’s involvement in and/or teaching purposes OIE stakeholder groups, including animal welfare. These were fully • free-living wildlife, including the member countries, other endorsed by all 162 member countries. issues of their slaughter and international organisations and industry/consumers; These recommendations were based trapping • maintenance of international on the work of an ad hoc group of • animals used for sport, recreation databases on animal welfare international experts and included and entertainment, including in information, including different the following: circuses and zoos, and that, for national legislations and policies, each group, in addition to essential 1. As animal welfare is a complex, internationally recognised animal animal health considerations, the multi-faceted public policy issue that welfare experts, and relevant topics of housing, management, includes important scientific, ethical, examples of good animal welfare transportation and killing economic and political dimensions, practice; the OIE should develop a detailed (including humane slaughter, • identification of the essential vision and strategy to incorporate, euthanasia and killing for disease elements of an effective national balance and take account of these control) be addressed. infrastructure for animal welfare, dimensions. 7. The OIE should give priority to including legislation/legal tools and 2. The OIE should then develop animal welfare issues regarding the development of a self- policies and guiding principles to animals used in agriculture and assessment check list; provide a sound foundation from aquaculture and, regarding the other • preparation and circulation of which to elaborate specific groups identified, the OIE should educational material to enhance recommendations and standards. establish relative priorities to be dealt awareness among OIE 3. The OIE should establish a working with as resources permit. stakeholders; group on animal welfare to 8. Within the agriculture and • promotion of the inclusion of coordinate and manage animal aquaculture group, the OIE should animal welfare in undergraduate welfare activities in accordance with firstly address transportation, and post-graduate veterinary the tasks listed below, and the humane slaughter, and killing for curricula; working group should advise on disease control, and, later, housing • identification of animal welfare specific tasks to be carried out by and management. The OIE should research needs and encouragement ad hoc groups. also consider animal welfare aspects, of collaboration among centres as issues arise, in the areas of genetic 4. In consultation with the OIE, the of research. working group should develop a modification and cloning, genetic David Bayvel, detailed operational plan for the selection for production and fashion, Director Animal Welfare, initial 12 months, addressing the and veterinary practices. phone 04 474 4251, priority issues identified. 9. When addressing zoonoses, the OIE fax 04 498 9888, 5. The working group and its ad hoc should give priority to addressing the [email protected] groups should consult with non- animal welfare aspects of animal Additional information is available on governmental organisations (NGOs) population reduction and control the OIE website: having a broad international policies (including stray dogs representation and make use of all and cats). www.oie.int available expertise and resources, 10. The OIE should incorporate within including those from academia, the its communication strategy key research community, industry and animal welfare stakeholders, other relevant stakeholders. including industry and NGOs. 6. The scope of OIE involvement in 11. The OIE should incorporate animal animal welfare issues should be welfare considerations within its grouped into the following: major functions and assume the

Biosecurity Issue 37 • 1 August 2002 13 UK animal welfare perspective by Kate Horrey the local Home Office inspectors and It has been an experience I would Kate Horrey is currently completing a then attended a two-day inspectors’ recommend as part of anyone’s secondment to the UK Home Office in conference at York. The UK system for continuing professional development. the regulation of animals in experiments London from the New Zealand Ministry Kate Horrey, UK Home Office, is very tight and closely overseen by the of Agriculture and Forestry. She is phone 0044 20 7273 3296, Home Office. Each year inspectors make fax 0044 20 7273 2029, working closely with the Animal a number of routine visits, both [email protected] Procedures Committee, responsible for announced and unannounced, to providing independent advice to the research premises. In addition, the UK Secretary of State on the regulation of runs a three-tier system of regulation Kiwi animals used in scientific procedures. with personal licences, project licences She updates Biosecurity readers on her and research premises licences required achievement in first six months in London. before work can commence. animal welfare In January this year I arrived at Another highlight has been the Heathrow with my backpack stuffed opportunity to understand a little more examinations with winter clothes, a precious working about the UK political process. Unlike Two New Zealand veterinarians were visa and feelings of excitement mixed New Zealand, the UK has a bicameral successful in the recent Australian with a healthy dose of trepidation. legislature, or two Houses of Parliament College of Veterinary Scientists However, I settled quickly into my – the Commons and the Lords. I have membership examination in animal secondment with the Animal Procedures been able to observe a little of the House welfare. of Lords Select Committee on Animal Committee (APC) and Secretariat, where They are Trish Pearce, a member of Experimentation public hearings and I spend the majority of my time providing MAF’s Compliance and Investigation deliberations. This Select Committee is administrative support to the APC. Group (Biosecurity) and Wayne looking into the issues regarding animals Established in 1987, the APC fulfils a Ricketts, a member of the Animal in scientific procedures in the United similar role to that of the New Zealand Welfare Group in MAF’s Biosecurity Kingdom, including: National Animal Ethics Advisory Authority. • the legislation Committee. Much of the groundwork is The Australian College of Veterinary completed by subcommittees and • justification of animal use Scientists was established in 1971 and working groups. I am closely involved • the use of alternatives provides an opportunity for the with three of these. They are reviewing: • public opinion recognition of advanced professional • the cost/benefit analysis process the • effects on science and the economy skills and proficiency for veterinarians Home Office completes before • European and international law. in practice, industry and government animals can be used for scientific employment. The College has 16 It has been a valuable experience to come purposes different chapters which allow and work for an animal welfare advisory veterinarians to achieve post-graduate • the most common, humane forms committee and government department in qualifications in a range of subjects of euthanasia for laboratory animals a different country. There is an interesting such as pharmacology, medicine, • education and training initiatives. mix of issues and challenges to be faced. epidemiology and animal welfare. There have also been several Some of them are common to both New The animal welfare chapter was opportunities to get away from the Zealand and the UK – such as public recently established, with inaugural corridors of the Home Office and find concern about the use of live animals in examinations taking place in 2001. out more about the UK approach to scientific experiments, public and political animal-based research. In March I demands for greater openness and Success in the examinations and visited a modern, purpose-built facility communication of information and the subsequent membership in the animal for research primates and, on a related ongoing need to promote and uphold the welfare chapter equips veterinarians matter, have also been present at principles of the Three Rs. Other issues are with a detailed understanding of the discussions regarding the sourcing of more unusual, such as the UK use of scientific basis for optimum animal research primates from outside the UK. primates in research and the greater scale welfare standards and to be able to This is a delicate area, with the Home of regulatory toxicology testing and logically debate the legal and ethical Office sending an inspector into China biomedical science. aspects of animal welfare. and Vietnam to check the welfare As a ‘working guest’ of the Home Office, David Bayvel, Director Animal standards of the breeding centres. Welfare, phone 04 474 4251, I have been treated exceptionally well fax 04 498 9888, In May I spent a day in a London and provided with opportunities that [email protected] academic research facility with one of would be impossible in New Zealand.

14 Biosecurity Issue 37 • 1 August 2002 NZ contributes to ethics dialogue The Australian Veterinary Association • handling conflicts of interest The highlights of the conference were conference held in Adelaide in early (covering intensive animal industries, interactive hypothetical sessions, the May comprised 18 streams, one of inducing disease for research first held in conjunction with the sheep which was a two-day programme purposes, separating responsibilities veterinarians and the second with the organised by AVERT – Australian for animal care and animal ethics in small animal veterinarians. In both cases Veterinarians in Ethics, Research research institutions) a skilled and amusing presenter, pig and Teaching. • the ethics and welfare of genetically veterinarian Ross Cutler, outlined a modified animals. hypothetical scenario, introduced a Topics covered in the well-attended small panel who assumed a variety of sessions included: Two New Zealand speakers presented roles, and encouraged audience • ethics and welfare and making papers. Massey University PhD student participation in the ensuing discussions. ethical decisions Kate Littin spoke on the ethical and The resulting debate was both thought • ethical and welfare implications of welfare implications of killing pests while provoking and highly entertaining. Dr Virginia Williams, the New Zealand ‘purposeful killing’ of animals Linda Carsons, Senior Policy Adviser, (covering research animals and Veterinary Association’s animal welfare Animal Welfare, phone 04 470 2746, humane endpoints, pests, food coordinator, discussed veterinarians in fax 04 498 9888, animals, companion animals) the intensive animal industries. [email protected] Follow-up on human case of B. suis An extensive investigation has not yet Although we have found no evidence of After the TAG has completed its work, identified the source of infection for Brucella suis infection in New Zealand recommendations for an ongoing the human case of Brucella suis pigs. The hypothesis that this human response can be formulated. previously reported in May. A technical case was acquired from pig carcasses The target for finalisation of advisory group is considering options dressed by the patient still seems the recommendations is September 2002. for an ongoing response. most likely explanation for the source of Matthew Stone, Programme this human infection. In May (Biosecurity 35:18) we reported that Coordinator a case of Brucella suis biovar 3 was isolated If that is the case, the prevalence of Exotic Disease Response, in a human. This sparked an investigation infection in New Zealand pigs is very phone 04 498 9884, fax 04 474 4227, [email protected] to identify the source of two pigs that were low, and at a level that is below the the suspected source of infection. sensitivity of testing programmes Accredited reviewers undertaken so far. No pigs tested positive for organisations with The TAG is currently developing a It was not possible to identify the response options analysis and an impact a code of ethical conduct specific single source herd for the two assessment, upon which recommenda- Organisations with a code of ethical pigs from available records. All possible tions can be based. The documents will conduct are required to undergo a review source herds were traced and pigs consider: from time to time. Reviews must be sampled and tested on all of these carried out by independent reviewers • options for further surveillance in properties in which pigs were present. accredited by MAF for the purpose in the various pig sectors and for However, some properties no longer had accordance with section 109 of the humans, and associated costs pigs on them, and in many other Animal Welfare Act 1999. • management of infected places with properties the herds were small, often The following people have been accredited pigs, if detected; the likely incidence comprising one sow and one boar only. to carry out independent reviews: of herd infections; the costs Serological testing with the Brucella associated with control Dr Kenneth John Patrick Cooper abortus competitive ELISA was • implementation of a comprehensive 61 Amapur Drive, Khandallah conducted on the possible source herds disease control programme for Wellington, 04 479 5092 and any herds associated with them by Brucella suis in domestic and feral Date of approval: 01.07.02 recent movements of pigs. No pigs were Expiry date of accreditation: 30.06.07 pigs, potentially incorporating positive to the test and there was no controls for Trichinella spiralis and Dr Angenita Blanche Harding evidence of brucellosis in these herds. biosecurity of feed sources; the AgriQuality NZ Ltd, Private Bag 3080 Technical advisory group development approach and Hamilton, 07 834 1777 [email protected] MAF convened a technical advisory associated costs Date of approval: 29.05.02 group (TAG) to consider options for an • the likely incidence of human Expiry date of accreditation: 28.05.07 ongoing response. infections, and associated costs.

Biosecurity Issue 37 • 1 August 2002 15 Increased sheep and goat surveillance to reinforce TSE-free status

From 1 July 2002, the BSE surveillance programme, up to 2000 cattle brains a The New Zealand Animal Health programme (Biosecurity 31:10-11) is year are now tested. Reference Laboratory at the National being expanded to look for scrapie and Centre for Disease Investigation (NCDI) Reflecting the mounting international BSE in New Zealand sheep and goats, will test all the samples. Should it be concern about BSE, in May of this year as well as BSE in cattle. necessary, samples producing suspicious the OIE adopted a new international test results will also be double-checked International requirements standard for the related disease scrapie. at an international reference laboratory. increasing This followed a recommendation of an For several years now, the World expert group in January this year that Impact if disease found Organisation for Animal Health (Office the OIE should urgently complete its A confirmed case of scrapie would have International des draft code chapter on an immediate negative impact on the Epizooties, OIE) has scrapie of sheep and bio-pharmaceutical industry, which has prescribed international goats and should address an excellent world status that depends standards for surveillance the specific issue of BSE on New Zealand being scrapie free. in sheep and goats. programmes to detect BSE The meat industries would also be in cattle. The New Surveillance affected. Some markets might be closed Zealand programme, in programme expanded to our exports and other markets might operation since the end of What the surveillance team would require additional precautions or not want to see: Slides (a) and (b) The expanded TSE 1989, required at least 300 additional processing. show the effects of scrapie on brain surveillance programme cattle brains to be tissue in the brain of a goat 20 examined annually. months after it was experimentally has been set up so that However, if a case of scrapie were infected. Slides (c) and (d) show New Zealand complies detected in New Zealand, there would be However, since the New brain tissue from a goat 18 months with the new OIE no immediate widespread slaughter of Zealand programme was after it was experimentally infected with BSE. requirements. The animals. MAF would proceed on the established, overseas objective is to provide improved, assumption the disease had been present authorities and consumers have sought in the country for many years. Given the greater assurances that BSE- and scientifically based evidence that this nature of the disease, it would be scrapie-free countries are actively country is free from both scrapie and prudent to define the extent of the looking for these diseases and enforcing BSE. Some 2000 cattle brains will problem and develop a well thought out measures to prevent their further spread continue to be tested for BSE testing response, in consultation with affected should they occur. annually. Around 3000 sheep brains and 300 goat brains will be tested for both industries. This is because: Despite New Zealand having been scrapie and BSE. • live sheep imports are rare recognised as being free from scrapie • scrapie spreads with difficulty and BSE for many years, the BSE The survey will be structured to obtain surveillance programme was expanded the maximum distribution possible • the incubation period is long and last year to provide further evidence of across the country using culled sheep variable; and our BSE-free status. Under the expanded going through slaughter houses. Continued on Page 17

Understanding TSE diseases BSE in sheep? TSEs (transmissible spongiform encephalopathies) are a group of progressive fatal diseases of That BSE can also occur in the central nervous system that occur in some mammals. sheep is a theoretical possibility. Indications are that Scrapie occurs in sheep and goats and has been documented since the 1700s. It is widespread many organs in the sheep in Europe and is present in the USA, Canada and Japan. It cannot be passed to humans. would be infected. This has BSE (bovine spongiform encephalopathy) in cattle was first detected in the United Kingdom in implications for how risks could the early 1980s and has now been found throughout the European Union, some central be managed. Distinguishing European countries, Japan and Israel. The original cases are thought to have come from feeding between scrapie and BSE in scrapie-infected material to cattle. Since then the disease has been passed on to other cattle sheep is very difficult with the through feeding them on meat meal made from infected cattle. Humans too have been infected, current methods available. A almost certainly through eating certain meat products containing what is known as mechanically committee of OIE experts in recovered meat, a type of cheap mince containing traces of central nervous tissue. (Muscle January recommended a tissue, that is, what we recognise as ‘meat’, is safe, as BSE infectivity is confined to the brain number of steps that could be and spinal cord.) So far over 100 people have died from new variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease taken to clarify the problem (vCJD), the human disease believed to be acquired from BSE-infected cattle. and manage risks.

16 Biosecurity Issue 37 • 1 August 2002 • sheep are usually between two and five years old before clinical signs of the disease can be seen. Contingency plan ready In the event of a detection MAF’s Long-term management contingency plan would swing into action. As the lead agency, MAF Biosecurity of varroa would coordinate the various groups. MAF is preparing to seek the views of (NPMS) for varroa is the most Immediately after deciding to initiate an affected industries and the public on a appropriate means to manage varroa in investigation or response, the Director long-term management strategy for the the longer term. An NPMS would enable of Animal Biosecurity would notify the parasitic bee mite Varroa destructor, a wide range of management activities Minister for Biosecurity, the MAF BSE which feeds on honey bees. One of the to be carried out, including continuation Co-ordinating Group, BSE Liaison Group, most damaging pests of honey bees of some elements of the existing varroa the Independent BSE Expert Science known, varroa was detected in the management programme such as Panel and Treasury. MAF would also be movement controls. obliged to notify the OIE and our trading Auckland region in April 2000. partners. We would also immediately seek Interim varroa management MAF is preparing a discussion paper on Long-term Management of Varroa confirmation of the diagnosis (likely to be Since November 2000, MAF has been destructor, highlighting the issues by examination using immunohisto- implementing a government funded identified by the varroa planning group. chemistry in an overseas laboratory) and 2-year, $7.6 million varroa management The paper will seek feedback from all put restricted place measures in place on programme. Key components of this parties interested in the future the farm of origin. programme include: management of varroa. Key questions At the earliest opportunity a meeting • government-funded treatment of that must be considered will include: of key stakeholders would be held, to infested hives in 2000/2001 formulate response actions. These • Is a long-term management • movement controls to slow spread of measures would take into account the programme necessary for varroa? varroa laboratory findings that initiated the • What should be the structure and investigation, the rest of the results of • surveillance in the South Island and legal basis of any such programme? lower North Island the surveillance programme, an • Who should manage a varroa assessment of the magnitude of the • education in varroa management for programme? problem and the results of tracing from beekeepers • What activities should be included in the original animal. • funding of research into varroa such a programme? MAF’s NCDI and other approved management • How should a long-term suppliers would work closely with the • compensation to beekeepers under management programme be funded? MAF Verification Authority to ensure s162a of the Biosecurity Act 1993. the ability to verify all response MAF is advising those with an interest in Unless a long-term management outcomes, as required by technical varroa to begin to considering these programme is put in place, these directives and overseas market access issues, and any other points they believe activities will cease when the existing requirements, issued by the New are relevant to managing the impact of programme ends. This programme is Zealand Food Safety Authority. varroa on New Zealand. currently scheduled to end in For the surveillance programme: November 2002. When the discussion document is Mirzet Sabirovic, New Zealand Food completed, stakeholder groups will be Long term management Safety Authority, notified and the document will be phone 04 498 9809, A varroa planning group made up of posted on the MAF website (see below). fax 04 474 4239, MAF, local government and Jeffrey Stewart, Programme Adviser, [email protected] representatives from affected industry Surveillance and Response, For MAF’s contingency plans: groups, has examined the options for phone 04 474 4199, Allen Bryce, National Manager, long-term varroa management. fax 04 474 4133, Surveillance and Response, This group has concluded that a [email protected] phone 04 470 2787, national pest management strategy www.maf.govt.nz/varroa fax 04 474 4133, [email protected]

For TSE diseases: Stuart MacDiarmid, National Manager, Risk Analysis, phone 04 474 4223, fax 04 474 4227, [email protected]

Biosecurity Issue 37 • 1 August 2002 17 Feeding food waste to pigs All 16 submissions on the MAF The proposed measures will require Costs met by industry and discussion paper Feeding food waste to regulations to implement. government pigs (Biosecurity 29:5, 1 August 2001) The package involves: If the MAF proposals are implemented, argued that a more cautious approach it is proposed that the costs of 1 prohibiting the feeding of uncooked to the risks associated with feeding complying will be met by industry, while meat to pigs swill to pigs was justified. government will meet the costs of the 2 permitting the collection, distribution Submitters all referred to the severe education programme and enforcement or trading in food waste, providing activity. The proposed government impact that an outbreak of a major that the collector, distributor or contribution recognises: exotic disease such as foot and mouth trader ensures that any product disease (FMD) would have on New containing meat and intended for pig • the impact that a serious exotic Zealand agriculture and on the New food will be cooked before feeding animal disease such as foot and Zealand economy. mouth disease would have on the 3 using deterrent-level fines and a entire economy Submitters also commented on the substantial education programme to specific control measures listed in the encourage compliance • the difficulties of equitably collecting costs from other livestock industries discussion paper. 4 investigation of reported breaches; that benefit from the restrictions; and Possible package of measures and 5 support for industry initiatives to A package of measures has been • the difficulty of identifying and develop and promote guidelines to designed in response to the gaining financial contributions from assist industry to comply (and submissions. The measures recognise those people who add to the risk. demonstrate compliance) with the small and backyard pig owners as the Don Crump, MAF Policy, proposed regulations, and a group that present the greatest risk of phone 04 498 9849, introducing foot and mouth disease via voluntary farm registration system. fax 04 474 4265, infected food waste fed to pigs. It is MAF has discussed the package with [email protected] suggested the Government would meet industry representatives, through the the costs of education and enforcement Animal Biosecurity Consultative and that compliance costs would be met Committee, and directly with the New by industry. Zealand Pork Industry Board.

Veterinary diagnostic labs change hands Gribbles Veterinary Pathology NZ Pty specifications that MAF has developed • technical procedure standards Ltd has purchased the Labworks and in partnership with the laboratories’ staff • disease investigation reporting LabNet veterinary diagnostic define the minimum quality standards requirements laboratories previously owned by for the services that we purchase. • minimum case throughput AgriQuality New Zealand Limited. Auditing systems ensure that services are requirements delivered to those expectations. Gribbles Veterinary Pathology NZ Pty • quality system requirements. Ltd is a wholly owned subsidiary of The MAF purchases animal disease Regular audits Gribbles Group Ltd, an Australasian surveillance information from veterinary laboratory business listed on the diagnostic laboratories according to the MAF-approved laboratories undergo Australian Stock Exchange. Standard for MAF Biosecurity Authority regular audits to assure the Ministry that Approved Veterinary Diagnostic they continue to meet the requirements MAF is now purchasing animal disease Laboratories. All contracted providers of of the standard. Failure to do so results surveillance information from two veterinary diagnostic laboratory services in application of remedial measures suppliers, Gribbles Veterinary Pathology to MAF must comply with this standard. specified in the contracts. and Alpha Scientific. Included within the standard Since the Standard for MAF Biosecurity Systems ensure high quality specifications are: Authority Approved Veterinary Diagnostic services • minimum technical competency Laboratories was first developed, there has The standards and contract requirements been a demonstrable improvement in the

18 Biosecurity Issue 36 • 15 June 2002 Imports of honey bee hive products and used beekeeping equipment The draft risk analysis for the The import risk analysis has shown that do not jeopardise this programme. The importation of honey bee hive products all hive products and used beekeeping risk analysis recommends that honey and used beekeeping equipment, and equipment can harbour the bacteria and royal jelly must be certified to the draft import health standard based (Melissococcus pluton) which cause this ensure they do not contain a on this risk analysis, will soon be disease. Treatment measures such as concentration of spores (50,000 available for public consultation. gamma irradiation and heat can be spores/litre) which is likely to establish used to enable safe importation of an infection. The risk analysis covers honey, royal some products. jelly, bee-collected pollen, propolis, Consultation bees’ wax and used beekeeping Royal jelly risk analysis update The documents are posted on the MAF equipment. It has been subjected to website and notifications have been sent In Biosecurity 34:9 (15 March 2002) we domestic and international peer review to the National Beekeepers’ Association, reported that a risk analysis for royal jelly and now provides the basis to the NBA regional branch secretaries, the was being fast-tracked following the accompanying draft import health Honey Exporters Joint Action Group, discovery of European foulbrood in an standard. the Honey Packers Association and import of bulk unprocessed royal jelly. The importers of honey bee products. Pests and diseases of risk analysis and draft import health importance standard referred to here identify measures Submissions close New Zealand is free from the serious that enable the safe importation of bulk on 26 August 2002 Jessie Chan, Technical Adviser, disease of honey bee larvae, European unprocessed royal jelly. International Animal Trade, foulbrood (EFB).The disease is present American foulbrood (AFB) is a disease phone 04 498 9897, in all major beekeeping areas of the of honey bee larvae that is present in fax 04 474 4133, world, including Australia. [email protected] New Zealand but is under official If EFB were to become established in control through a pest management New Zealand, beekeepers would strategy managed by the National probably need to feed antibiotics to Beekeepers’ Association. Under the rules colonies to control the disease. This governing international trade, New could create trade implications for Zealand therefore intends to put in place honey and royal jelly exports. restrictions to ensure imported products

technical competence that underpins the diagnostic laboratories contracted to MAF Biosecurity Authority. International Animal Trade team MAF will continue to use the Jennie Brunton joined Animal Biosecurity’s specifications of this standard to ensure International Animal Trade team as a technical that the contracted laboratories operate adviser in April. Jennie, who grew up on a deer to international best practice. The farm near Te Anau, graduated with a Bachelor linkage between Gribbles Veterinary of Science in Zoology and a Postgraduate Pathology NZ Pty Ltd and its parent Diploma in Marine Science from Otago company will provide another avenue University in 2000. by which this can be assessed. Before joining MAF, Jennie worked as a veterinary nurse in both small and farm Allen Bryce, Programme Manager, animal practices. Surveillance and Response, Her speciality portfolio in the International phone 04 470 2787, Animal Trade team is ruminants, ensuring that fax 04 474 4133, exports of deer, sheep, goats and cattle etc [email protected] meet the requirements of importing countries. Jennie Brunton.

Biosecurity Issue 37 • 1 August 2002 19 Zealand’s veterinary agreement with the European Union so the certification requirements are quite different to those found in other import health standards.

New import health standards The draft standards are for: • bovine meat (beef) for human • horse meat for human Specified products for human consumption containing dairy consumption consumption products, eggs or meat • casings for human • lard and rendered fats for The latest version of this standard is dated 19 May 2002. consumption (derived from human consumption (derived The 7 May 2002 amendments to this standard relate to bone pigs) from cattle, deer, goats, pigs in meat. The previous standard required that cooked meat • pig blood products (derived and sheep) products from any country must be free of bone. A risk from low risk materials) for • mammalian game trophies assessment was carried out and the standard was amended to pharmaceutical or technical use • marine fisheries products for allow bone-in meat products, which must be canned and • cattle, deer, horse and pig human consumption subjected to a thermal treatment of Fo3 or greater in the bone. by-products (derived from • pig meat for human Fo3 is a recognised retort industry specification and refers to low risk materials) for consumption pharmaceutical use, technical the equivalent of 121˚C for 3 minutes. • processed (rendered) animal use or petfood The 19 May amendments corrected typographical errors. protein fish meal and poultry • cattle, goat, sheep, pig or meal) for animal feed Cooked fresh water fish for human consumption from all deer hides and skin countries • processed (rendered) • cervine (deer) meat for mammalian protein derived The amendment clarifies requirements for processing shelf human consumption from low risk material for stable hermetically sealed fish products. The new IHS is dated • commercial consignments further processing into 23 May 2002 and replaces the one dated 21 May 1999. of fresh/frozen/processed petfood Ornamental fish and marine invertebrates from all countries salmonids for human • processed petfood consumption The list of fish species that are not permitted to be imported • rabbit meat • fish-eggs-roe into New Zealand has been removed to prevent confusion. • sheep and goat meat • heat treated (pasteurised) The standard now contains only a list of fish species that are • inedible lard and rendered fat milk and milk products for permitted to be imported. The new IHS is dated 24 May 2002 (derived from cattle, goats, human consumption and replaces the one dated 5 December 2001. horses, sheep, pigs and deer). • heat treated milk and milk Dairy products for human consumption from the UK products not for human This standard has been amended to allow importation of dairy consumption products that were sourced prior to the UK being declared free Veterinary agreement of foot and mouth disease. The amendment allows for heat The European Community member states are Austria, Belgium, treatment of the products, as was the situation during the foot Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Ireland, and mouth outbreak in the UK but not included when the Luxembourg, The Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and the standard was re-issued following recognition of FMD freedom. United Kingdom. The veterinary agreement recognises that The new IHS is dated 20 June 2002 and replaces the one European Community animal and/or public health legislation dated 24 January 2002. delivers guarantees equivalent to those required by New Processed pig meat products for human consumption from Zealand legislation. (The agreement gives similar recognition for the USA New Zealand animal products exports.) Therefore, the draft The new standard recognises that cooking by microwave to a import health standards must be considered in conjunction with minimum core temperature of 88ºC for a minimum of 60 seconds the relevant European Community legislation. Contact Jennie is equivalent to current requirements. The new IHS is dated 20 Brunton for the relevant European Union legislation. June 2002 and replaces the one dated 31 August 2001. Jennie Brunton, Technical Adviser, International Animal Trade, Kerry Mulqueen, National Adviser, Import Management, phone 04 474 4116, fax 04 474 4227, [email protected] phone 04 498 9624, fax 04 474 4132, [email protected] www.maf.govt.nz/biosecurity/consultation.htm www.maf.govt.nz/animal-imports Draft import health standards for Codes of ethical conduct – approvals, consultation notifications and revocations since Animal products from the European Union the last issue of Biosecurity Draft import health standards for animal products from the All organisations involved in the use of live animals for European Union are available for public comment. The draft research, testing or teaching are required to adhere to an standards were developed within the provisions of New approved code of ethical conduct.

20 Biosecurity Issue 37 • 1 August 2002 Codes of ethical conduct approved: Nil Cost recovery for facilitating export Amendments to codes of ethical conduct approved: of live animals and animal germplasm • AgResearch Ltd MAF is inviting submissions on a discussion paper that outlines Notifications to MAF of minor amendments to codes of ethical options for the recovery of MAF’s costs in providing official conduct: Nil assurances for the export of live animals and animal germplasm. Notifications to MAF of arrangements to use an existing code Options include: of ethical conduct • a fixed fee per export certificate • Novartis Animal Health Australasia Pty Ltd (to use the AgResearch Ltd code and the Ruakura Animal Ethics • unit fees; and Committee) • hourly rates. • Parnell Laboratories NZ Ltd (extension of arrangement with The resultant fees and charges will be set by regulations under AgResearch Ltd (Ruakura AEC) to cover all New Zealand) the Animal Products Act 1999. Codes of ethical conduct revoked or arrangements terminated: This discussion paper has been distributed to all registered • Agriculture New Zealand Ltd (Rangiora) exporters of animals and animal germplasm and official Approvals by the Director-General of MAF for the use of veterinarians, and publicly released via the media. non-human hominids: Nil The closing date for submissions is Friday 16 August 2002. Approvals by the Minister of Agriculture of research or testing Late submissions will not be accepted. Submissions should in the national interest: Nil be addressed to: Linda Carsons, Senior Policy Adviser, Animal Welfare, Ivan Rowe, MAF Policy, phone 04 498 9868, phone 04 470 2746, fax 04 498 9888, [email protected] fax 04-474 4265, [email protected] Animal welfare publications available www.maf.govt.nz/biosecurity/consultation.htm Annual reports Attack on painted apple moth The 2001 annual reports for both the National Animal Welfare continues Advisory Committee (NAWAC) and the National Animal Ethics In early July Cabinet decided that the painted apple moth aerial Advisory Committee (NAEAC) were published recently. NAWAC spraying programme should continue while further information advises the Minister of Agriculture on the welfare of animals was gathered on two options. These are: while NAEAC provides the Minister with independent advice on 1. to expand the sprayed area to some 8000 hectares in an ethical and welfare issues arising from the use of live animals in all-out effort to eradicate the pest; or research, testing and teaching. 2. move to a long-term management option to contain the spread. Guide on codes of ethical conduct A paper will go to Cabinet in August. In the meantime the spray The National Animal Ethics Advisory Committee has issued a area has been expanded from about 600 to 900 hectares. This guide to assist those preparing a code of ethical conduct for allows the flexibility to quickly respond in areas where there are consideration by NAEAC and approval by MAF. new larval finds. If you would like a copy of any of these documents, contact: Ian Gear, Acting Director, Forest Biosecurity Pam Edwards, Executive Coordinator Animal Welfare, phone 04 470 2744, fax 04 498 9888, [email protected] phone 04 474 4129, fax 04 498 9888, www.maf.govt.nz/painted-apple-moth [email protected] www.maf.govt.nz/animal-welfare Amended import health standards for seed Draft code of welfare for layer hens – The import health standards for Pinus species and Douglas Fir new date for public consultation (P.seudotsuga menziesii) seed for sowing were amended on The National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (NAWAC) 10 July 2002 to remove Chile from the list of countries or areas wishes to advise that a code of welfare for layer hens has been considered by MAF to be free of Pine Pitch Canker (Fusarium drafted to replace the Code of Recommendations and Minimum circinatum). Seed collected from trees of Pinus species or Standards for Layer Hens, which was deemed as a code of Pseudotsuga menziesii in Chile must now meet the import welfare under the Animal Welfare Act 1999. The draft code was requirements for areas potentially affected by Pine Pitch Canker. released for public consultation on 17 July 2002 and the Both amended standards are available on the MAF web site (below). consultation period will close on 28 August 2002. Copies are Dr Michael Ormsby, National Adviser Import Health Standards available on the website (see below) or at public libraries. Forest Biosecurity Wayne Ricketts, National Adviser Animal Welfare, phone 04 474 4100, fax 04 470 2741, phone 04 474 4276, fax 04 474 4133, [email protected] [email protected] www.maf.govt.nz/animal-welfare www.maf.govt.nz/biosecurity/forest-imports

Biosecurity Issue 37 • 1 August 2002 21 New organism records: 18/05/02 – 28/06/02

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 18/05/02 – 28/06/02, and held in the Plant Pest Information Network (PPIN) database. Wherever possible, common names have been included. PLANTS BIOSECURITY RECORDS 18/05/02 – 28/06/02 Validated new to New Zealand reports: No new to New Zealand records in this period. New host reports Organism Host Location Submitted by Comment Alternaria brassicae Brassica juncea Auckland National Plant Pest Other PPIN hosts include courgette, Chinese cabbage and radish. (alternaria leaf spot) (Indian mustard) Reference Laboratory (NPPRL) Aphelenchoides fragariae Salvia taraxacifolia Auckland NPPRL This nematode has a wide geographic distribution and host range. (foliar nematode) (dandelion sage), Primula florindae (Tibetan primrose), Eryngium giganteum (giant sea holly, Schrebera alata, Scabiosa lucida and Helleborus foetidus (stinking hellebore). Aphelenchoides ritzemabosi Levisticum officinale Auckland NPPRL This nematode has a wide geographic distribution and host range. (chrysanthemum foliar (lovage), Salvia aurita, nematode) S. trijuga and Geranium maderense. Botryosphaeria parva Leucadendron sp. Bay of Plenty NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include mandarin, avocado, apple, grape, kiwifruit, (botryosphaeria rot) (no common name) nashi, pear, loquat, chestnut, rhododendron, Japanese plum, peach, feijoa, blueberry and tamarillo. Botryosphaeria sp. Actinidia arguta Mid Canterbury NPPRL This genus of fungus has a very wide host range and geographic (botryosphaeria canker) (kiwifruit) distribution. Botryotinia fuckeliana Panax quinquefolium Dunedin NPPRL This fungus has a very wide host range and geographic distribution. (botrytis blight) (American ginseng) Crocus sativus (saffron) North Canterbury NPPRL Cephaleuros sp. Feijoa sellowiana Auckland NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include passionfruit, avocado and climbing fig. (algal leaf spot) (feijoa) Cercospora apii Limonium sinuatum Auckland NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include creeping mallow, hawksbeard and Mercury (cercospora leaf spot) (blue statice) Bay weed. Chrysanthemum segetum Waikato NPPRL (corn marigold) Ceroplastes destructor Pseudopanax discolor Auckland NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include Citrus spp. and kiwifruit. (soft wax scale) (no common name) Colletotrichum acutatum Leucadendron sp. Bay of Plenty NPPRL This fungus has a very wide host range. (anthracnose) (no common name) Colletotrichum coccodes Eruca vesicaria ssp. Auckland NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include tomato, tamarillo, potato cucurbits, eggplant, (anthracnose, black dot) sativa (rocket) white clover, chrysanthemum, and capsicum. Oxalis tuberosa (oca, yam) Southland NPPRL Diploceras hypericinum Hypericum androsaemum Auckland NPPRL No other hosts recorded in PPIN. (no common name) (tutsan) Erwinia herbicola Vitis vinifera (grape) Gisborne NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include kiwifruit, apricot, feijoa, Japanese plum, (bacterial rot, bacterial grape, avocado, pumpkin and passionfruit. soft rot) Fusarium culmorum Malus sylvestris var. Nelson NPPRL This species has a wide host range and geographic distribution. (fusarium root rot) domestica (apple) Paeonia sp. (peony rose) Central Otago NPPRL Fusarium oxysporum Juglans regia (walnut) Mid Canterbury NPPRL This species has a wide host range and geographic distribution. (black root rot complex) Paeonia sp.(peony rose) Nelson NPPRL Prunus avium Marlborough NPPRL (sweet cherry) Gibberella avenacea Tanacetum parthenium Mid Canterbury NPPRL This species has a wide host range and geographic distribution. (foot rot, root rot) (feverfew) Gibberella gordonia Vitis vinifera (grape) Gisborne NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include honeydew melon, bean, perennial ryegrass, (fusarium blight) wheat, potato, pea, hazelnut, olive, passionfruit, feijoa raspberry, persimmon, kiwifruit, and tamarillo. Meloidogyne hapla Clematis sp. (clematis) Mid Canterbury NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include tamarillo, pea, tomato, kiwifruit, onion, celery, (Northern root knot rose, carrot, garlic, potato, avocado and feijoa. nematode) Nectria cinnabarina Albizia julibrissin Mid Canterbury NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include kiwifruit, apple, Prunus spp., pear, (coral spot) (silk tree) rose and carnation.

Nectria haematococca Juglans regia, (walnut), Nelson NPPRL (dry rot, root rot) Malus sylvestris var. domestica, (apple) This fungus has a wide host range and geographic distribution. Crocus sativus, (saffron) North Canterbury NPPRL

22 Biosecurity Issue 37 • 1 August 2002 PLANTS BIOSECURITY RECORDS 18/05/02 – 28/06/02 continued New host reports Organism Host Location Submitted by Comment Nectria radicicola var. Actinidia deliciosa Bay of Plenty NPPRL No other hosts recorded in PPIN. macroconidialis (kiwifruit) (cylindrocarpon rot) Nectria tawa Panax quinquefolium Dunedin NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include Lilium sp., peony, grape and rhododendron. (no common name) (American ginseng) Phoma sp. Tanacetum parthenium Mid Canterbury NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include kiwifruit, onion, olive, asparagus, Capsicum spp., (phoma rot, phoma leaf spot) (feverfew) Citrus sp., cucurbits, nashi, tamarillo, carrot, yam, persimmon, feijoa, apple, Dicksonia antarctica Nelson NPPRL strawberry, gentian, pear, tomato, Narcissus sp., passionfruit, avocado, (soft tree fern) wheat, grape, Prunus spp., azalea, potato, blueberry, pansy and peony. Phomopsis sp. Forsythia sp. (forsythia) Wairarapa NPPRL Other PPIN hosts for this genus include grape, pea, kiwifruit, (no common name) passionfruit, rye, tamarillo, Citrus sp., Prunus spp., apple, feijoa, persimmon, chestnut, blueberry, and olive. Pseudomonas corrugata Vitis vinifera (grape) Gisborne NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include tomato. (stem bacteriosis) Pseudomonas fluorescens Tanacetum parthenium Mid Canterbury NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include capsicum, garden pea, potato, onion, primrose, (no common name) (feverfew), Eustoma black passionfruit, yam, tamarillo, carrot, tomato, and blackcurrant. grandiflorum, (lisianthus), Cichorium intybus, (chicory) Panax quinquefolium Dunedin NPPRL (American ginseng) Pseudomonas marginalis Panax quinquefolium Dunedin NPPRL Other PPIN Hosts include tomato, rose, kiwifruit, onion, leek, carrot, (bacterial rot, pink eye) (American ginseng) potato and yam. Oxalis tuberosa (oca, yam) Southland NPPRL Pseudomonas viridiflava Oxalis tuberosa (oca, yam) Southland NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include kiwifruit, grape, cucurbits, tomato, (bacterial rot, leaf spot) Tanacetum parthenium Mid Canterbury NPPRL passionfruit, rose, Prunus spp., runner bean, pea, onion, blueberry, (feverfew) capsicum, radish, carrot and chicory. Forsythia sp. (forsythia) Wairarapa NPPRL Pyrenophora erythrospila Caryota sp. Auckland NPPRL No other hosts recorded in PPIN. (no common name) (fishtail palm) Pythium sp. Paeonia sp.(peony rose) North Canterbury NPPRL This genus of fungus has a very wide host range and geographic (pythium root rot) Juglans regia (walnut) Nelson NPPRL distribution. Castanea sativa (chestnut) Mid Canterbury NPPRL Ramularia coleosporii Senecio bipinnatisectus Auckland NPPRL Other PPIN hosts include German ivy. (ramularia) Australian fireweed Extension to distribution reports Organism Host Location Submitted by Comment Pulvinaria Disphyma australe Wellington Landcare Research Other PPIN distributions include Mid Canterbury and Three Kings mesembryanthemi (Maori ice plant, New Islands. (ice plant scale) Zealand ice plant) Plants records: George Gill, Technical Adviser, Pest Management, MAF Plants Biosecurity, phone 04 470 2742, fax 04 474 4257, [email protected] FOREST BIOSECURITY RECORDS 18/05/02 – 28/06/02 Validated new to New Zealand reports Organism Host Location Submitted by Comment Neopolycystus insectifurax Paropsis charybdis Taupo Landcare Research N. insectifurax was reportedly released in New Zealand against (no common name) (eucalyptus tortoise beetle) P.charybdis around ten years ago, but has not been reported to have established. Recent examination of voucher specimens of the original importation show that they represent another species of Neopolycystus, not N.insectifurax.

New host reports Organism Host Location Submitted by Comment Cephaleuros virescens Metrosideros Auckland Forest Research Other PPIN hosts include passionfruit and saw banksia. (algal leaf spot, red rust) kermadecensis (Kermadec pohutakawa) Pythium sp. (cavity spot, Taxus sp. Mid Canterbury National Plant Pest Genus Pythium have been recorded on wide range of hosts in PPIN. damping-off, pythium root (yew) Reference Laboratory rot, pythium rot, root rot) Gibberella avenacea Taxus sp. Mid Canterbury National Plant Pest Other PPIN hosts include kiwifruit, onion, arnica, asparagus, aster, oats, (foot rot, root rot) (yew) Reference Laboratory boronia, capsicum, kaka beak, chestnut, florist’s chrysanthemum, peony, watermelon, hazelnut, cucumber, pumpkin, carrot, carnation, persimmon, strawberry, gentian, gypsophila, barley, Chinese juniper, ryegrass, apple, narcissus, olive, yam, scarlet runner bean, runner bean, pea, apricot, nectarine, Japanese plum, pear, rhododendron, sweet brier, rose, boysenberry, sandersonia, rye, potato, wheat, broad bean, and grape. Phoma sp. (phoma rot, Abies pindrow Mid Canterbury National Plant Pest Genus Phoma have been recorded on wide range of hosts in PPIN. phoma leaf spot) (West Himalayan fir) Reference Laboratory Pestalotiopsis versicolor Abies pindrow Mid Canterbury National Plant Pest Other PPIN hosts include avocado, Chilean nut, blueberry, kiwifruit, (pestalotiopsis) (West Himalayan fir) Reference Laboratory feijoa, persimmon, passionfruit, blackcurrant, radiata pine, leucospermum, Eucalyptus sp. and black beech.

Continued on back cover

Biosecurity Issue 37 • 1 August 2002 23 Continued from inside back cover

FOREST BIOSECURITY RECORDS 18/05/02 – 28/06/02 New host reports Organism Host Location Submitted by Comment Gibberella baccata Abies pindrow Mid Canterbury National Plant Pest Other PPIN hosts include mandarin, apple, New Zealand grapefruit, (branch dieback, branch rot, (West Himalayan fir) Reference Laboratory tomato, lemon, apricot, grape, passionfruit, persimmon, orange, canker, false coral spot) kiwifruit, pear, nashi, tangelo, pea, cucumber, carnation, peach, loquat, Citrus sp., feijoa, banksian rose, babaco, gypsophila, oat, wheat, bean, Japanese plum, potato, carrot, avocado, strawberry, blueberry, asparagus, elm and cabbage tree. Gibberella baccata Taxus sp. Mid Canterbury National Plant Other PPIN hosts include mandarin, apple, New Zealand grapefruit, (branch dieback, branch (yew) Pest Reference tomato, lemon, apricot, grape, passionfruit, persimmon, orange, rot, canker, false coral spot) Laboratory kiwifruit, pear, nashi, tangelo, pea, cucumber, carnation, peach, loquat, Citrus sp., feijoa, banksian rose, babaco, gypsophila, oat, wheat, bean, Japanese plum, potato, carrot, avocado, strawberry, blueberry, asparagus, elm and cabbage tree. Phoma sp. Taxus sp. Mid Canterbury National Plant Genus Phoma have been recorded on wide range of hosts in PPIN. (phoma rot, phoma leaf (yew) Pest Reference spot) Laboratory Nambouria xanthops Eucalyptus ovata Coromandel Forest Research Other PPIN hosts include Tasmanian blue gum and Manna gum. (no common name) (no common name) Prionoplus reticularis Cupressus lusitanica Bay of Plenty Forest Research Other PPIN hosts include poplar. Wide host range. (huhu beetle) (Mexican cypress) Prionoplus reticularis Cupressocyparis x Bay of Plenty Forest Research Other PPIN hosts include poplar. (huhu beetle) leylandii (no common name) Nectria tawa Pinus radiata Dunedin National Plant Pest Other PPIN hosts include Lilium sp., peony, grape and rhododendron. (no common name) (monterey pine, pine, Reference Laboratory radiata pine) Extension to distribution reports Organism Host Location Submitted by Comment Callidiopsis scutellaris Eucalyptus nitens North Canterbury Forest Research No other distributions are recorded in PPIN. (no common name) (shining gum, silvertop) Nambouria xanthops Eucalyptus ovata Coromandel Forest Research Other PPIN distributions include Auckland. (no common name) (no common name) Uromycladium alpinum Acacia mearnsii Rangitikei Forest Research Other PPIN distributions include Hawke’s Bay. (acacia rust) (black wattle, brush wattle) Mycosphaerella suberosa Eucalyptus globulus Coromandel Forest Research No other distributions recorded in PPIN. (no common name) (blue gum, Tasmanian blue gum) Mycosphaerella suberosa Eucalyptus globulus ssp. Bay of Plenty Forest Research No other distributions recorded in PPIN. (no common name) maidenii (Maiden’s gum) Trachymela sloanei Eucalyptus nitens Rangitikei Forest Research Other PPIN distributions include Marlborough Sounds (small eucalyptus tortoise (shining gum, silvertop) and Marlborough. beetle) Neoptemnopteryx fulva Swimming pool Bay of Plenty National Plant Pest No other distributions recorded in PPIN. (no common name) Reference Laboratory Forest records: Ian Gear, Acting Director MAF Forest Biosecurity,phone 04 470 2744, fax 04 498 9888, [email protected] ANIMAL BIOSECURITY RECORDS 18/05/02 – 28/06/02 No new to New Zealand reports

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