2.2.1. The responsibilities of phytosanitary services
2.2.2. Safeguards against LGB
The relevant Government Minister may make Plant Quarantine regulations enabling the provisions and purposes of the Plant Quarantine act to be carred out; and in particular may make regulations:
1) to prohibit or restrict the importation into the country of:· any plant material likely to carry pests; or
· any soil, packaging or other thing likely to carry pests; or
· any pest;2) to prescribe conditions for the importation of plant material or beneficial organisms into the country, including the manner of application for, and the form and contents of, a permit under the relevant section of the Act;
3) to prescribe the manner and form of declaration to be made by persons arriving the country;
4) to provide for the manner of given notice of the arrival in the country of things to which this Act applies;
5) to provide for masters of conveyances to give information and carry out precautions;
6) to provide for the manner of inspection, detection, treatment, destruction, reshipment or other disposal of any imported plant material, soil, packaging, pest or other thing;
7) to provide for the manner in which, and the conditions subject to which, quarantine stations and post-entry quarantine stations shall be used;
8) to provide for the control of plant material kept or grown in isolation other than in a quarantine station or post-entry quarantine station;
9) to provide the registration of persons importing propagative material;
10) to prescribe the manner of importation into the country of any thing for research purposes under the relevant sections of the Act;
11) to declare any part or parts of the country infested by a quarantine pest to be a quarantine area, and to provide for a buffer zone around such area;
12) to prohibit or restrict the movement of any plant material, conveyances, soil, tools, packaging or other things likely to carry pests from a quarantine area;
13) to prohibit or restrict the growing of specified plants;
14) to prescribe the treatment to be adopted in respect of any plant material which is infested by a quarantine pest;
15) to provide for the clearing or other treatment of conveyances, machinery, tools, equipment, clothing or other things which may have come into contact with a quarantine pest;
16) to provide for the manner in which plant material, soil and packaging shall be treated, cleaned, destroyed or otherwise disposed of;
17) to provide for the registration of producers of plant material for export;
18) to prescribe the treatment of plant material before export;
19) to provide for the issue of phytosanitary certificates;
20) to provide for the appointment of advisory bodies;
21) to prescribe the matters for which fees shall be payable under the Plant Quarantine Act, the amount of those fees, and the method of their payment and recovery;
22) to provide for the circumstances in which compensation may be paid for the destruction or other disposal of any thing under the provisions of the Plant Quarantine Act, and for the manner of assessment of such compensation and the method of its payment;
23) to provide for the manner by which any notice to the public under the Plant Quarantine Act may he given;
24) to provide for the making of rules and orders under the Plant Quarantine Act.
In order to protect agricultural production and trade as well as the livelihoods of producers and traders from damaging pests and diseases, countries introduce various forms of Plant Protection and Phytosanitary Control legislation. The aim of much of this legislation is to prevent the transmission or carriage of pests and diseases from one country to another. The necessity for this is recognised internationally by agreements and conventions under the auspices of FAO, such as the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC).¹
¹ The terms and conditions of trading contracts often recognize this necessity, and make contractual parties responsible for pest and disease, control.
The phytosanitary sections of Plant Protection Services are responsible for:
a) Preventing the introduction of plant pests (including pest of harvested stored products), pathogens and noxious weeds.b) Preventing their spread within the country.
c) Eradicating or controlling the pest when they are present. Phytosanitary Produce Inspectors must be trained to recognize and intercept a wide range of pests and diseases, recognize the damage that they cause and be able to organise control. The learning required is complex and they have to be kept up to date with relevant research findings. (Refer TDS #4)
Various measures are taken to prevent the introduction of pests and diseases into a country. The import of some plant materials may be totally prohibited. Others may be imported hut subject to a period of quarantine, or a special Plant Importation Permit (PIP). The PIP may require a declaration from the Plant Health Authority in the exporting country, that the parent crops were grown in a disease-free area, were inspected during the active growing season and found to he free from pests and diseases. (Refer TDS #5)
Most plant material may be imported as long as it is accompanied by an International Model Phytosanitary Certificate (PC), or its equivalent, which should detail any treatment which may have been applied in the exporting country. This treatment may be in response to a requirement laid down in the PIP or may have been required by the export regulations of the exporting country. A certificate recording a fumigation treatment may accompany the cargo documents.
In order to facilitate trade whilst maintaining the necessary protection of their agricultural industries, countries provide a staff of Plant Protection "subject specialists" (entomologists, plant pathologists etc.) and Plant Protection Inspectors, trained to detect and recognise pests and diseases, and who proscribe the necessary action or treatment. The average trader or clearing and forwarding (C+F) Agent cannot be expected to be able to detect and recognise the wide range of pests and diseases which put agriculture at risk. The problem will he increased as new entrepreneurs enter the trading systems during market liberalisation.
In the case of insect pests of foods traded and stored after harvest most have become cosmopolitan pests. Modern standards require that such pests should, nevertheless, he controlled to prevent damage and contamination of food during transport and storage.
Certain insects, including LGB, are potentially damaging to agriculture, food security and export trade that some countries have taken special powers to control them and to prevent their import. These are the critical quarantine pests. For example the Khapra Beetle (Trogoderma granarium), which is difficult to control and can cause loss of food value and bagstack collapse in central storage, is a pest proscribed by many countries e.g. USA, AUSTRALIA, MEXICO, TANZANIA, KENYA. Shipments from countries where the Khapra Beetle has been identified are prohibited entry unless they have been subjected to prescribed treatments, and are accompanied by Phytosanitary Certificates issued by trained Plant Health Inspectors. In the past, shipments which have been found infested with the Khapra Beetle in an uncontrollable situation e.g. in a ship, have been refused entry.
In order to facilitate the safe and orderly movement of traded commodities and to minimize the pest risk associated with such movement, proper safeguards should he implemented through the use of Plant Importation Permits, (PIP's) and Phytosanitary Certificates (PC's). The PIP is the instrument whereby governments assure that imported plants enter in accordance with the importing country's policies and regulations. The PC is an instrument issued by a recognized national plant quarantine officer of the exporting country, attesting to the tact that the plants or plant products were found to be substantially free from injurious pests and diseases, and that the consignment is believed to conform with the current phytosanitary regulations of the importing country. Nevertheless, the certificate was never meant to substitute for inspection upon arrival. Rather, the certificate serves as a means of lowering pest risk and doubles as an instrument to certify origin. (Refer TDS #5)
In general, information provided in the PC's accompanying maize shipments, are insufficient to judge whether the phytosanitary inspection or pest control treatment of the grain at the ports of export would minimize the transfer of live LGB (either as adults or pre-adult stages, including eggs) in the shipped consignments.
In the past importers, including donor organisations, have rarely requested pre-import PIP'S, which normally should be filed with the PC's. Without the issuance of PIP'S from the importing country, it is difficult for the inspection/plant quarantine services in the exporting country to forecast what sort of pre-export treatment and what additional declarations regarding quarantinable pests (based on up-to-date lists) would be required.
It is necessary to specify the conditions of pre-export fumigation in sufficient detail to ensure that control of LGB is achievable. Fumigation treatments applied to maize cargoes have recorded an exposure period to phosphine of 72 hours (3 days) as opposed to the recommended minimum exposure period of 120 hours (5 days). In such similar cases, rejection or re-fumigation of the consignment would be justifiable on the grounds that undetected live infestations may be present.
Additionally, rejection or re-fumigation of maize cargoes from areas known to have been, or still are LGB infested, can be justified if any live insect pests are found on arrival prior to unloading the vessel or vehicle. The presence of any live insects can be taken as sufficient indication that pre-export fumigation treatments were unsuccessful. There is a risk (perhaps minimal) that LGB may he present, but at such low numbers as to remain undetected by normal inspection procedures currently in use. Unless ships are inspected, certified free of insects and treated if necessary prior to loading, it cannot be assumed that this maybe the source of the infestation on arrival at destination. From the point of view of the Phytosanitary Inspector in the receiving port, the most satisfactory situation would be:
· All maize from areas where LGB is known to occur, should be fumigated at, or before shipment, irrespective of whether live infestation was detected or not, using an application method, exposure period and dosage rate known to be lethal to LGB. (See Chapter 3.2, these Guidelines).· Phytosanitary Certificates should record full details of the treatment applied, including records of gas concentrations measured during the exposure period, and most importantly, concentrations achieved at the completion of the exposure period, using reliable gas monitors.
· Ships holds should be certified free of live infestation prior to loading, and certificates to this effect issued to accompany the Phytosanitary Certificate presented on ships arrival at port of destination.
Further improvement, including the adherence to standardized Phytosanitary Control procedures is needed to prevent further accidental introductions, and more rapid intra-African spread of LGB. Procedures currently in force are unlikely to prevent this happening again.
The Larger Grain Borer should be classified as a "Critical Quarantine Pest" i.e. a pest of highest concern because it can cause economic loss and also lead to loss of market access for exports. Representations should be made to donors who provide maize from areas in which LGB has been identified, to follow these Phytosanitary guidelines which call for the routine treatment of maize before shipment. These procedures, designed mainly for African grain handling in bags, may be modified to take into account recent information on improved methods of insect control which have since been identified. For example a new method of bulk grain fumigation makes it possible to force gas distribution tubes into bulk grain already loaded in a ship's hold. (Refer TDS #12)
Cargoes found to be infested with LGB should not be brought ashore until an effective control treatment has been applied. The ship's holds should be closed and the space above the cargo fogged or sprayed with an appropriate insecticide whilst expert advice is sought on the most appropriate control method to be used. The results of a trial of new method of grain fumigation while it is still in the ship's hold indicate successful control of target insects. The same method could be considered for the treatment of maize discovered to be infested while it is being loaded into a hold at a port of shipment. (See Chapter 3.3)
Whenever ship-board fumigation of maize is practised, gas sampling of cargo spaces must he undertaken before discharge, to ensure the safety of customs and phytosanitary inspectors, surveyors, dockworkers and the ship's crew. The cargo spaces should also be analyzed for gas concentrations at the completion of the exposure period so that certification can be issued by those monitoring the success/failure of the fumigation. Maize which arrives from an LGB-infested area with a fumigation or phytosanitary certificate which records a treatment deemed to be insufficient to kill LGB (and other grain pests), must be refumigated at the correct dosage and exposure period on arrival. This treatment should be undertaken even if no live insects are found, although in this case, the grain could be treated after off-loading at the discretion of the Phytosanitary Inspector.
Samples taken from ships' cargoes originating in LGB endemic areas for breeding out should be kept in defined post-entry quarantine facilities. At the end of the test period the samples should be incinerated, fumigated, autoclaved or deep frozen before disposal. Heads of National Plant Protection Services of all countries should receive assistance to evaluate in detail the new responsibilities and resource needs of the services to provide protection against LGB. Consideration needs to be given to the needs of future liberalized market economies, when parastatal grain handling organizations, including their produce inspection and fumigation teams, have significantly reduced market operations. It is evident that the departmental staff require training in the detection and identification of stored products pests and in the evaluation of the effectiveness of appropriate control measures.
2.2.2.1 SENSIBLE PRECAUTIONS
To delay the spread of P. truncatus and reduce the associated food losses it is essential to take the following precautions.
For production areas not yet infested
To reduce the risk of spread to your country:
· require stocks of maize and cassava coming from areas known to have P. truncatus infestation to have a valid fumigation certificate;· ensure that quarantine officers are trained to recognize the pest and know what action should be taken against it; and
· ensure that the are rigorous inspection procedures at point of entry.
Be ready to deal with the pest:
· by undertaking regular surveys in areas where the risk of introduction is high. Pheromone-baited traps should be used for this task; and· by ensuring that extension workers and plant protection agents are made aware of the problem and are ready to advise farmers on methods to reduce losses.
For the grain trade and food aid donors
It is crucial that the grain trade and food aid donors become aware of the dangers of shipping cargoes infested by P. truncatus into those countries as yet uninfested by this pest. They must take the following precautions:
· ensure that their shipments are fumigated according to current phytosanitary regulations or, where such regulations do not exist, they must insist that a suitable fumigation is undertaken; and· if stocks are to be transported across a third country infested with P. truncatus, then every precaution must be taken to prevent infestation in transit. Stocks in open railway wagons or on lorries should be completely covered with a transport sheet (tarpaulin) and on reaching the final destination must be fumigated.
