NAPPO NEWSLETTER - SEPTEMBER 2015
|In this Issue|
|Message from the chair of the EC||Notes from the Industry||CPM 10|
|EC Meeting||Annual Mtg. 2015||Other Events|
|Faces of NAPPO||NAPPO Workshops||Phyto Alert System|
|People in Plant Protection - OIRSA||NAPPO New Office|
|Risk Management Symposium in Memphis||International Year of Plant Health for 2020|
This is the second of three meetings the NAPPO Executive Committee(EC) holds every year. Underlying the regular meeting agenda was the formal introduction and welcome of Dr. Stephanie Bloem as the new Executive Director who took on her duties on July 1. As well, the EC approved revised standards, discussed other documents, and followed up on planned communication activities to support NAPPO’s important relationship with industry.
Documents Discussed, Approved or Archived
The EC approved and signed the following documents:
Communication with Industry
Along the lines of strengthening interactions with industry highlighted in the spring edition of this newsletter, the EC continues to seek ways in which to improve communications. One of the ideas that will be explored is a mechanism to update the stakeholder list, making use of the new design for the NAPPO website (www.nappo.org/).
Relations with other organizations
The EC recognised the excellent results of the two workshops recently offered by NAPPO’s Seed and Biological Control[RL1] Expert Groups, both of which had participants from other Regional Plant Protection Organizations – EPPO (Europe and Mediterranean) was involved at both events, while OIRSA (Central America) had representatives at the Biological Control workshop.
The EC agreed to have an official liaison on biological control who would keep the NAPPO Working Group and Secretariat up to date on news and exchanges with EPPO. As current chair of the NAPPO EG, Peter Mason will take on this role.
The current NAPPO Strategic Plan was intended to provide direction during the transition period (2013-15) to the new way of functioning. Work on the new Strategic Plan will begin soon, for the period 2016-2020.
The NAPPO Executive Committee meets at least three times a year. Their next meeting is scheduled for October, 2015, during the NAPPO Annual Meeting in Memphis,Tennessee.
Abdul Ameen holds a PhD in Entomology from the Louisiana State University, and a BS and MS in Zoology from the University of Ilorin, Nigeria.
He joined the Plant Health Risk Assessment Unit of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency in 2007. He has been working on risk assessments of arthropods and molluscs of phytosanitary importance to Canada.
Abdul has been a member of the NAPPO Phytosanitary Alert System Expert Group since 2009
Gericke Cook is a Geographer with USDA APHIS PPQ CHPST in Fort Collins, CO and has seven years of experience in providing scientific and operational support to plant pest detection programs. She holds B.S. degrees in biology and mathematics, and is a PhD candidate in ecological modelling at Colorado State University. Gericke conducts interdisciplinary research in the areas of geography, ecology and spatial statistics for application to domestic plant pest detection programs, with emphasis on how human pathways contribute to pest introduction and spread.
Some of her more recent projects include national risk models for grasshopper, emerald ash borer, and European gypsy moth. She also leads development of a climate suitability modeling system for the Cooperative Agricultural Pest Survey (CAPS) program. She shares her expertise in predictive modeling on collaborative projects, and evaluates new technologies and analytical techniques for insertion into the agency. She has a particular interest in fostering better linkages between scientific support and policy or operational implementations.Gericke is a member of the NAPPO Lymantriids expert group.
Efraín Medina Guerra, Executive Director, OIRSA
Efraín Medina Guerra, was born in Guatemala, he is an Agronomist graduated from the University of San Carlos of Guatemala and has a Master in Sciences from Texas A & I University, United States.
Professionally, he was the OIRSA representative in Guatemala (2013–2014), Minister of Agriculture, Livestock and Food in Guatemala (2012); General Secretary (Head of International Mission) for the Central American University Superior Council (CSUCA) and the Central American University Confederation (2002–2010); Chancellor of the University of San Carlos of Guatemala (1998–2002), y Dean of the Faculty of Agronomy at the same university (1991–1995), among others.
Since August 1, 2014, Efraín Medina Guerra has been the Executive Director for the International Regional Organization for Plant and Animal Health, OIRSA, by mandate from the Regional International Committee on Agriculture and Livestock of the nine member countries.
|Octavio Javier Ángel Carranza de Mendoza
Technical Director, OIRSA
Doctor of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Breeding. He obtained a Master in Sociology from the Faculty of Political and Social Sciences, Mexican Autonomous University (UNAM). He attended a certification program on Administrative Law at the Faculty of Law, and an on-line specialization on animal food safety and quality inspection and control at the Faculty of Veterinary and Animal Breeding, both at the same university.
Mr. Carranza de Mendoza has held several positions in Mexico, among them: Import and Export Director, Livestock Services and Certification, General Director for Food and Agriculture, Aquatic and Fishing Safety, and he was recently the Representative of OIRSA in Mexico.
Presently, Mr. Carranza de Mendoza is the Technical Director for the International Regional Organization for Plant and Animal Health -OIRSA-, in the head office in San Salvador, El Salvador.
| The topic of the 2015 NAPPO Annual Meeting Symposium, scheduled for Thursday, October 29th, is “Innovations in Pest Risk Management”. The topic was chosen following the adoption of the most recent NAPPO Regional Standard, RSPM 40, on “Principles of Pest Risk Management for the Import of Commodities”. RSPM 40 is the first conceptual standard on pest risk management developed and adopted in the world!
Several internationally renowned speakers have confirmed their participation including Dr. Charles Yoe, Professor of Economics from Notre Dame at Maryland University, who will present the Keynote address, and Dr. Mark Burgman, Managing Director for the Centre of Excellence for Biosecurity Risk Analysis at the University of Melbourne in Australia, who will speak about economic models and their importance for pest risk management. In addition, several well-respected government and industry stakeholders have agreed to participate in the Symposium – highlighting successful partnerships in pest risk management for each of their countries.
When making your travel arrangements to attend the NAPPO Annual Meeting in Memphis, we urge you to consider staying on for this ground-breaking Symposium!
See you there!
Phytosanitary harmonization in the NAPPO region: an operational point of view
Mexico, the United States and Canada are countries with proven experience in establishing and adopting phytosanitary standards. The three countries honour the concept of harmonization1 coined in the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) and included in the ISPM 5: Glossary of phytosanitary terms (2015). The National Plant Protection Organizations (NPPOs) of the region establish, recognize and apply their harmonized phytosanitary measures regarding common IPPC2 standards and those of the North American Plant Protection Organization (NAPPO). However, beyond this general approach, there is a great opportunity for the NAPPO region to be able to apply harmonized mechanisms among the three countries to evaluate, select and apply phytosanitary measures to manage the phytosanitary risk in the trade in the region.
Recognizing each country sovereignty to establish and apply their own phytosanitary measures, an effort must be made to identify those cases when it is possible to harmonize procedures to evaluate and select relevant phytosanitary measures, as well as to establish mechanisms for their application, inspection and certification. Our industry members are discussing that there should be visible criteria to evaluate and select phytosanitary measures, therefore, we are suggesting a harmonized regional mechanism, to decide the type and number of appropriate measures to reduce the risk of pest introduction and spread3.
The mechanism indicated should include industry participation in a proactive and collaborative context in order to protect plant health and to maintain trade. It is important to know how the NPPO reach a decision to select a phytosanitary measure and in what proportion this measure mitigates the risk of introducing and spreading one or more pests, justified through a pest risk analysis. In other words, understand the way to evaluate the efficacy of the measure according to the identified risk level, in order to conclude if one measure is sufficient to mitigate it or if it is necessary to apply more than one accumulative or independent measure.
In addition, a harmonized regional procedure may be sought to do a pest risk analysis4. This procedure should include short pathways for commodities that meet certain criteria, such as geographic limitation (a defined site or place of production), limited amounts of products, defined companies involved, etc. Where possible, it would be appropriate that NPPOs from the NAPPO region reach a consensus on criteria to classify a commodity as high or low risk (i.e., there are different positions in the same region regarding seed risks).
The industry is looking for certainty and to understand the origin and justification of phytosanitary measures that they must comply with for the movement of commodities. This type of scenario will help convince the different stakeholders in trade and to defend and promote compliance of phytosanitary standards as part of a culture based on trust, collaboration (government-industry) and transparency.
The following are highly important procedures for trading in the region that could be analyzed, in order to look for an operational harmonization:
Source: Mario Puente, Mexican Seed Trade Association
1Harmonization. Establishment, recognition y application by different countries of phytosanitary measures based on common standards [FAO, 1995; revised CEMF, 1999; based on the World Trade Organization Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (WTO, 1994)].
2Harmonized phytosanitary measures. Phytosanitary measures established by contracting parties to the IPPC, based on international standards [IPPC].
3Pest risk management (for quarantine pests). Evaluation and selection of options to reduce the risk of introduction and spread of a pest [FAO, 1995; ISPM 11: 2001].
4Pest risk analysis (agreed interpretation). The process of evaluating biological or other scientific and economic evidence to determine whether an organism is a pest, whether it should be regulated, and the strength or any phytosanitary measures to be taken against it [FAO, 1995; revised IPPC, 1997; ISPM 2: 2007].
|Save the Date: 26-30 October 2015
Greg Wolff (Canada), Javier Trujillo (Mexico), and Osama El-Lissy (USA) of the NAPPO Executive Committee cordially invite you to attend the 39th NAPPO Annual Meeting to be held from 26-30 October 2015, in Memphis, Tennessee, USA. This year’s meeting symposium, “Innovations in Pest Risk Management”, is an industry favorite!
The NAPPO Annual Meeting provides an excellent opportunity for industry and plant health officials to interact with their colleagues and counterparts and to learn about new and exciting activities taking place in the NAPPO region.
|You can find more information about the meeting (such as hotel and local information) on the NAPPO Annual Meeting webpage. The agenda, speakers, and registration information will be available soon.
For more information, contact Stephanie Dubon at .
Don’t miss out on this great opportunity: save these dates now!
NAPPO Biological Control Expert Group conducts workshop
Preparation of Petitions for First Release of a Non-indigenous Entomophagous Biological Control Agent
The Biological Control Expert Group conducted a workshop July 7-8 2015 in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada to provide training on preparing a Petition for first release of an entomophagous biological control agent according to requirements outlined in NAPPO RSPM 12. Understanding by individuals/companies of the information required for a petition to release an exotic biological control agent is important to the regulatory process in all NAPPO countries to ensure that fair and thorough risk assessment can be made. Petitioners are frequently not aware of the appropriate level of detail that is required, nor of the type of work that is required to generate this information. Addressing these aspects is essential to improvement in the quality of submissions, enabling regulators in Canada, Mexico and the United States to make approval decisions that are highly informed and based on harmonized information.
The workshop was conceived and organized by the NAPPO Biological Control Expert Group. Members of the EG, and several invitees, made oral presentations on the regulatory processes in Canada, Mexico, the United States, and the United Kingdom, followed by presentations on each section of RSPM 12. A discussion followed each presentation during which points were clarified, concerns raised, and challenges identified. Simultaneous interpretation was provided in Spanish and English throughout the workshop.
As Regional Plant Protection Organization (RPPO) for North America, NAPPO reached out to its’ sister organizations to invite them to the workshop. Among the 24 participants who attended the event were representatives from the commercial biological control industry in Canada, Mexico, the United States and the United Kingdom (UK), the target audience. Representatives also attended from the National Plant Protection Organizations of Panama (Ministry of Agriculture, invited through the RPPO of Central America, OIRSA) and of the UK (FERA, representing EPPO).
Through the presentations by EG members and invited experts, participants gained a better knowledge of the regulatory requirements in each NAPPO country as well as requirements in the UK and they became more familiar with the level of information required for each section of the RSPM 12 guidelines. Discussion after each presentation led to better appreciation of the challenges faced by industry, regulators, and researchers. Issues and follow up actions were identified, including that the materials developed for this workshop may also serve as an online training module.
Overall, participants concluded that the workshop was of value, particularly in providing the “… opportunity to enter into productive discussions and listen to one another’s points of view”. Furthermore, it was suggested that the workshop could be useful for classical biological control practitioners and researchers so they can better understand the process and that it would also be beneficial to involve an economist to cover aspects of the cost-effectiveness of biological control.
The workshop provided the opportunity for collaboration among Canada, Mexico and the United States and to showcase the work of the EG to international partners.
By Peter Mason, Chairperson, NAPPO Biological Control Expert Group
|Back Row: Peter Mason (AAFC), Bruno Gallant (CFIA), Thierry Poire (CFIA), Dave Gillespie (AAFC), Ken Bloem (APHIS)
Third Row: Rebecca Lee (NAPPO), John Huber (CFS), Dominic-André Demers (BioBest), Sam Bishop (FERA), Marta Singh (NAPPO), Rene Ruiter (Koppert), Bruce Gill (CFIA)
Second Row: Antolín Carlos Díaz Voss (BioBest), Brian Spencer (Applied Bionomics), John Goolsby (ARS), Indira Molo Alvarado (MIDA), Nedelka Marin-Martinez (NAPPO), Richard Gretrex (Syngenta-Bioline).
First Row: Hugo Arredondo (Sanidad Vegetal), Carol Glennister (IPM Laboratories), Sandra De Gracia (MIDA), Joshua Bennington (ELC), Gregorio Ramos García (BioBest), Cary Gates (Flowers Canada)
AAFC– Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada; CFIA – Canadian Food Inspection Agency; APHIS – Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service; NAPPO – North American Plant Protection Organization; MIDA – Ministerio de Desarrollo Agropecuario; ELC – Electronic Language Communications Ltd.
Needs assessment for regulatory support of the North American seed industry
The NAPPO Seed Expert Group (EG) conducted a workshop July 28-30, 2015 in Riverdale, Maryland, USA. The goal of the three day workshop was to bring the stakeholders together to define and prioritise the phytosanitary needs of the industry. Multiple objectives of the workshop included: discussing the meaning of and begin to develop a process for harmonization of seed testing protocols and methods in the NAPPO region; reaching a consensus regarding the research needs in seed testing; identifying harmonization challenges for at least one pathogen of concern in the NAPPO countries; determining how pest lists for seed commodities can be used in the NAPPO region; exploring accreditation and discussing new approaches to risk management as alternatives to traditional phytosanitary measures in seed trade.
The workshop speakers included government representatives of the three NAPPO countries, national seed associations, the Seed Association of the Americas (SAA), and the European and Mediterranean Regional Plant Protection Organization, EPPO (remotely). Simultaneous interpretation was provided in Spanish and English throughout the workshop
The event attracted thirty-two participants who felt that the workshop was of value, particularly in hearing of the number of seed health initiatives underway worldwide and the diversity of views between industry and regulators in relation to risk and seed health issues. The workshop produced a number of accreditation, diagnostic, research, and pest listing needs to foster harmonization.
The workshop was concluded with the meeting of the NAPPO Seed EG to finalize the priorities discussed in the workshop, review and compile meeting results, and identify next steps including preparation of project proposals for 2016. The EG agreed to present two project proposals for 2016 which are, Project 1, Develop NAPPO discussion document on criteria for harmonized pest lists for seeds and Project Proposal 2, Pepper Mild Mottle Mosaic Virus (PMMoV) as test case for harmonization.
Sources: Michael Perry, NAPPO Seed EG Chairperson, and Stephanie Bloem, NAPPO Executive Director
Back row: Nedelka Marin-Martinez, NAPPO; Ric Dunkle, ASTA; Ines Ares,SAA; Nancy Brooker; Stephan Briere, CFIA; Stephanie Bloem, NAPPO; Jorge Leyva, Mexican Embassy; Mario Puente, AMSAC;
Front row: Luis Espinoza, SENASICA; Shailaja Rabindran, USDA; Darrel Maddox; Tom Moore; Marjolein Speikerman; Samantha Thomas; Alejandra Elizalde, AMSAC; Nancy Villegas, SENASICA; Jan De Lange, Bejo Mexico; Laurene Levy, USDA; Michael Perry, USDA.
| The new office for the North American Plant Protection Organization is located inside the North Carolina State University’s Centennial Campus at 1730 Varsity Drive, Suite 100, Venture IV, Raleigh, NC, 27607, United States of America and we are slowly but surely making the arrangements to be able to move in as soon as possible!
In early July, NAPPO signed a 5-year lease with the building’s management company, CBRE. Renovations are underway in the new office space, with an estimated completion date of mid- October, 2015.
NAPPO has secured an insurance underwriter to provide all the necessary coverage for the new space. The new Secretariat will have four offices, a small conference room and reception area and a galley kitchen. We have three local office furniture vendors vying with each other to provide quotes to furnish the office with a combination of new and used furniture.
IT and phone providers, that currently service other offices of the Venture IV building, will be submitting their equipment/service bids shortly. Bids have also been sought for a photocopy machine and service/maintenance contract.
All NAPPO staff in Canada have been invited by the NAPPO Executive Committee to relocate to Raleigh. Final decision(s) on relocation will depend on available Visa options and staff personal and family considerations.
We are hopeful that the new NAPPO Secretariat office will be fully operational in April, 2016, if not sooner. We look forward to welcoming you all there!
Source: Stephanie Bloem, NAPPO Executive Director
|At the Tenth Session of the Commission on Phytosanitary Measures (CPM-10) in March 2015, the delegate from the Republic of Finland proposed the establishment of an International Year of Plant Health (IYPH) for 2020. The CPM strongly supported Finland’s proposal as a pivotal initiative to raise awareness on plant health among civil society and decision makers worldwide. Many delegations expressed their full support to Finland in its offer to function as a champion for the proclamation of an IYPH in 2020.
It is estimated that each year, 10-16% of the global harvest is lost to plant pests, representing losses of US$220 billion. New and emerging plant health risks have the potential to increase the scale of these losses. Plant health-related negative impacts on plant production present a major limiting factor to food security not to mention other major possible impacts on the environment and trade of agricultural products.
The establishment of an IYPH for 2020 will be an important step to address future pest risk challenges and, in addition to an increased awareness on plant health, expected outcomes include an improved understanding of the challenges affecting the sustainable management of plant resources and an improved international commitment in cooperating in finding ways to address these challenges. Past International Years (IYs) include Quinoa (2013) and Family Farming (2014). 2015 is the international Year of Soils and 2016 will be the International Year of Pulses.
When the proposal was made, the CPM-10 (2015) agreed on the need to have a detailed work programme with precise and clearly focussed objectives. It was decided that a Steering Group be established to present a detailed work programme and a clarified set of objectives to CPM-11 (2016). According to the official procedures for the establishment of IYs under the United Nations (UN) System, the next key steps include the presentation of the initiative to the 40th FAO Conference (2017) for adoption and the presentation to the General Assembly of the UN (2018).
Participation of countries, National Plant Protection Organizations (NPPOs) and Regional Plant Protection Organizations (RPPOs), among others, is strongly encouraged and will be key in making this initiative a success story. There are several ways by which countries, NPPOs and RPPOs can be involved, including: promoting the initiative nationally and regionally, providing in-kind and financial contributions to ensure the achievement of the activities included in the planning of the IYPH, and providing support for the initiative at key meetings (e.g., FAO Conference). In addition, the CPM Bureau gave the green light to the establishment of a volunteer programme aimed at mobilizing staff resources in the form of volunteers. More details to come!
In discussing communication efforts to promote the IYPH, the CPM Bureau identified RPPO meetings as key fora where the Secretariat of the IPPC should introduce the initiative and the next steps. To this effect, the NAPPO Secretariat intends to extend an invitation to a representative from the Secretariat of the IPPC for a presentation at the 2015 NAPPO Annual Meeting that will be held next October. Stay tuned!
In order to stay updated on the next steps and developments related to the proposal to establish an IYPH for 2020, you are invited to consult frequently the page dedicated to the IYPH on the International Phytosanitary Portal:
By Marie-Pierre Mignault, International Plant Standard Officer, CFIA (also part time working for the IPPC Secretariat as an in kind contribution from Canada)
During the Tenth Session of the Commission on Phytosanitary Measures held at the FAO Head Office in Rome on March 16-20, 2015, the following International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures were approved:
ISPM 26, Annex 3 (Establishment of pest free areas for fruit flies [Tephritidae]) on Phytosanitary procedures for fruit fly (Tephritidae) management (2005-010);
This annex provides guidelines for the application of phytosanitary procedures for fruit fly management.
Various phytosanitary procedures are used for fruit fly suppression, containment, eradication and exclusion. These procedures may be applied to establish and maintain fruit fly-pest free areas (FFPFAs) (this standard) and areas of low pest prevalence for fruit flies (FF-ALPPs) (ISPM 30 (Establishment of areas of low pest prevalence for fruit flies (Tephritidae)), as well as to develop systems approaches for fruit flies (ISPM 35 (Systems approach for pest risk management of fruit flies (Tephritidae).
Amendments to ISPM 5 (2013): Glossary of phytosanitary terms (1994-001)
The glossary is constantly been updated, it may include additions, revisions or removal of terms. This year, the following addition was proposed: “production site”; and twelve revisions: “point of entry”, “systems approach”, “pest free place of production and pest free production site”; “quarantine station”; “low pest prevalence area”, “pest list for basic commodities”, “habitat”, “pest free area”, “pest free place of production”, “surveillance” and “survey”. It also proposes eliminating the following terms: “occurrence”, “naturally occurring”, “restriction”, “protected area”; “controlled area”, interpretation of the term “plants” in the IPPC and its ISPMs, and therefore revision of the “scope of ISPM 5”. We invite all our readers to make sure they are using the last version of the Glossary.
The following draft phytosanitary treatments were approved as annexes to the ISPM 28 Phytosanitary treatments for regulated pests.
The Standards Committee adopted, on behalf of CPM, three diagnostic protocols that will be part of annexes to the ISPM 27.- Diagnostic protocols for regulated pests:
The approved diagnostic protocols are available on the IPPC International Phytosanitary Portal: https://www.ippc.int/en/core-activities/standards-setting/ispms.
Source: Ana Lilia Montealegre Lara, SAGARPA-SENASICA-DGSV-.Mexico, NAPPO Working Group
|Return to Index|
|Practical considerations for an Asian gypsy moth program|
||Dates: November 2015
Houston, TX - USA
|Entomology 2015, ESA 63rd Annual Meeting
November 15-18, 2015
"Synergy in Science: Partnering for Solutions"
The Entomological Society of America will co-locate their Annual Meeting with
the American Society of Agronomy, the Crop Science Society of America
and the Soil Science Society of America http://www.entsoc.org/entomology2015
|ForestPestManagement Forum December 1-3, 2015 Ottawa, Canada http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/pestforum|
July 9 – 12, 2016
Columbus,OH AmericanHort.org/events AmericanHort’s annual event features keynote presentations, educational workshops and
sessions, and the largest horticultural trade show of its type in North America
|2016 APS Annual Meeting
July 30 – August 3, 2016
|XXV International Congress of Entomology Co-location of Annual Meetings of: Entomological Society of America, Entomological Society of Canada and other national societies. Orlando,Florida,USA
September 25-30, 2016 www.ice2016orlando.org
|11th International Congress of Plant Pathology. Celebrating 50 years
Boston, MA, USA
July 29 – August 3, 2018 http://www.isppweb.org/
|XXX International Horticulture Congress
August 12-16, 2018
Istambul, Turkey http://www.ihc2018.org/
|Email notifications of new pest alerts and news stories will typically be sent out regularly. To subscribe, follow the instructions on the website: www.pestalert.org/main.cfm under Subscribe.