FAQs related to Pests and Diseases
Some people may be allergic to the caterpillar’s hairs.
The painted apple moth poses a serious threat to our gardens, crops, forests, native bush, and the communities that depend on them. The pest is a voracious and indiscriminate eater and destroys plants by eating their leaves. It is considered a minor pest in its native Australia where it and other moths are controlled by orchardists using pesticides. It poses a much greater threat to New Zealand’s horticulture and native forests and the moth has already adapted to native and introduced plants common throughout New Zealand.
Nobody knows for sure how it got here but it was probably a stowaway on a shipping container from Australia. This is the most likely explanation because the pest was first found in an industrial area and till then wasn’t found anywhere in the world outside Australia.
The painted apple moth (Teia anartoides) is a native Australian pest accidentally introduced to New Zealand. The moth is a minor pest in Australia but poses a serious threat to our gardens, crops, forests, native bush, and the communities that depend on them.
The painted apple moth is recognisable once you know what to look for.
There are five stages in the painted apple moth life cycle -- egg mass, larvae, pre-pupae, pupae (cocoon), and adult moths -- and the pest looks quite different at each stage. The painted apple moth is most distinctive in the larva (caterpillar) stage, when it is brightly coloured, hairy and easily recognised by the tufts of hair on its back. (No native caterpillars are hairy like the painted apple moth.)
If you find a painted apple moth, call 0800 96 96 96 immediately.
The painted apple moth is quickly adapting to New Zealand and has been found on several common native species already. The pest is a voracious eater, defoliating, and eventually destroying, trees it feeds on. If uncontrolled, the pest could spread throughout our native and exotic forests causing widespread destruction.
Female moths are flightless but male moths can fly and newly hatched caterpillars can "balloon" up to a few hundred metres in the wind using silken threads. Most importantly, the pest can be spread by residents moving plants they’re living in.
If it isn't wiped out the moth could cost the country $350 million over the next 20 years.
No measures have been taken regarding New Zealand's trade, nor should they be. New Zealand is free from scrapie and to date has found no evidence of atypical scrapie. This status remains unchanged.
In countries where atypical scrapie exists, no additional food safety measures have been put in place and it does not appear to affect their ability to trade sheep products.
New Zealand, as a mature exporting country, has always undertaken the surveillance and research necessary to clearly define the health status of its animal populations,
There is no basis to suggest that atypical scrapie poses a risk to human health.
To date scientists have found no evidence that atypical scrapie can be transmitted to people, or that it is dangerous to people.
The UK Food Standards Agency and Defra are among a number of organisations in Europe funding ongoing research into atypical scrapie using a range of different experimental methods.
Recent research using humanised genetically modified mice, although still not concluded, indicates that atypical scrapie is unlikely to be able to cross the species barrier to humans.
The UK Food Standards Agency is not advising people to change their eating habits with regard to lamb or mutton (sheep meat) and goat meat or products derived from these animals. New Zealand's food safety standards remain aligned with this advice.
Scrapie has been recognised in Europe since 1732 and has never been associated with human illness.
Although atypical scrapie has been found in a number of European countries since it was identified in 1998, it has been found only at very low incidence rates.
In the wake of the finds, MAFBNZ traced all the flocks that had contributed to the original consignment of research sheep sent to the UK. Historical samples from these flocks were examined, and sheep from two of the larger flocks that contained higher numbers of older sheep were tested for atypical scrapie. No evidence of atypical scrapie was found.
No evidence of the condition has been found in New Zealand.
Scrapie has been a notifiable disease in New Zealand since 1952 and an active surveillance programme has been in place since 1990. This surveillance supported our case for recognition of freedom from scrapie and no evidence of atypical scrapie has been found.
New Zealand continues to supply sheep brains as negative controls for EU research purposes. Atypical scrapie has not been detected in the thousands of brains supplied to date.
New Zealand’s livestock populations are internationally recognised as free from scrapie in sheep and goats, BSE in cattle and Chronic Wasting Disease in deer and this has not changed as a result of this investigation.
The UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) maintains a scrapie-free flock of sheep for research. The flock comprises sheep (and offspring) imported from New Zealand, which is free from scrapie. The flock is kept under strict biosecurity and is monitored clinically and at post mortem for evidence of scrapie.
Post mortem examination of three sheep from the flock (in 2006 and 2007) found evidence of so-called "atypical scrapie". The sheep were all over six years old.
A research report into the three cases published in BMC Veterinary Research on 10 February 2009 speculates that it is likely that atypical scrapie arose spontaneously in the three sheep and did not come from an external source.
The authors also speculate that atypical scrapie is likely to occur in flocks worldwide, especially in older sheep of susceptible genotypes.
It must be emphasised that atypical scrapie is a distinct condition unrelated to scrapie. Atypical scrapie has been recognised only relatively recently (it was identified first in 1998 in Norway and at that time was called Nor98). It differs from scrapie in its clinical, neuropathological and biochemical features. Most cases are detected in apparently healthy sheep by post mortem examination during routine slaughter as part of the European Union’s programme of looking for evidence of BSE ("mad cow disease") in European sheep.
If you don't have T. brumale: You should source seedlings that have been tested and certified as being free from T. brumale.
If you do have T. brumale: Many truffle growers are familiar with mycorrhizal species such as Scleroderma sp. and Tuber maculatum which compete with more valuable truffle species. The skills needed to manage T. brumale are similar and T. brumale has the advantage of being a marketable edible species.
It is possible for a skilled mycologist to identify T. Brumale mycorrhizae on root samples using a microscope, and DNA testing can be used to confirm its presence. The NZTA is investigating options to help growers establish if they have T. brumale in their truffières.
Without testing your tree roots, it is difficult to determine whether you will have T. brumale in your truffière. It should be noted that negative test results do not guarantee that a truffière is free of T. brumale. To be absolutely sure, every tree would have to be tested.
It is not a risk to human health. T. brumale truffles are edible and traded in France and other European countries. This truffle species, like other truffle species, exists in non-harmful, symbiotic relationship with hazels and oaks. It is not considered a threat to New Zealand's native fauna and flora but can compete with the Périgord black truffle for space on the roots of host plants.
We don't know. Oaks and hazels have, since European settlement, been brought in from Europe and the tools to detect the presence of T. brumale on tree roots have only become sophisticated in recent years. It is possible that T. brumale arrived long ago, but we know for certain that it is present in trees planted in the mid 1990s, and potentially other trees as well.
T. brumale was not known to occur in New Zealand and MAF BNZ initiated a response to determine; how it got here, how long it has been here, its distribution and potential impacts. As a precautionary action a number of trees linked to the Winter Truffle were destroyed while investigations were conducted.
To determine whether T. brumale was already present in the New Zealand environment a sample of trees from three North Island truffières were tested for T. brumale. A small number of these trees tested positive for T. brumale. The results were confirmed by DNA testing. MAF BNZ has not destroyed further trees due to the confirmed presence of T. brumale in New Zealand.
Given the number of truffières established in recent years that may contain T. brumale, and the technical unfeasibility of eradicating T. brumale over large areas, MAF BNZ will not be attempting eradication of this truffle or imposing movement controls on truffle growers. This decision is supported by the New Zealand Truffle Association (NZTA).
MAF Biosecurity New Zealand (MAF BNZ) does not know for sure how T. brumale arrived in New Zealand. However, the possibility that it arrived in New Zealand as a low level contaminant on imported truffles cannot be ruled out. Modern DNA tests are becoming capable of determining the presence of very small quantities of such contaminants.
While MAF BNZ investigations have revealed that it has been present since at least 1995, MAF BNZ cannot discount the possibility that T. brumale was present before this date.
It is an edible truffle which is associated with oak and hazel trees. It occurs naturally in France and Italy and in other parts of Europe.
This honey IHS process has been underway for years. Beekeepers have been waiting for a decision for some time. Biosecurity New Zealand wanted to end the uncertainty sooner rather than later; there would never be a ‘good’ time.
Varroa has been present in New Zealand for six years and is a completely separate issue to the IHS. Biosecurity New Zealand does not believe that an internal disease control operation in New Zealand should have a bearing on decisions on international trade.
No.
Varroa depends on adult bees for transport. The mite spreads naturally between bee colonies by travelling with drifting bees and swarms.
Modern beekeeping practices often involve shifting bees, beehives, and equipment between apiary sites, often over long distances. This has the potential to spread varroa more quickly over long distances.
It weakens and kills honeybee colonies. Bees are important because they pollinate a wide range of food crops.
The Varroa mite, (Varroa destructor - formerly Varroa jacobsoni) is an external parasite of honey bees that attacks adult bees and their developing larvae, or young.
Infected hives may show the following signs:
- Unexpectedly low bee numbers
- A patchy pattern on brood frames as would be seen with a heavy sacbrood infestation
- Small reddish-brown mites on the bodies of bees, and on uncapped drone pupae
- Weak crawling bees, possible with deformed wings
- Sudden hive population crashes, or hives being found in autumn with honey stores but no bees.
Beekeepers in risk areas should be carrying out active sampling of their hives, to detect varroa before mite numbers rise to damaging levels. Visual examination of adult bees is not an effective way to monitor for varroa.
The whole bee population is at risk from the mite. Numbers of mites in a colony typically build up over a year or so, until they are sufficient to kill the colony if it is not treated. The mite will wipe out most wild (or feral) bees, as they will not be treated by a beekeeper to control varroa levels. Only well-managed bee colonies will survive the arrival of varroa.