Final Report of a Mission Carried out in Greece from 02 to 10 February
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
EUROPEAN COMMISSION HEALTH AND CONSUMERS DIRECTORATE-GENERAL Directorate F - Food and Veterinary Office Ares(2010)438607 DG(SANCO) 2010-8609 - MR FINAL FINAL REPORT OF A MISSION CARRIED OUT IN GREECE FROM 02 TO 10 FEBRUARY 2010 IN ORDER TO EVALUATE THE STATUS OF PROTECTED ZONES IN GREECE (FOLLOW- UP), THE GENERAL SYSTEM OF SURVEILLANCE FOR HARMFUL ORGANISMS AND THE SITUATION AND CONTROLS FOR RHYNCHOPHORUS FERRUGINEUS (FOLLOW- UP) In response to information provided by the Competent Authority, any factual error noted in the draft report has been corrected; any clarification appears in the form of a footnote. Executive Summary This report describes the outcome of a mission carried out by the Food and Veterinary Office in Greece from 2 to 10 February 2010. The objectives of the mission were to evaluate the actions taken by Greece in response to the recommendations of mission report DG(SANCO)/2009/8146 regarding protected zones, the general system of surveillance for harmful organisms, and the actions taken by Greece in response to the recommendations of mission report DG(SANCO)/2009/8146 and mission report DG(SANCO)/2009/8353 regarding Rhynchophorus ferrugineus. Since the last FVO mission on protected zones Greece has made significant progress. The Single Authority (SA) has put in place a general system for co-coordinating, planning the official surveys and compiling their results which were duly notified to the Commission and the other Member States. Nowadays, this system is based on an adequate methodology, and supported by laboratory analyses. However, the fact that a minority of Prefectures have not implemented or have only partly implemented the survey plan means that the national survey did not confirm that the relevant harmful organisms are not endemic or established in certain areas of the protected zone. In addition, the movement of articles within the protected zone is still not always in compliance with EU legislation. Greece has also put in place a system of surveillance for other harmful organisms, amongst which are harmful organisms subject to EU emergency measures. This system is generally appropriate but at the moment it does not deal with Anoplophora chinenis, which is not in compliance with the EU requirements. Since the two last FVO missions on this subject, Greece has made efforts to improve the survey and the control measures for R. ferrugineus. These efforts were made both by the SA and the Prefectures. However the improvements in the control measures do not compensate for the significant delay in cutting and destroying the infested trees, which means that these measures cannot be considered as “appropriate measures aiming at eradication”. Also, the deficiencies in reporting the survey results and in notifying immediately any significant development of the situation, such as new Prefectures or a new plant species found infested, have prevented the Commission and the other Member States from having an accurate picture of the situation in 2008 and 2009. Recommendations are made in the report to address the shortcomings found. I Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................1 2 OBJECTIVES OF THE MISSION .................................................................................................1 3 LEGAL BASIS FOR THE MISSION ................................................................................................2 4 BACKGROUND ..........................................................................................................................2 5 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................................2 5.1 COMPETENT AUTHORITIES ...............................................................................................................2 5.2 PROTECTED ZONES ........................................................................................................................2 5.2.1 SPECIFIC BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................2 5.2.2 SYSTEMATIC OFFICIAL SURVEY ....................................................................................................3 5.2.3 INTERNAL MARKET CONTROL AND PLANT PASSPORTING .....................................................................7 5.2.4 GENERAL CONCLUSION FOR PROTECTED ZONES .............................................................................8 5.3 SYSTEM OF SURVEILLANCE FOR HARMFUL ORGANISMS ..........................................................................9 5.3.1 PURPOSE OF SURVEILLANCE ......................................................................................................9 5.3.2 ORGANISATION OF THE SURVEY ................................................................................................10 5.3.3 SURVEY IMPLEMENTATION .......................................................................................................11 5.3.4 DATA HANDLING AND REPORTING ..............................................................................................11 5.3.5 GENERAL CONCLUSION ON THE GENERAL SYSTEM OF SURVEILLANCE FOR HARMFUL ORGANISMS .............11 5.4 RHYNCHOPHORUS FERRUGINEUS .....................................................................................................12 5.4.1 SPECIFIC BACKGROUND ..........................................................................................................12 5.4.2 SPECIFIC LEGISLATION ...........................................................................................................12 5.4.3 SURVEYS .............................................................................................................................12 5.4.4 CONTROL MEASURES IN CASE OF OUTBREAKS ..............................................................................14 5.4.5 CONTROL OF INTERNAL MOVEMENTS AND IMPORT CONTROLS ..........................................................20 5.4.6 GENERAL CONCLUSION FOR RHYNCHOPHORUS FERRUGINEUS ........................................................21 6 OVERALL CONCLUSIONS .........................................................................................................21 7 CLOSING MEETING ................................................................................................................21 8 RECOMMENDATIONS ...............................................................................................................21 ANNEX 1 - LEGAL REFERENCES .................................................................................................24 II ABBREVIATIONS AND DEFINITIONS USED IN THIS REPORT Abbreviation Explanation BPI Benaki Phytopathological institute CTV Citrus Tristeza Virus EU European Union FSP Forest Service of the Prefecture FVO Food and Veterinary Office ISPM International Standard for Phytosanitary Measure MRDF Ministry of Rural Development and Food NAGREF Institute of Mediterranean Forest Ecosystems of the National Agricultural Research Foundation RDDP Rural Development Directorates of Agriculture of the Prefecture SA Single Authority III 1 INTRODUCTION The mission took place in Greece from 2 to 10 February 2010 as a part of the Food and Veterinary Office's (FVO) planned mission programme. The mission team consisted of two inspectors from the FVO and a national expert from a Member State and was accompanied by representatives of the Single Authority (SA) throughout the mission. An opening meeting was held on 2 February 2010 at the headquarters of the Department of Phytosanitary Control of the Directorate of Plant Produce Protection, in the Hellenic Ministry of Rural Development and Food (MRDF) in Athens during which the objectives and itinerary for the mission were confirmed. A closing meeting was held at the headquarters of the MRDF in Athens on 10 February 2010. 2 OBJECTIVES OF THE MISSION The objectives of the mission were: -to evaluate the actions taken by Greece in response to the recommendations of mission report DG(SANCO)/2009/8146 regarding protected zones; -to evaluate the general system of surveillance for harmful organisms; -to evaluate the actions taken by Greece in response to the recommendations of mission report DG(SANCO)/2009/8146 and mission report DG(SANCO)/2009/8353 regarding Rhynchophorus ferrugineus. In pursuit of these objectives, the following sites were visited: Competent Authorities N° Comments Single Authority Central 1 Departement of Phytosanitary Control of MRDF Other responsible bodies Prefectures 6 Drama, Eastern Attica, Halkidiki, Heraklion, Ilia, Serres, Plant health Nurseries or garden centres 4 Drama: 2, Halkidiki: 1, Serres: 1 Saw mills 1 Serres:1 Outbbreaks sites R. ferrugineus 7 Eastern Attica : 2, Ilia : 4, Heraklion: 1 In addition, representatives of the Prefectures of Dodecanese and Lasithi were interviewed. Definitions of terms used in this report are contained in Article 2 of Directive 2000/29/EC. In addition, the following terms are used in this report: Harmful organisms - refers to those pests and diseases listed in Annexes I and II of Directive 2000/29/EC and other pests and diseases not listed, but considered to be of quarantine status; 1 and according to the International Standard for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPM) N° 5 : Surveillance – official process which collects and records data on pest occurence or absence by survey, monitoring or other procedures; Survey – official