|
|
|
|
|
This document has been prepared on contract to the New Zealand Ministry of Agriculture as an Operational Plan to eradicate Varroa jacobsoni from New Zealand. The objective of the plan is to return New Zealand to country freedom from the pest in 4 years.
The plan involves the following steps:
· Depopulation of all registered hives in Eradication Zones (15km around any apiary infected with varroa) by September 1, 2000 (see section 4),
· Poisoning of all feral honey bee colonies within those Eradication Zones by March 31, 2001 (see section 5),
· Movement of hives into Eradication Zones for paid pollination services in spring 2001 followed by the depopulation of those hives by December 31, 2001 (see section 4),
· Repopulation of all hives previously repopulated once the Eradication Zones have been completely cleared of bees (and therefore mites), in autumn and/or spring 2001 (see section 6),
· Movement control of hives in both the Eradication and Buffer Zones for a further 3 years to allow for proper surveillance and traceback in the event of any further mites being found (see section 7),
· Thorough, risk-based surveillance of all repopulated hives in the Eradication Zones, and all hives in a larger Buffer Zone (northern North Island), for a period of a further 3 years (see section 8),
· Surveillance of apiaries in both the Surveillance (southern North Island) and Disease-Free (South Island) Zones throughout the duration of the operational plan (see section 8).
Based on current information from the delimiting survey, 24,898 hives in 1744 apiaries would need to be depopulated in Eradication Zones, followed by a further 51,011 hives depopulated in those zones after the completion of paid pollination activities in spring 2000. There would therefore be a requirement for 75,909 replacement nucleus colonies or their equivalents to repopulate these hives in either autumn or spring 2001. Total depopulation would mean a reduction in hive numbers in the North Island of 44%, corresponding to a drop of 25% in total New Zealand hive holdings (see section 10.12).
The plan assumes 7 further findings of the mite (“Blips”) in either the Eradication or Buffer Zones, and includes costings for depopulation/repopulation of registered hives and poisoning of feral honey bee colonies in those blips (see section 10.9).
This document also makes recommendations on compensation payments to beekeepers affected by the plan, as required under provisions of the Biosecurity Act (see section 9).
Detailed costs of implementation of all parts of the programme have been calculated including an estimate of claims for compensation for loss of income (see section 10).
Cost in year 1 is $31,102,783 and in year 2 is $12,768,908, reflecting a further 4 and 3 blips in those two years. Cost for the subsequent 2 years of the plan (movement control and surveillance) is $5,924,683 per annum. Total cost for implementing the Operational Plan is therefore $55,721,057. Cost for eradicating the mite in any blip (15km radius) is $1,307,561 in year 1.
Impacts on New Zealand honey crop are estimated to be approximately 40% of North Island production and 25% of total national production in the 2000-2001 season. There is also likely to be a significant (but unquantified) reduction in the 2001-2002 season. Other significant uncosted effects include social and psychological costs to the beekeeping industry caused by the depopulation, and downstream effects to both bee products manufacturers/exporters and package bee and queen producers/exporters (see section 10.12).
A quality system approach has been taken to the design of the management of the programme and the required work instructions, forms and documents have been identified. The Apiary Register database would be upgraded to cope with extra recording, mapping and reporting requirements.
No eradication attempt, no matter how technically sound, will succeed without the cooperation of the majority of commercial beekeepers. They are the stake-holding group upon whom the effects will fall most heavily, and through non-compliance, even if unwittingly, are most able to cause the programme to fail.
A significant group within the beekeeping industry is opposed to eradication. The reason for their opposition is compelling. Many countries, faced with a newly discovered varroa outbreak have attempted eradication or to slow spread by some form of movement control. All of these attempts have been unsuccessful. Indeed, all they have achieved is disruption, hardship and significant loss of income to the commercial beekeeping community.
If eradication of varroa from New Zealand is to be successful, it is necessary that those presently opposed are persuaded that the eradication programme to be attempted in New Zealand has significant components, not found in overseas programmes, that will greatly improve the likelihood of success.
These components can be listed as:
· A very thorough delimiting survey has been carried out which will give a high level of confidence that we have established the extent of the infection.
· The most sensitive test available (Apistan and sticky boards) has been used to carry out the delimiting survey.
· A comprehensive tracing effort is being made to track down as many as possible of the risk contacts with known infected apiaries.
· Epidemiology tools are being used to successfully model and predict mite behaviour.
· The methods to be used for eradication will have been tested and be technically sound.
· The planning of the eradication programme has included technical, regulatory and industry representatives.
· The eradication programme has been planned and agreement on key components reached by consensus.
· There is a strong commitment from the stake holding sectors, beekeeping, horticulture and agriculture to see this programme succeed.
· There is a commitment from Government to commit the large sums of money required over a five-year time frame.
· The programme acknowledges that it is probable that some outlying low-level infections will have been missed by tracing and has built in the likely cost of dealing with these .
· Ongoing surveillance will ensure that any presently undiscovered infections are detected early and will be dealt with.
· Fair compensation will be paid for the destruction of hives and consequent loss of income.
· A process of appeal for when disputes arise is built in to the programme.
· A process for review and modification will be built in to the programme.
Not all of these components are agreed yet but need to be built in before the final proposal is put to industry for agreement.
Finally, it must be acknowledged that there are within the beekeeping community a number of individuals who have not been complying with current regulations designed to help the industry control the endemic disease American foulbrood. Unless these individuals can be persuaded to change their behaviour in relation to varroa eradication, the programme will fail. A commitment is required from the appropriate regulatory and enforcement authorities and from the National Beekeepers’ Association to ensure that any breaches of Biosecurity Act regulations are dealt with swiftly and severely.
While depopulation of registered hives involves considerable labour and logistical support, it is considered to be both more effective in ensuring complete destruction of existing mites, and less labour and cost-intensive than the movement/treatment option. Total depopulation of registered hives within the Eradication Zone is therefore recommended.
Poisoning using bait stations is recommended. This option has been chosen because it will deal with difficult to locate feral colonies in large and rugged areas of bush. This method will kill any unregistered colonies and any colony that may not have been killed during the depopulation operation. It will also kill colonies located high in trees that can be very difficult to find and access.
Repopulation of beehives depopulated within the Eradication Zone should occur beginning in either autumn or spring 2001.
No assessment should be made of beehives at the time of repopulation, and no adjustment should be made to funds made available for repopulation, based on colony strength.
A four-frame nucleus colony containing brood and a young mated queen should be the standard used for repopulation costing purposes. The cost of this unit is assessed at $75, including feeding costs that may be needed to sustain the colony prior to the onset of nectar flows, costs associated with movement of beekeeping equipment back to apiaries and installation of nucleus hives in the equipment.
Surveillance based on probability of risk, rather than an accreditation scheme, is the recommended option.
A strict movement control option was chosen over movement control based upon an accredited beekeeper scheme.
A set price of $75 plus GST should be offered as compensation to all beekeepers who have hives depopulated by an Authorised Person.
No compensation will be paid on colonies found to already be dead at the time of depopulation, unless based on the judgement of an Authorised Person the hive has died as result of a varroa infestation.
No compensation should be paid for honey consumed as stores by hives prior to depopulation.
The cost of storage of boxes of brood comb should be considered on a case by case basis and compensation should be considered if hardship or bee robbing problems can be demonstrated.
The cost of storage of boxes of empty comb should be compensated at a rate of $1.20 per hive to allow for the cost of the pesticide, extra storage, covers for the boxes, protective clothing and face masks during fumigation and inventory control.
No compensation should be paid to growers for loss of production unless they had paid for pollination in the past season or could not bring in beehives because of the feral baiting programme.
No compensation be paid to non-commercial beekeepers for loss of income other than the $75 per hive fee be paid for repopulation.
For claims for loss if income from commercial beekeepers the following options are suggested:
a. The beekeeper’s accountant should submit a claim for loss of income based on an average of the sets of accounts for the past 3 years.
b. a MAF/AgriQuality/independent accountant assess the claimant’s books as above and determine a compensation rate.
c. The beekeeper accept an assessed amount as determined by government and based on average net income figures presented in the American Foulbrood Pest Management Strategy document (1997) and adjusted for inflation at the rate of 1.5% p.a. (ie 4.5%).
The following critical assumptions were used in the development of this Operational Plan:
Baiting Bees - bees will fly at least 500m from their colony to collect a honey bait.
Bee Flight - the maximum distance bees are likely to fly under normal foraging conditions is 7km. Drone drift is likely to occur between hives within an apiary and between localised apiaries, but under normal conditions is not likely to exceed this 15km distance.
Blip Operations - costings are provided for a single Infected Place (blip). The plan assumes 7 blips will take place, but makes no prediction as to when the blips will occur. Estimation of blips is based on the current number of blips detected in the delimiting survey (5), an analysis of site sensitivity analysis (72%), and the effectiveness of tracing (75-95%).
Buffer Zone - the Buffer Zone is set using a geographic separation between the upper and lower North Island. There is little movement of beehives between these two geographic areas.
Cost of Nucleus Colony for Repopulation - $75 plus GST.
Depopulation - depopulation of registered hives will be concluded before any significant pollination will be required in spring 2000.
Depopulation Compensation - strictly on a per colony basis, not taking into consideration of the size of hives, amount of stored honey on hives, or the condition of equipment. No compensation will be paid on colonies found to already be dead at the time of depopulation, unless based on the judgement of an Authorised Person the hive has died as result of a varroa infestation.
Enforcement - NBA/MAF will prosecute beekeepers who are found to have breached movement control or registration requirements.
Eradication Period - Eradication Zone to be kept free until spring 2001, after which time managed hives can be reintroduced.
Feral Colonies - feral colonies can be depopulated (killed) using bait stations.
Loss of Income - costings have been included for indicative purposes only. No reduction has been made for pollination fees obtained during spring 2000 prior to depopulation.
Mites Existing Without Bees - longest period is 3 weeks. Shortest period for movement of equipment within the Zone following depopulation has a safety margin of twice this period, or 6 weeks.
Movement Control in Eradication Zone - no movement will be allowed out of the Eradication Zone for 12 months following repopulation.
Compliance with Movement Control - beekeepers and others can be stopped from moving bees outside the Eradication Zone.
Natural Mite Spread - the spread of varroa between hives and between apiaries under natural conditions (no human assistance) is a product of the drift of bees between hives, the robbing of weak hives by other hives, and the absconding of bees in a heavily infested hive (resulting in the movement of the absconding bees into either a vacant hive or a hive already populated by a colony of bees). The natural spread of varroa is not likely to be greater than 5km per annum.
Pollination - all FRU and KIWF figures in the Agribase printout are figures for kiwifruit, except in the Te Awamutu Eradication Zone. All NUTS figures in the printout are Macadamias. Pollination requirements are: Kiwifruit - 8 hives/ha. Berryfruit - 2 hive/ha. Pipfruit - 2 hives/ha. Stonefruit - 2 hives/ha. Seeds - 2 hives/ha. Nuts - 2 hives/ ha. Avocados - 1 hive/ha. Citrus does not require pollination.
Return to Country Freedom - end of year 4.
Risk of Reinfestation – the risk of reinfestation following depopulation is the same or less in the Eradication Zones as in the Buffer Zones. The risk of infestation is less in the Surveillance Zone than in the Buffer Zone.
Sensitivity of Test – the Apistan test is considered to be highly sensitive (>83%) on a hive basis for heavy infections, and for light infections (1 varroa mite) that occurred more than one year ago. Hive level sensitivity is likely to be 50% for light infections that occurred approximately six months ago, and poor for light infections occurring within six months of testing.
Apiary site level sensitivity for the delimiting survey is estimated to be 72% for infections occurring more than six months ago. Testing every hive within an apiary is expected to yield site level sensitivities of 88% for apiaries infected one year ago, and 76% for apiaries infected six months ago.
Conducting one test of all hives in all apiaries prior to the pollination season should enable detection of seven out of ten infected apiary districts.
Surveillance Outside Eradication and Buffer Zones - level of testing designed to detect any infection if it is present at a greater than 0.2% prevalence (required to achieve OIE acceptance of disease-free status).
Surveillance in Eradication Zone - all hives in all apiaries, same throughout all 4 years.
Surveillance in Buffer Zone – all hives in all apiaries in year 1, 50% of apiaries in years 2-4.
For the purposes of this Operational Plan, registered hives are those colonies of honey bees managed by man and registered by a beekeeper under government legislation.
The area from which registered colonies will be depopulated will consist of:
a) all apiaries where a varroa mite has been identified during the delimiting and/or in-fill survey (called an Infected Place),
b) a 15km radius around any Infected Place (as per the recommendation of the Technical Advisory Committee).
The Eradication Zone will be legally defined in the form of 260 Series Map grid squares (1km x 1km). No account will be taken for local features and natural boundaries (ie., bush areas and off-shore islands that fall within the 15km radius will not be excluded), nor for any portion of any grid square that may fall outside the 15km radius.
The Technical Advisory Committee identified two possible options in relation to Varroa eradication and registered colonies:
Treatment of colonies in registered hives was considered as an alternative to depopulation. However, the presence of feral colonies throughout the Eradication Zone means that unless all feral colonies in a given area could be poisoned within a short period of time, any treatment of registered hives to destroy mites would be ineffective because of the reintroduction of mites from unpoisoned feral colonies. If such poisoning could be achieved in a short-time frame, all registered hives within the Eradication Zone would have to be trucked into the feral-free zone and managed to ensure the colonies did not starve or become subject to predation ("robbing") from other colonies. The literature also suggests that no currently available treatment can guarantee a 100% eradication of mites from honey bee colonies.
This option would involve the staged depopulation of colonies in all registered hives on their apiary sites, the storage on site of beekeeping equipment associated with the depopulated hive for a given time period to ensure the equipment is free of mites, and then the movement of the equipment to storage premises within the Eradication Zone.
While depopulation of registered hives involves considerable labour and logistical support, it is considered to be both more effective in ensuring complete destruction of existing mites, and less labour and cost-intensive than the movement/treatment option. Total depopulation of registered hives within the Eradication Zone is therefore recommended.
Warranted personnel will carry out depopulation of all hives in registered apiaries in a staged programme directed by an Operations Centre. Depopulation will use an approved chemical of low risk to the general public and the environment. The depopulation procedure will include completing an official inventory of all hives depopulated. The owner of the apiary will be responsible for the storage of equipment associated with the depopulated hives. The equipment will be required to remain on site 6 weeks following depopulation, and then will be subject to movement control to any central storage premises created by the owner, provided the premises is within the Eradication Zone.
The registered hive depopulation programme will begin as soon as a decision was made to attempt eradication. Assuming a decision was made at the end of May, an Operations Centre will be set up in the first week of June and logistics (including requisition of equipment and personnel) will be completed by June 15. It is anticipated that all registered hives will be depopulated within the Eradication Zone by August 1.
The programme will be managed by an Operations Centre with sufficient staff to administer logistical requirements, recruit and train field staff, assign field work and record field work and colony inventories. A Movement Control Officer will be required to send notices to beekeepers and management the movement of depopulated beehive equipment.
Registered beekeepers will be notified that depopulation of their apiaries will be undertaken and will be given the option of removing any surplus honey from hives in those apiaries before depopulation takes place. Honey from those hives can be removed provided a Movement Control Permit is obtained, and provided the honey and combs remain within the Eradication Zone.
Warranted personnel will visit the apiary during normal work hours (daylight) and apply a measured dose of the depopulation chemical into each beehive. No provision will be made for sealing either the hive entrance or holes in hive components, since it is anticipated that the chemical will have a residual action long enough to kill foraging bees returning at nightfall. Each hive that receives the depopulation chemical will be marked DP/MAF followed by a number in sequential order. Marking will be with a black indelible marker in characters no less than 100mm high. The personnel will not be responsible for removing any stored honey found on any hive at the time of the depopulation visit.
The depopulation chemical used will be determined following tests carried out on suitable products by HortResearch. Specifications for the chemical are that it be safe for applicators, the general public and the environment, be low cost, produce no long-tern toxic residues, and kill all bees in the colony using only one application. An application rate will be determined in order to calculate the total amount of chemical required for the entire depopulation operation.
At the time hives are depopulated in an apiary, the warranted personnel will make an inventory of the number of live hives in the apiary. The personnel will also assess whether in their judgement any dead hive in the apiary may have died out as a result of varroa infestation. No record will be kept of the number of supers per hive, the condition of the equipment or the amount of stored honey present. Two-queen colonies will be recorded as one hive. Hives with splits (ie., two colonies separated by a barrier division board) will be recorded as two hives. Both members of the depopulation team will check and sign the inventory record as verification of the number that are present of live hives, dead hives and dead hives resulting from varroa infestation.
The beekeeper owning the registered apiary will be notified by mail within 48 hours following the depopulation of hives in the apiary. The beekeeper will be responsible for storing the equipment associated with the depopulated hives on site. Any robbing of equipment or other deterioration will be at the beekeeper’s own risk. The beekeeper will be instructed not to move any equipment from the apiary for a period of 6 weeks, and only then under a Movement Control Permit.
Six weeks following the depopulation of any apiary, the registered beekeeper owning the apiary may apply for a Movement Control Permit to move the equipment in that apiary to a central storage premises, provided the premises is within the Eradication Zone. It will be the beekeeper’s responsibility to move the equipment and store it in a manner so that it is not robbed or deteriorates. Even though mites cannot live on beehive equipment beyond the 6-week period, the movement of such equipment outside the Eradication Zone is regarded as high risk because it could act as an attractant for any bees (and therefore mites) not eradicated from within the zone.
No beehive equipment from within the Eradication Zone will be allowed outside the Eradication Zone until a determination is made by the Minister.
In the case of depopulation of hives belonging to hobbyist beekeepers, there may be situations where the beekeeper no longer wants to retain ownership of the beehive equipment. In such cases, the Field Team will get the beekeeper to sign a form relinquishing rights to the ownership of the equipment.
Six weeks following the depopulation of the apiary, a Field Team or beekeeper authorised by the Operations Centre will uplift the equipment and remove it to a central storage area. An assessment will then be made by a representative of the Operations Centre as to whether the equipment is of a standard suitable for retention. If the equipment is not suitable, the equipment will be destroyed by a Field Team under direction of the Operations Centre. If the equipment is suitable, it will be offered for tender once repopulation within the Eradication Zone is allowed.
Any honey not removed from these hives prior to repopulation will be removed to a central storage area, extracted by a beekeeper contractor and offered for sale.
Although the depopulation programme for registered apiaries within the Eradication Zone will likely be finished by August 1, the poisoning programme for ferals will not be concluded before registered hives are needed for paid pollination, particularly in kiwifruit. A further short-term registered hive depopulation programme with therefore be required once pollination has finished. Since pollination hives are normally removed to central dump sites following pollination, it would make sense to also carry out this practice in this case, and have Field Teams depopulate the hives once they are set down in the dump sites. All other actions (depopulated hive inventory, holding equipment on site for 6 weeks, movement of equipment to central storage premise within the Zone) would be the same as for the previous depopulation programme.
Control of swarms emanating from these pollination hives was considered, but was not included as an operational procedure, since swarms will become feral colonies and be poisoned once the feral poisoning programme is reactivated in the area.
No area freedom determination will be made following the depopulation of registered hives since feral colonies will still be present. Area freedom determination will take place as part of the feral bee eradication procedure.
In addition to the marking of each hive when the depopulation chemical is applied, a sign will be fixed on one hive in the apiary giving written information describing the programme and any safety issues. Because the chemical chosen for use will be safe for the public and the environment, the only safety issue is likely to be bees robbing the depopulated hive. Only robbing bees from feral colonies or unregistered hives are likely to cause the problem, since all registered hives in the area will depopulated at approximately the same time.
The depopulation programme will be undertaken in a staged manner, although there is no requirement for the work to begin at the edge of the Eradication Zone and move towards any central point. The Operations Centre will be responsible for ensuring that all registered apiaries are depopulated before a feral colony baiting programme is initiated. It is assumed that the entire depopulation programme will be concluded before any feral colony baiting is begun.
Since it is assumed that the depopulation programme will be concluded before any significant pollination of horticultural crops is required in the spring of 2000, there is no requirement for the management of pollination issues other than depopulation of hives used for paid pollination. All crop pollination is expected to be in the form of paid pollination services. No compensation will be paid where paid pollination services were not previously required.
The existing Apiary Register database will be used to identify apiaries to be depopulated and record depopulation activity. A file will be maintained of all depopulated apiary inventories.
Reports of the number of apiaries and hives depopulated will be supplied to MAF as required.
An internal audit programme covering the following areas will be developed to ensure consistency and maintenance of standards:
· Data entry
· Depopulated apiary inventory
· Depopulated apiary procedures
· Complaints
The following forms will be developed:
· Apiary depopulation assignment/work record
· Depopulated apiary inventory
· Relinquishing of ownership of beehive equipment
The following notices will be developed:
· Notice of intent to depopulate apiary (instruction to remove stored honey)
· Notice of depopulation of apiary/notice of movement restriction
Work instructions for the following activities will be produced:
· Use of powers under the Biosecurity Act
· Notifying beekeepers of intent to depopulate apiary
· Apiary depopulation work assignment
· Depopulating colonies in an apiary
· Depopulated apiary inventory
· Apiary depopulation data entry
· Notifying beekeepers of apiary depopulation
· Handling complaints
· Identifying hives that have died as a result of varroa infestation
An inventory control system will be developed to control the use of depopulation materials.
It is recommended that preference be given to employing for these jobs beekeepers and their staff whose livelihoods are directly affected by the eradication programme.
A hands-on, practical training programme will be developed for field team staff, covering proper depopulation procedures, depopulated apiary inventories, safety issues, public relations and accurate record keeping.
Depopulation of registered hives would be an action that the Minister could direct under Section 145 of the Biosecurity Act. It is assumed that at least one member of every field team would carry a warrant as an Authorised Person under the Biosecurity Act to carry out such depopulation.
Interference with the activities of the Accredited Person during A Biosecurity Emergency is an offence under Section 154 of the Biosecurity Act. A work instruction will be developed giving guidance to warranted personnel in dealing with breaches of the Act.
· Type of depopulation chemical to be used
· Registration of pesticide (no pesticide is currently allowed for use in killing honey bees)
· Disbursement of funds obtained from sale of relinquished beehive equipment/honey
Feral honey bee colonies are established from swarms emanating from other colonies. The density of feral colonies in any give area is influenced by climate and foraging potential of the area but most importantly by the number of suitable cavities available for occupation and the number of other colonies in the area. Typical areas for feral colonies include native bush and shelter belts with hollows in trees and buildings with gaps providing access to wall linings and ceiling cavities.
The area from which feral colonies will be eradicated will be the same as the area within which managed colonies will be depopulated. This is the area referred to as the Eradication Zone. That is, the area covered by drawing a 15 kilometre radius around every Infected Place.
An exclusion zone of a further 5 kilometre radius will be needed around the outside perimeter of the Eradication Zone. Beekeepers will be advised to remove beehives, under permit, from this area to prevent these hives also being poisoned.
There are two options worth considering for eradication of feral colonies:
Ground searching and appeals to the public and landowners for information will locate many feral colonies which can be destroyed by the application of a small amount of insecticide such as Carbaryl. As of 11/5/00, information on the location of 279 feral colonies, in the Infected Area, had been volunteered to the Operations Centre by members of the public. This would be only a small proportion of the actual number.
Bees can be attracted to bait stations provided an attractive bait such as honey is used. Successful foraging bees recruit other bees to feed from the bait station. If a non-repellent, slow-acting poison is included in the bait, sufficient will be carried back to the colony to destroy it.
Poisoning using bait stations is recommended. This option has been chosen because it will deal with difficult to locate feral colonies in large and rugged areas of bush. This method will kill any unregistered colonies and any colony that may not have been killed during the depopulation operation. It will also kill colonies located high in trees that can be very difficult to find and access.
A grid of bait stations containing poisoned bait will be established at 1 km intervals throughout the Eradication Zone. These will be checked at regular intervals and the bait changed or replenished as required. Baiting would cease in any area three months after the last observed honey bee activity.
The feral eradication programme would start as soon as registered hive depopulation was completed. This is anticipated to be about the beginning of August 2000. Spring and early summer are the ideal times for this as bees are hungry and actively foraging. The objective would be to have the Eradication Zone bee-free by the end of March 2001.
The bait stations will be modified Lynfield fruit fly traps. Access holes will be small enough to exclude birds and most bumble bees. (The reason for excluding bumble bees is that they would provide some pollination service after all of the honey bees had been eliminated). The bait stations would be hung out of reach of stock and small children.
Bait will be honey mixed with a poison such as acephate (Orthene) or sulfuramid (Finitron). These are recommended as they are slow-acting, non-repellent to bees and have low mammalian toxicity. The honey will be tested to ensure it is free of AFB spores as there is a chance that some of this honey will be robbed out of dead feral colonies and end up in managed hives after repopulation. The honey will also be dyed to reduce the possibility that it will be consumed by people. The addition of a queen bee pheromone or beeswax to the bait station may increase attractiveness to bees (this will be tested before the start of the programme). Bait will be contained in pre-packed screw top plastic jars for ease of use and safety of transport.
Pre-baiting of stations with non-toxic bait is not required but non-toxic honey could be incorporated on top of the toxic bait if creamed or crystallised honey was used . Bait stations will initially be checked at two week intervals. Any old bait remaining will be removed and replaced with a container of fresh bait. Bait remaining longer than two weeks is likely to ferment and be less attractive to bees. The quantity of bait eaten will be recorded as a measure of bee activity in the area. As the bee population in an area declined, the frequency of servicing will be reduced in that area.
Bait station servicing staff will be required during their servicing runs to stop and inspect areas containing flowers to check for the presence of foraging bees. An area will be deemed to be free of honey bees three months after the last bee activity is observed.
It has been suggested that members of the public should be asked to report the presence of bees. It is our experience that many people cannot distinguish between bees, wasps and various look alike flies which means that the Operations Centre would be inundated with many incorrect reports of sightings. However, it would be worth considering an appeal for information from the public toward the end of the operation
Feral colonies whose locations are known will be used as monitors and will be checked at the end of the baiting programme to ensure that they are dead.
Each station will carry a warning sign. Occupiers of properties containing bait stations will be given written information describing the programme and any safety issues. Poisoned bait will be carried and placed in the stations in screw top jars so it will not be touched by bait station servicing staff.
Baiting will start at the edges of the Eradication Zone and move progressively toward the centre. Baiting around areas requiring hives to be brought in for pollination will be timed as much as possible to take place before or after pollination.
The baiting programme in areas of significant kiwifruit production will be managed as much as possible to reduce the risk of poisoning hives brought into the area for pollination purposes. This could be done by pulling out, over the pollination period, bait stations located close to orchards, or timing baiting of those areas to take place after pollination. It may not be possible to manage baiting round minor crops occupying small areas, as this may be too disruptive to the programme and put its objectives at risk. Some allowance will have to be made for compensation for loss of production to cover these cases.
Some crops currently receive “free pollination” (ie., pollination is provided by bees from registered hives located in the vicinity for honey production or nearby feral colonies). After depopulation of registered colonies and eradication of ferals, bees will have to be brought in to pollinate these crops. It is recommended that these growers be expected to pay a commercial price for this service and not be compensated for any extra cost involved. However, the hives brought in to provide this pollination will have to be destroyed so the owner of the hives will be eligible for compensation for the cost of repopulating those hives on the same basis as other registered hives depopulated in the Eradication Zone.
The programme will be managed from an Operations Centre with sufficient staff to
recruit and train bait station operators, plan run servicing, enter run records in the database, and administer stores and wages, etc.
A database will be developed to record and track bait station monitoring progress. This will be able to produce summary reports and data for mapping. Agribase will be used to produce run maps.
Reports on progress of the feral eradication programme will be supplied to MAF as required.
An internal audit programme covering the following areas will be developed to ensure consistency and maintenance of standards:
Data entry
Bait station site spacing
Bait station servicing
The following forms will be developed:
Bait site servicing record
Run map
Landowner consent form
Landowner information sheet
Work instructions for the following activities will be produced:
· Specifications for making traps, formulating and storage of baits, and disposal of baits and traps
Locating and setting up bait stations
· Negotiating with land occupiers
· Bait station servicing
· Bait station servicing data entry
It is recommended that preference is given to employing beekeepers and their employees affected by the eradication programme who would otherwise be unemployed.
A hands-on, practical training programme will be developed to train bait station operators. This will cover correct bait station servicing, safety, public relations and accurate record keeping.
It is envisioned that access to property to place bait stations will be by consent so bait station operators will not require warranting under the Biosecurity Act. Some of the operations management staff will be Authorised Persons under the Biosecurity Act who will have authority to deal with the expected few cases where access to a required property is denied.
Occupiers of land where bait stations are sited will be asked to sign a document stating that they understand that the bait station contains a poisoned bait, that they agree to have it located on their property, that they will allow access for servicing, that they will not interfere with it and that they will inform the Operations Centre if the bait station becomes damaged.
· Is resource management consent required before we put out poisoned bait in stations and dispose of unused poisoned baits and containers?
· Do we require an emergency use permit for the bait station poison? Who is responsible for obtaining that?
· Will compensation be paid to growers for loss of income if pollination not possible?
· Trials on poison concentration in bait, bait station spacing and bait station design need to be carried out to verify that this programme will work under NZ conditions.
The need to repopulate registered hives depopulated during the varroa eradication programme stems from compensation provisions of Section 149 of the Biosecurity Act, namely that a person with goods destroyed as a result of anything done to eradicate the pest is entitled to compensation of such an amount that the person will be in no better or worse position than any person who is not directly affected by the action taken.
At the same time, there is a need to control the repopulation of beehive equipment from the registered hive depopulation programme, since the equipment is stored within the Eradication Zone and is not allowed out of the Eradication Zone until the eradication programme is declared completed. Beekeeping activities should be allowed to begin again once it has been determined that no feral colonies exist within the Zone, and indeed repopulated hives kept within Zone will be required to act as surveillance hives to establish whether the eradication programme has been successful, and whether any “hot spots” need to be re-worked.
The timing of repopulation is driven by the length of time taken to eradicate all feral colonies within the Zone, together with a sufficient length of time to ensure no mites in dead feral colonies remain alive at the time repopulation occurs. It is therefore recommended the “all clear” period before repopulation is no shorter than 6 weeks.
It is unlikely that the feral colony eradication programme will be completed before hives are required for paid pollination activities, particularly for kiwifruit. Hives brought into these areas will therefore need to be depopulated, and a further feral colony eradication programme undertaken in the areas following pollination.
Assuming a 6 week “all clear” period, repopulation will not to get under way until late summer. Since this is very late in the beekeeping season, and at a time that colony populations are reducing, there is likely to be no economic benefit to beekeepers in repopulating beehives held in the Eradication Zone at this time. However, there is likely to be an economic benefit to the horticultural industry in ensuring that sufficient hives with adequate amounts of bees and brood are available for pollination in spring 2001. It is therefore recommended that repopulation begin in either autumn or spring 2001.
Consideration was given to assessing the strength of the honey bee colony at the time of depopulation and then either adjusting compensation accordingly, or repopulating the hive to the same standard. This was judged to be too time-consuming and subject to dispute. The time of year (winter) when depopulation will occur is also the time when honey bee colonies are at their lowest population. It is therefore recommended that no estimation of colony strength is made, and hives to be depopulated are simply recorded in the inventory as either alive at the time of depopulation, dead or dead as a result of varroa infestation.
Consideration was also given to the type of colony used for replacement. In the spring period, there is little to be gained by replacing the depopulated colony with another full strength colony, since a smaller colony or split will increase in size to become a full production colony by the time of the summer honey flow. As well, the intent should be to return total hive numbers in the country to something approaching pre-eradication numbers. This would not be achieved by replacing a depopulated hive with a full strength hive taken from another area.
The replacement colony could take the form of either a broodless package with queen or a nucleus hive with queen. The preferred option is likely to be a nucleus hive, even though this will require the building of new frames by the person offering the nucleus hive. A nucleus hive with brood in the hive will assist in the development of the replacement colony, allowing it to approach full strength by the time of the honey flow. There would be a far greater degree of variability in colony development leading to the honey flow if broodless packages were used. It is therefore recommended that nucleus hives with brood and a young queen are used as standard units for repopulation costing purposes.
Finally, consideration was given to tendering with beekeepers outside the Eradication Zone for provision of standard nucleus hives at a set price to ensure quality. This was determined to be too administratively difficult. It is therefore recommended that a set price per repopulation hive is established, and beekeepers who have had hives depopulated are given that money to negotiate as they see fit with beekeepers willing to provide nucleus hives. The beekeeper purchasing the nucs will have full responsibility for determining the quality of the product provided, and only where such a product cannot be obtained at the set price will the government be required to negotiate on behalf of the beekeeper for provision of repopulation nucleus hives.
It is recommended that beekeepers source their nuclei on the open market. However, because of the numbers likely to be required it is recommended that the NBA, at national or branch level, organise numbers and sources of supply. The American Foulbrood Pest Management Strategy contains provision that should ensure that no bees made available for repopulation come from hives with a clinical case of American foulbrood.
Beekeepers intending to make nuclei for supply would need to start producing nuclei colonies in January-May 2001 for delivery August 2001. The NBA may wish to set standards for the nuclei and audit their quality, but the ultimate responsibility for quality assurance must be with the beekeepers purchasing the nuclei.
Repopulation of beehives depopulated within the Eradication Zone should occur beginning in either spring or autumn 2001.
No assessment should be made of beehives at the time of repopulation, and no adjustment should be made to funds made available for repopulation, based on colony strength.
A four frame nucleus colony containing brood and a young mated queen should be the standard used for repopulation costing purposes, although no limit should be placed on what type of colony a beekeeper actually uses for repopulation. The cost of this unit is assessed at $75, including feeding costs that may be needed to sustain the colony prior to the onset of nectar flows, and costs associated with movement of beekeeping equipment back to apiaries and installation of nucleus hives in the equipment.
During the summer of 2001, the Operations Centre should send a release form to each beekeeper affected by repopulation activities. The form will include a declaration by the beekeeper releasing the government from any further claims relating to depopulation and repopulation activities associated with the eradication programme. All beekeepers who return the release form should receive payment on March 1, 2001, at the specified rate for each live colony identified in the depopulated apiary inventory. The beekeeper has sole responsibility for obtaining sufficient nucleus colonies to the standard desired. Only in the case where the beekeeper is unable to obtain enough nucs to the standard will the government be obliged to negotiated on the beekeeper’s behalf.
All work associated with movement of beekeeping equipment back to apiaries and installation of nucleus hives in the equipment will be the responsibility of the beekeeper.
Movement control involves 4 distinctly different zones; the Eradication Zone (15km around any infected apiary); the Buffer Zone (the northern half of the North Island excluding the Eradication Zone); the Surveillance Zone (the southern half of the North Island); the Disease Free Zone (all of the South Island). Each zone will be treated separately and different movement controls will be required because of the different level of risk posed.
Movement control will be closely integrated with the surveillance strategy.
The following options were considered for movement control:
The Accreditation Programme proposed by the NCDI was considered in detail, since this option was prepared by the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries. The programme was felt to have several good features, including good inter-relationship with surveillance, similarity with other animal disease control programmes such as Tb and American foulbrood, and acceptability to veterinary administrations and overseas government authorities.
Nevertheless, the Accreditation Programme was rejected as an option as it was considered to be unnecessarily complex and restrictive.
Strict movement control based on zones of risk, which is similar to the regime currently being used in the delimiting survey, was also considered. It was felt that such a regime provides a simpler system to both administer and comply with, and is already well understood and accepted in the current circumstances by beekeepers. From an epidemiological point of view, the system treats all beehives equally according to risk, and does not impose as many restrictions on beehives or beekeepers who are not high risk (ie., those in the Surveillance Zone). Finally, the system is likely to be no more costly than the Accreditation option.
Strict movement control with hive testing is therefore the recommended option.
Note – The movements referred to below include hives, nucs, packages, frames of brood, queen bees, honey supers removed from hives for extraction and sticky supers for cleaning out.
Movement in the Eradication Zone is currently prohibited except where allowed under permit. These restrictions will remain in place until eradication has been completed.
Before eradication has been carried out hives may be moved in to the Eradication Zone, under permit, for pollination purposes. None of these hives will be allowed out and all will be depopulated on completion of the pollination contract (these hives will be treated in the same way as any other depopulated hives for compensation purposes).
After depopulation has been completed and the all clear given to repopulate hives, movement will be permitted in the same way as described below for the Buffer Zone
No movement of any hive or other risk item from an outfit will be permitted until every hive in that operation has been tested with Apistan and found clear of varroa. After the clear test free movement within the Buffer Zone and in and out of the Eradication Zone will be allowed. Movement permits will not be required.
All hives in the Buffer and Eradication Zones will be tested twice yearly. Clear tests each time will be required to maintain free movement status. (A positve test will result in that apiary being declared an Infected Place, the hives depopulated and tracing carried out to find and test any risk contacts with that apiary)
Where beekeepers can show that parts of their operation are run as separate units with no movement of risk material between them, they could apply to have them treated as separate operations for movement control purposes.
Movement in to the Surveillance Zone will be prohibited.
Movement to the South Island will be prohibited except for bee products which would be allowed under permit
The collection of swarms will be prohibited (Swarms should be destroyed as they are of unknown disease status).
Free movement will be allowed within the Surveillance Zone. Any hives moved in to the Buffer or Eradication Zone will not be allowed back in to the Surveillance Zone and will be subject to twice yearly testing.
Movement to the South Island will be prohibited.
Movement will be unrestricted except that no movement from any part of the North Island will be allowed.
The movement restrictions will be reviewed annually by a group representing the NCDI and beekeeping industry. Movement restrictions will be eased if good progress with eradication is achieved. Some movement restriction will remain in place until country freedom status is regained.
Beekeepers with hives in more than one zone will be treated as though their entire operation is within the highest risk zone. That is, if they have hives in the Surveillance and Buffer Zones they will be treated as though all of their operation was in the Buffer Zone.
Beekeepers in such situations can however elect to operate under an agreed management plan under which they describe how they isolate or minimise the risk of moving potentially infected material from an area of high risk to an area of lower risk.
After agreement with the Operations Centre parts of the beekeeper’s operation will be treated separately according to the zones in which the hives are located. Any such agreement will be subject to audit by the Operations Centre.
An industry consultation process, such as is already operating during the delimiting survey, will be set up to assist with any alterations and amendments to the detail of the movement control restrictions. This process will take account of changes and unforseen circumstances.
A process will be negotiated with MAF and the NBA on how these issues will be handled. This will be documented and included in operating procedures.
For acceptability it is important to ensure consistency in the application of movement restrictions. For this reason centralised control of the function is desirable. A Movement Control Manager will be appointed to the Operations Centre. This may not always be a full time role, as the workload will vary seasonally and according to programme development. Movement control officers will be appointed as required to assist.
Movement permits will be issued on MAF letterhead and signed by properly Authorised Persons under the Biosecurity Act.
Applications will be requested on an approved application form to ensure that all of the necessary detail is provided. Where possible issued permits will be faxed or emailed to the beekeeper. Copies of all permits issued will be filed along with the application form and any other relevant documentation. When applications are declined the applicant will be advised by phone or in writing. A copy of the declined application will be filed along with an explanation.
Work instructions will be produced for the following activities:
· Managing the movement control function
· Issuing Movement Permits
· Handling movement control documentation
The movement control function will be subject to a programme of regular internal audit.
Movement control staff will be those who have already had some experience in this role or will be trained on the job by an experienced operator. A training checklist will be produced to assist with this. Administration of movement control of bees and bee products requires some knowledge of the beekeeping industry and beekeeping jargon. Where movement control staff have not yet gained this experience a person with apiculture experience will be assigned to assist them.
The following forms will be developed:
· Movement permit templates to cover the most common situations (these will be sent to MAF Legal for comment before use)
· Application forms for movement permits
A report will be provided to MAF summarising permitting activity as required.
On-going surveillance during and after eradication is required to provide information on the status of zones, beekeepers and apiary sites, and to determine the success of the programme in achieving its objective. The information obtained is used for a variety of purposes such as delimiting the geographic spread of the infection, proof of zonal freedom, and for pre-movement and export purposes.
If eradication is to succeed the surveillance regime must be sensitive enough to be able to detect any infected apiary before it can spread infection to another site. At the time of writing NCDI were still working to more accurately define test sensitivity. The surveillance regime described below may have to be modified if the test level is found to be inadequate.
The surveillance zones are the same as for movement control, namely:
a - Eradication Zone - 15km around any Infected Place
b - Buffer Zone – the northern half of North Island excluding the Eradication Zone
c - Surveillance Zone – southern half of the North Island
d - Disease-Free Zone - the South Island
The Accreditation Scheme proposed by the NCDI was examined as an option for surveillance. The scheme was rejected because beekeepers and their hives in the Surveillance Zone were not treated equally from a surveillance point of view (ie., those who sought accreditation had their hives surveyed, and those who did not seek accreditation did not). The scheme therefore does not fit a randomised model needed to provide proper assurances regarding mite presence.
In the Restricted and Eradication Zones, it was not felt that accreditation provided sufficient surveillance post-depopulation in these high-risk zones.
The Accreditation Scheme was also linked to movement control. For a review of reasons why the scheme was rejected for movement control, see the Movement Control section.
Surveillance based on risk was examined and appeared to satisfy both epidemiological and statistical analysis requirements. Surveillance is on going and universal in both the Eradication and Buffer Zones, and lesser and randomised in the Surveillance Zone and Disease Free Zone.
Surveillance based on risk is therefore the recommended option.
The following surveillance strategy programme will be carried out in the various zones:
Eradication Zone - all apiaries and all hives, 6 and 12 months following repopulation, and twice yearly thereafter for at least a year after the last blip has been eliminated.
Buffer Zone - all apiaries and all hives, twice yearly for at least a year after the last blip has been eliminated
Surveillance Zone – Approximately 1150 randomly selected apiaries will be tested in the first year and the same number at approximately two year intervals thereafter. This is designed to meet the OIE minimum requirement for achieving disease free status of not more than 0.2% of hives infected
Disease-Free Zone – As for the Surveillance Zone except that 1400 randomly selected apiaries will be tested and sentinel hives will be set up and tested around major ports and airports.
The only test with the necessary sensitivity that can be approved at this stage is the Apistan test. The test is two Apistan strips per five frames of bees for 24 hours above a sticky board placed on the hive floor. The strips and sticky boards will be inserted and removed by independent persons approved by the Operations Centre managing the response. The sticky boards will be sent for reading to a MAF-approved laboratory.
A training programme with defined competency levels will be developed and will be compulsory for all testing personnel. An audit programme will be developed to ensure consistency of standards.
The programme will be managed by the Operations Centre. In the first year, costs will be included in the administration budget for the eradication programme. In years 2-4, management will be carried out by a smaller number of staff as part of other on going (non-programme) duties.
Details of test results for each apiary and each beekeeper will be recorded in the apiary database.
Forms allocating testing runs will be generated on the apiary database.
A procedure will be negotiated and documented with approved labs to process sticky boards and advise results.
Reports summarising progress will be made to MAF as required. Incidents and significant issues will be reported as they occur.
An internal programme covering all aspects of the programme will be developed.
· Planning testing programmes
· Maintaining test results section of the apiary database
Checklist of issues to be covered in training of programme testing staff.
None
The Biosecurity Act 1993 allows for compensation to be paid provided, “The compensation must be of such an amount that the person to whom it is paid will be in no better or worse position than any person whose property or goods are not directly affected by the exercise of the powers.” It is proposed to offer compensation to beekeepers who have had colonies depopulated:
· to purchase a replacement nucleus hive, or not, as they chose
· to cover the cost of treating brood boxes and combs in storage
· for loss of production and income under certain circumstances
Compensation is payable from money appropriated by Parliament for the purpose.
Compensation cannot be paid to persons who have failed to comply with the Biosecurity Act, or regulations under the Act, and whose failure has been serious or significant or has contributed to the presence of the organism or to the spread of the organism being managed or eradicated.
It is proposed that:
· Beekeepers update their records on the Apiary Register database by way of the Annual Disease Returns (ADR’s), which are legally due back by 1 June 2000 (Pest Management Strategy).
· MAF extend the return period to 30 June, given that the ADR’s were late being sent out (due out 20 April, actually mailed 11 May 2000).
· MAF contacts all beekeepers who are liable to have their hives depopulated (ie., are able to be compensated), to ensure their records are true and correct. An accurate hive record will enable administrators to more accurately work out the likely costs of compensation.
· After this cut-off period, any beekeepers with apiaries found not to be registered are not given compensation.
· Consideration is given to not paying any compensation at all to beekeepers found to having an unregistered apiary(s).
· A publicity campaign is conducted to ensure all beekeepers are aware of the issues surrounding apiary registration, declaration of hive numbers and their liability for compensation.
It is recommended that a set price of $75 plus GST be offered to all beekeepers who have live hives depopulated by an Authorised Person. Compensation should also be paid for hives that in the opinion of the Authorised Person died from varroa infestation.
Beekeepers can use this money how they choose, but most will no doubt use it to purchase replacement nuclei. The per hive compensation fee will be paid regardless of the size of the hive or its condition provided that it is maintained in a registered apiary and complies with the American Foulbrood Pest Management Strategy (ie., compensation will not be paid for hives infected with American foulbrood as these must be destroyed anyway).
The sum of $75 per hive is for a replacement nucleus hive and is calculated to include the cost of:
· a disposable cardboard nucleus box
· four frames of bees, brood, honey and pollen stores
· a young queen bee
· freight to an agreed location
· sugar syrup to maintain the colony until it is self sufficient
· costs to set up the colony in an apiary
Note: The sections on Repopulation and Costings in this plan has recommendations on sourcing nuclei and the numbers that will be needed to repopulate hives from the Infected Zones as well as hives brought in for pollination and subsequently depopulated. The numbers involved may be very difficult to supply.
Some honey will have been eaten by hives prior to depopulation and will not be available for processing and sale. However, this would be impossible to assess. It is therefore recommended that no compensation be paid for honey consumed as stores by the bees since movement controls were initiated.
Comb honey left too long on hives in the autumn is subject to both travel stain on the surface of the cappings and to puncturing by bees. Both of these reduce the value of the comb, especially for export. Comb honey is more valuable than bulk honey ($7 kg compared to $2.20 for bulk extracted honey on average) but in any case it will be very difficult to assess any loss in value. It is therefore recommended that no compensation be made for an alleged loss of export quality grade comb honey.
Beekeepers will be invited to remove any surplus honey stores prior to depopulation (see Depopulation section). As this is normal beekeeper activity, it is recommended that no compensation be offered for any alleged loss of honey stores.
Honey stores have the potential to be contaminated by chemical residues from the depopulation programme. While care is being taken in the choice of chemicals to use, beeswax has an affinity for many pesticides. Bioassays and residue analysis are proposed to test the likelihood of harmful residues remaining in the wax combs for the 12 months that the combs will remain free of bees (August 2000-August 2001).
Six weeks after depopulation, beekeepers can either leave the hives in the apiaries or remove them to storage. In either case combs will need to be protected from rodents, wax moths, stock damage and pollen mites. Rodents and wax moths can completely destroy wax combs while pollen mites destroy stored pollen in the cells. Wax combs will require fumigation or cold storage at regular intervals to protect them for the time they are in storage.
Most beekeepers will need to store the depopulated hives under shelter and may wish to rent premises to do this. However, it is possible to store boxes outside under temporary protection. Usually this would not be possible, as bees would rob out the honey in the brood box combs. In this case it is expected that the feral bee destruction programme will have been initiated and there should not be too many, if any, bees in the area to cause a nuisance. Beekeepers who reside outside the Eradication Zone will still have bees in their environment so will need to provide bee proof storage.
It is recommended that this issue be considered on a case by case basis and compensation be considered if hardship or bee robbing problems can be demonstrated.
Beekeepers have the usual problem of storing and protecting honey boxes and combs but this is for a limited period (May to December) and during the colder months when wax moth and pollen mite damage can either be controlled or is naturally limited. However, storage for depopulated hives will be required for 12-16 months and through the summer. If combs are not fumigated or stored in a chiller then they will be destroyed by wax moth. Each honey box typically holds 8 combs and contains around $5 of wax if melted out (excluding costs of extraction and transport, etc). However, to replace these frames with drawn wax foundation would cost around $3 per frame or $24 per box. This takes into account the cost of the wax foundation sheets, loss of honey production while the bees draw out the sheets into comb, and extra replacement of the wooden frames. A variety in the quality of frames are tolerated in honey boxes but if they lose their wax combs they may not be suitable for re waxing and would have to be replaced.
Thus, beekeepers will have to treat their combs, and this will be difficult if stored outside because of dispersal of the fumigant. It will also be difficult inside as boxes will need to be stacked in such a way that beekeepers can access them to replace the fumigants. This will require a lot more area for storage than would normally be required as many beekeepers stack boxes on pallets and stack up to 3 pallets on top of each other.
Magtoxin tablets (magnesium phosphide) may be a suitable fumigant provided residue levels are manageable. It is proposed to investigate this issue, as well chemical registration and seek assurance that levels of phosphine gas that could build up in confined areas fall within acceptable fire risk limits. Magtoxin tablets cost around 8.5 cents each and at least one tablet will be needed per 2 boxes at monthly intervals from September 2000 to September 2001.
It is recommended that a cost of $1.20 be accepted per hive to allow for the cost of the pesticide, extra storage, covers for the boxes, protective clothing and face masks during fumigation and inventory control.
Beekeepers will need to be careful about mixing up frames and boxes during storage since this is a good way to spread American foulbrood. It is recommended that beekeepers keep records of the brood boxes in storage so that they can be traced back to the apiary of origin.
On the positive side, beekeepers will be able to effect repairs and maintenance on their brood boxes, floorboards and lids and feeders and will be able to scrape propolis off this equipment for sale.
It is expected that hives will be brought into the Eradication Zone for pollination purposes after depopulation is completed, which is expected to be the beginning of August 2000. The feral baiting programme will begin in August as well and can be managed in such a way that kiwifruit pollination is not affected. However, it may not be possible to accommodate early citrus, berryfruit, and stone fruit requirements (late August to late September) as well as tunnel house and green house pollination for such crops as flower seed crops, strawberries and gerkins and melons etc. Mid season pollination of pip fruit, avocados and nashis may also be compromised.
Some beekeepers may have a claim for loss of pollination fees and growers may expect payment for loss or reduction in marketable crops. Further work will need to be done to assess the areas of these crops that may be affected from a lack of honey bees.
It is recommended that no compensation be paid to growers unless they had paid for pollination in the past season or could not bring in beehives because of the feral baiting programme.
Bumble bee colonies are imported into the Auckland area from the Hawkes Bay region for pollination of tomatoes in greenhouses. Bumble bees mostly remain in the green houses, and since bait stations will exclude them there is little threat to their pollination activities. Bumble bees can transport varroa, however, so it is recommended that bumble bee colonies only be brought into the Eradication Zone under permit and that they are destroyed following the pollination period.
It is proposed to depopulate any hive brought into the Eradication Zone for pollination. Full strength hives will be needed for early to mid-season pollination, since a 4-frame replacement nucleus hive will not be strong enough. These hives should also receive the $75 per hive fee after depopulation. Compensation will also need to be paid for subsequent loss of honey crop and other income activities.
This will be the most difficult option to assess and administer since beekeepers produce different income streams from their colonies with attendant different costs. For example the following “farm gate prices” are achievable:
Product : Farm Gate Value
bulk honey : $1.50-4.50 kg
comb honey : $5-7 kg
beeswax : $6-7 kg
pollen : $9-20 kg
royal jelly : $900-4000 kg
bulk bees : $11-14 kg
queen bees : $14-20 each
nucleus hives : $35-50 each
pollination (other) : $30-46/hive
pollination (kiwifruit) : $50-90/hive
It is not possible to give production figures per hive since not every hive will produce all of the above and there are seasonal and regional variations in production. For example, some hives earn more than one pollination fee and some beekeepers wholesale their products whereas others will retail their products. Compensation, at least for commercial beekeepers, therefore needs to be assessed on an individual basis. A commercial beekeeper is defined as one “who keeps bees for a pecuniary profit” and as such submits a set of accounts to Inland Revenue each year.
It is recommended that for non-commercial beekeepers no compensation other than the $75 per hive fee is paid. For commercial beekeepers, the following options are suggested:
· the beekeeper’s accountant submit a claim for loss of income based on an average of the set of accounts for the past 3 years.
· a MAF/AgriQuality/independent accountant assess the claimant’s books as above and determine a compensation rate.
· the beekeeper accept an assessed amount as determined by government and based on average net income figures presented in the American Foulbrood Pest Management Strategy document (1997) and adjusted for inflation at the rate of 1.5% p.a. (ie 4.5%). These figures are discussed in the Estimated Cost of Implementation section.
Care will be needed in assessing loss of income for beekeepers who produce-added value products (eg., cosmetics and dietary supplements from beeswax, honey and royal jelly). They may still be able to make these products by buying in the raw materials, but may effectively lose the price differential between their own raw materials and those bought from another beekeeper.
Beekeepers within the Eradication Zone, who lose a large proportion, or all of their hives, and who have a significant retail business may lose market share and goodwill as a result of an inability to supply eg royal jelly and pollen. However, it is hoped that they may be able to source product elsewhere, alhough at higer cost.
There appears to be an anomoly in the Biosecurity Act relating to downstream losses. Beekeepers who manufacture products derived from their production may be able to seek compensation for the loss of those products, markets and goodwill. As well, the horticultural industry receives an indirect compensation in the form of sufficient repopulated hives to provide paid pollination services, as well as potentially direct compensation for loss income resulting from eradication activities under the plan. However, companies who do not own beehives and derive their income from the manufacture of products derived from raw materials supplied by beekeepers affected by eradication may not be eligble for compensation under provisions of the Act. There is likely to be significant downstream losses suffered by such companies, espeically if they cannot obtain bee product raw materials from other sources.
Compensation for depopulated hives will be based on the following:
· Warranted personnel count live hives and hives killed by varroa in the field and complete an inventory.
· Each field team always comprises at least two persons and both parties sign the inventory sheet.
· The inventory records as above will be regarded as final.
· A beekeeper may accompany a field team depopulating his/her own hives and will be invited to sign the inventory sheet as well.
This is a per hive fee and will be calculated on the basis of the number of hives depopulated as well as dead hives in the field.
Payments to beekeepers can be made by cheque or direct to a bank account once the number of hives is validated and the beekeeper’s Annual Disease Return has been received. This information can be checked through AgriQuality NZ Ltd who would countersign the inventory form. Payments to the beekeepers could be made by the finance section within MAF or AgriQuality NZ Ltd or by an independent contractor such as an appointed accountancy firm or bank. As large sums of money will be involved in some cases, checks should be made to ensure the compensation is paid to the correct person(s).
It is proposed to review the Apiary Register database and interview involved parties as well as the alleged owners of the hives. Some hives may be leased, others will be in company, partnership or trust names, there may be bank liens, and so on.
Beekeepers may be asked to sign a waiver of any further liability for compensation once the have been paid agreed amounts.
Section 162A (5) of the Biosecurity Act requires that, “Any dispute concerning the eligibility for, or amount of, compensation must be submitted to arbitration and the provisions of the Arbitration Act 1996 apply.”
The American Foulbrood PMS has an arbitration process that could be activated in this instance if required.
· waiver form after compensation is paid
· apiary report form to include space for at least 2 depopulation team members to sign and record live hive numbers for compensation purposes and for HQ staff to validate other details off the apiary database
· work instructions for assessing and managing compensation
· inventory form for stored boxes for compensation of treatment option
· How commercial beekeepers are to be compensated for loss of income and or goodwill
· How growers could be compensated if pollination services cannot be provided
· Policy on non-payment of compensation
· How stored combs can best be protected and beekeepers compensated for this
· Arbitration process
· Procedures for assuring that any compensation payments go to the correct party(s)
· Is compesation payable to growers and downstream bee product manufacturers
Assumptions: 1 bait station per km2; 6 months duration
Assumptions: all apiaries; all hives; 2 tests per year
Assumptions: all apiaries; all hives; 2 tests per year
Assumption: detect any infection if it is present at >0.2% prevalence (OIE definition of disease-free status)
Year 1-2 (annually)
Years 3-4 (annually)
Cost of replacement nucs and pest control
Loss of income
Source: Agribase
Apiaries and hives in Eradication and Buffer Zones
Size of blip (extrapolated from apiaries/km2 in average of Eradication Zones)
The following costs are averages for beekeepers in New Zealand, as presented by industry in the AFB Pest Management Strategy document in July 1997. The figures have been adjusted for inflation at a rate of 1.5% p.a. (ie, 4.5%).
The figures are for use in determining likely compensation costs to beekeepers affected by the eradication programme. However, compensation for individual beekeepers will be determined by an assessment of net income from income tax records.
Pollination Hives
|
Gross Income |
$138.88 |
|
Production Costs |
$86.06 |
|
Net Income |
$52.82 |
Non-Pollination Hive
|
Gross Income |
$108.56 |
|
Production Costs |
$66.10 |
|
Net Income |
$42.46 |
Weighted Average (Pollination and Non-Pollination)
(Weighted by total number of each type of hive in New Zealand industry - 37% Pollination/63% Non-Pollination)
|
Gross Income |
$119.93 |
|
Production Costs |
$73.58 |
|
Net Income |
$46.35 |
Critical factors that are not costed can still have an important and in some cases even over-riding effect on the ability of the Operational Plan to achieve its objective.
The most significant factor that has not been costed is the impact of depopulation activities in the Eradication Zones on hive holdings. The following table summarises this impact:
Eradication activities will involve the depopulation of approximately 44% of all North Island hives within 6 months of the initiation of the Operational Plan. Total New Zealand hive reduction will be approximately 25%.
The depopulation will have a significant impact on reducing both honey and bee products production in the North Island, as well as on the ability of beekeepers in both the North and South Islands to supply sufficient nucleus colonies to repopulate these hives in the spring of 2001.
The supply of nucleus colonies will have a further impact on reducing honey and bee products production in the remaining hives in the North and South Islands in 2001-2002, and on the ability of beekeepers to provide sufficient hives of proper strength for paid pollination services in the spring of 2001. The impact on pollination services could translate into reduced yields in some crops in the 2001-2002 crop year, and most especially kiwifruit (because of it’s reliance on high stocking rates prepared to hive strength standards).
The North Island honey crop for 2000-2001 will be reduced by a figure marginally less than 44%, since pollination hives normally produce less honey than non-pollination hives. This will still translate into a 20-25% reduction in total New Zealand honey crop for that production season. This is likely to mean that a potential shortage will occur in supply of honey to the domestic market, especially prior to Christmas in 2001. Export demands are likely to exacerbate the problem.
The New Zealand honey crop will also be reduced in the 2001-2002 season as a result of nucleus colonies being taken to repopulate over 70,000 hives, and as a result of those repopulated hives being below strength going into the honey production season at the beginning of 2002. The price of honey in the retail domestic market will increase in mid-2000 and remain at a high price until at least mid-2003.
Other critical factors not costed are the social and psychological costs to the beekeeping industry caused by this depopulation (acute and chronic depression, family and marital stress), as well as downstream adverse economic effects on bee products manufacturers/exporters and package bee and queen producers/exporters. Downstream effects are likely to mean some bee products manufacturers may not be able to source sufficient bee product raw materials (honey, propolis and pollen) to meet demand, and product that is sourced will increase in price. Package bee producers may be unable to source sufficient bees to meet export orders, particularly in the autumn following depopulation (2001), since beekeepers may be reluctant to reduce bee numbers in hives they wish to produce repopulation nucleus hives from the next spring.
Note: movement control ongoing for 4 years (until mite free status regained)
|
Month |
Depopulation |
Feral Eradication |
Bee Free Period |
Repopulation |
Pollination |
|
June 00 |
X |
||||
|
July 00 |
X |
||||
|
Aug 00 |
X ? |
X ? |
|||
|
Sept 00 |
X |
X |
|||
|
Oct 00 |
X |
X |
|||
|
Nov 00 |
X |
X Kiwi |
|||
|
Dec 00 |
X |
X Kiwi |
|||
|
Jan 01 |
X |
X |
|||
|
Feb 01 |
X |
||||
|
Mar 01 |
X |
||||
|
Apr 01 |
X ? |
X ? |
|||
|
May 01 |
X |
||||
|
June 01 |
X |
||||
|
July 01 |
X |
||||
|
Aug 01 |
X |
X ? |
|||
|
Sept 01 |
X |
X |
|||
|
Oct 01 |
X |
X |
|||
|
Nov 01 |
X |
X |
|||
|
Dec 01 |
X |
X |
|||
This will be a flexible structure, with staff being added or removed to take account of varying workloads:
· Access to IP support required at all times
· At least one staff member at Operations Centre should have some apiary competence
· Part-time role for one person doing audit/training
Home NZ Bkpg Bee Diseases Organisation Information Contacts
, webmaster of the site...