An Independent Review of New Zealand's Biosecurity Surveillance Systems-Apiary Industry

Background & Disclaimer

Apiary Industry

Includes: Bees kept by both commercial and hobby beekeepers. Surveillance has been recognised as important to this sector for many years. For this reason it has been regarded, by many, as "mature".

Risk factors specific to the sector:

• The legal importation of bees and bee products is tightly controlled through scientific risk analyses and Import Health Standards;
• The lengthy delays in the completion of risk analyses and the development of Import Health Standards creates an environment in which illegal importation of risk goods is more likely;
• Given the current border security standards, the illegal importation of bees and bee products is more difficult that it has been in the past;
• A number of diseases of bees are transmissible through honey and other bee products;
• 100% inspection of mail and of incoming passengers and their baggage cannot assure 100% detection of risk goods carried by them;
• The potential for the illegal importation of disease-causing organisms was demonstrated with the importation of Rabbit calicivirus;
• The potential impact of an incursion of the serious disease of bees has been demonstrated through the recent experience with Varroa.

Surveillance objectives:

• The animal disease Surveillance objectives specified by MAF Animal Biosecurity are:
• To facilitate the export trade in animals and animal products by being able to credibly certify New Zealand is true disease status, therefore minimising the cemetery requirements that these exports must meet;
• To fulfil international treaty obligations, including the prompt reporting of animal health events to international organisations and trading partners;
• To develop and establish technically justifiable import requirements for animals and animal products entering New Zealand;
• To enable the prompt notification of exotic diseases in New Zealand;
• To support the development of pest management strategies to control animal diseases;
• To facilitate the formulation of public health policies for the control of animal diseases that can affect human health.

Surveillance processes:

• A national programme of active Surveillance for diseases of honeybees partially funded by MAF [103]. AQ is the primary contractor for this Surveillance programme. Much of the field inspections, however, are carried out by trained apiarists;
• Detection of other diseases during inspections as part of the active Surveillance of commercial apiaries for American foulbrood, as part of the apiary industry Pest Management Strategy, is incorporated into the programme;
• "Passive" disease Surveillance through diagnostic laboratories. Information from this channel is dependent upon observation, examination and referrals by beekeepers.

NB: Current Surveillance for Varroa has not been included in the scope of this project because it is seen as being part of a response of limited duration rather than part of an ongoing Surveillance programme.

Strengths:

• Clearly stated purposes (facilitation of international trade and assistance in the detection of new or exotic diseases);
• The targeting of a limited number of organisms considered of particular importance to the above purposes;
• Documentation of requirements in standards and securing of supply through contracts;
• Industry involvement in the planning of the programme and commitment to it;
• The involvement of people trained in disease recognition and knowledgeable about the apiary industry;
• The targeted inspection and sampling of specific high risk areas;
• The targeting of consignments from apiaries involved in exporting;
• The use of laboratories with specialist expertise.

Weaknesses:

• The absence of defined technical objectives. (It would be desirable for the required sensitivities for detection of organisms to be specified. These sensitivities should be based on the known epidemiology of the organisms, their probable behaviour in NZ and the difficulties of eradicating, or controlling, them if they were to enter the country);
• The current sampling intensity is substantially below the standard proposed to OIE for demonstration of freedom from bee diseases [104];

Performance:

• The current Surveillance programme has been in operation for only a short period of time. Its predecessor lacked the targeting of areas assessed to be "high risk" and some people involved in the industry have attributed delays in the detection of Varroa to that lack of targeting.

Page last updated: 16 October 2008