The Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry will start
treating varroa-infested hives as soon as possible.
Beekeepers with infested apiaries and those apiaries
within 5kms of infested apiaries will be offered
assisted treatment of hives with a registered
chemical. Beekeepers with apiaries considered at risk
of infestation will continue to be monitored.
The government will meet the cost of purchasing and
applying treatments. The programme will be jointly
administered by MAF and the National Beekeepers
Association. MAF expects that there will be an
approved chemical available in 10 days, at which time
field teams will swing into action.
All beekeepers from apiaries that require treatment
will be contacted shortly with details of the
programme.
Treating all varroa infested hives is only the first
of a three-phase long-term varroa management
programme. The Minister for Biosecurity and the
Minister of Agriculture announced yesterday that
Government was opting for joint government and
beekeeping industry management of varroa in New
Zealand. Eradication was ruled out as an option after
a group of technical experts identified that the
chances of successfully eradicating varroa were
minimal.
MAF is committed to reducing the impact of varroa by
ensuring that the South Island remains varroa-free for
as long as possible, and varroa's effects in the North
Island are minimised. Assisted treatment and movement
control will continue in the upper North Island until
consultation with industry has finalised ongoing
varroa control arrangements.
MAF will be attending the National Beekeepers
Association annual general meeting next week, as well
as holding regional meetings with the Association to
further explain the three-tier approach.
It is critical that the draft operational plan for
interim management and the long-term management
programme benefit from industry input prior to being
finalised. The National Beekeepers Association is
co-ordinating beekeeper submissions on the draft
operational plan. The final plan will be reported back
to Government by mid September.
MAF will also be working with the Ministry of Social
Policy and the beekeeping industry to assess the need
for rural sector support for the beekeepers. Some
North Island farmers, heavily reliant on income from
beekeeping may face severe financial hardship and
stress as a result of varroa.
- What is the current distribution of varroa?
A delimiting survey for Varroa has been completed.
Infestations are prevalent and heavy around Auckland,
Pukekohe and Hauraki Plains, with outlying sites at
Helensville, Te Puke, Hokianga, Te Awamutu, Otorohanga
and National Park. It is assumed that feral bees have
been infected.
- What are the possible economic impacts of varroa?
MAF has estimated the impacts to be in the range of
$400 million to $900 million if there is no direct
Government involvement. (This is a the total, or
one-off, value of the future expected impacts.) The
impacts arise through factors such as the reduced bee
numbers leading to reduced pollination; increased
costs of pollination services; and increased costs for
beekeepers. The actual economic impacts of varroa will
depend to a large extent on the success of the
Government response.
- With Government involvement - how much?
The management programme is expected to cost
Government up to $40 million over the next two years.
Government's involvement and funding of management
beyond the two-year interim programme will be
determined through the development of a long-term
management plan. The decision to go for the management
option should reduce the monetary impact of varroa to
a much lower level.
- What were the response options being discussed?
implement a Government supported eradication
programme;
industry only management; and
joint Government and industry management.
- What was the technical advice on a preferred response?
On the basis of risks identified by a group of
technical experts, MAF considers there is a low
probability that an eradication programme for varroa
would be successful.
- What about industry only management?
The economic impacts to New Zealand of Varroa under
this option are estimated to be in the range of $400
million to $900 million. MAF considers that these
impacts could be significantly reduced through direct
Government involvement in management.
- Why was eradication not pursued?
The four primary technical risks identified were:
Varroa might be more widespread than previously known
while the Apistan test is the most sensitive
available, it will not reliably detect very low levels
of varroa infestation; and
the likelihood of unidentified infestations reduces
the feasibility of eradication.
It may not be possible to detect and treat new
infestations before they spread further
eradication of varroa is dependent on being able to
detect new infestations before they spread to other
locations;
even with the best available Apistan test, new
infestations may remain undetected for up to six
months, and there is potential for those to spread
further prior to detection; and
the technical group considered this a significant risk
to eradication being achieved.
It may not be possible to eradicate all infested feral
colonies
eradication of varroa requires elimination of all
infested feral colonies (this would be done using
poison bait stations - one per square kilometre);
attracting the last feral bees into poison bait
stations would be difficult because the last bees
would have little competition for abundant natural
food sources, such as flowers.
There may be public concerns over possible
environmental and public health impacts of a poisoning
programme
Although any poisoning programme would be carried out
with appropriate safeguards, public concern would be
an unqualified but potentially significant risk to the
programme.
In addition to technical risks, the technical group
also noted:
eliminating a substantial proportion of the North
Island's bees (about 40%) poses a significant risk to
industries that rely on bees for pollination services.
(This risk is acceptable only if there were a good
probability of success.)
- What was the estimated cost of eradication?
- The cost of attempting eradication is estimated at
$55-70 million.
- Was cost a factor in the decision not to eradicate?
No. Eradication would be overwhelmingly worthwhile
from an economic perspective if it was technically
feasible with a good probability of success. The
decision not to pursue eradication was based on the
technical advice that there is a low probability of
success.
- Was MAF too slow in its response and did this affect
the chance of a successful eradication?
The time taken to collect information and properly
assess response options did not affect the response
option chosen. MAF and the Technical Advisory Group
considered it was necessary to determine the extent of
the varroa infestation before commencing any response.
MAF and beekeepers have addressed this issue with
great urgency, but determining the geographical
distribution of varroa has been very time and people
consuming. The extent of spread has meant a huge
number of bee hives had to be tested in the infested
area, and many follow up surveys were required outside
of the infested area as a result of beehive movements.
Depopulating large numbers of infested hives before
the extent of the infestation was known would have
been premature. In fact, as it turns out, this would
have resulted in much unnecessary destruction of
hives, as the long-term management option chosen does
not require hive destruction.
Natural spread of the mite is slow, and movement
controls were put in place to guard against accidental
spread while the delimiting survey was completed.
- Would an eradication attempt contribute to control,
even if it were unsuccessful?
The techniques for eradicating Varroa are
fundamentally different from the techniques for long
term management. Eradication would require the
depopulation of all managed and feral bees. Long-term
management requires the use of chemicals to kill
Varroa in managed hives, while leaving the bees in
those hives healthy.
A failed eradication attempt would not effectively
contribute to a long-term management programme.
Rather, it would drain Government and industry
resources, good will and trust, to the extent that any
subsequent control programme would probably be much
less effective than what is currently being proposed.
An unsuccessful eradication attempt would also
severely disrupt beekeeping activities, and put crop
pollination at risk.
- What will the joint Government and industry response
involve?
Government has agreed in principle to a three-stage
plan.
Immediate management (next 10 weeks)
Aim: To get a treatment programme underway while the
interim management plan is finalised.
Actions: Beekeepers from all infested apiaries, and
apiaries within a five kilometre radius of an infested
apiary, will be offered treatment of hives with a
registered chemical. A MAF contractor will administer
the treatment and costs will be met by MAF.
Interim management (a two year Government supported
management programme)
Aim: to ensure that the South Island remains free of
Varroa for as long as possible, and that the effects
of Varroa in the North Island are minimised.
Actions: MAF has prepared and released a draft
operational plan for Varroa control to the industry
for comment.
It is proposed that MAF finalise this plan once
industry comments have been received, and report back
to Cabinet by the end of mid-September with firm
proposals.
Long term management (beyond two years)
Aim: to ensure the effects of Varroa are minimised.
Actions: The Government considers that the complex
issues associated with long term management of Varroa
would be best considered in the context of developing
long term management proposal under the Biosecurity
Act 1993.
Cabinet has approved additional funding to enable MAF
to employ a facilitator to lead development of a
long-term strategy. (Control at an apiary level - At
an apiary level, control involves monitoring mite
populations and treating infested hives with a
registered chemical (or alternative organic treatment)
which kills mites and leaves the hives intact.)
- What is a long-term management plan?
The long-term management plan will have similar legal
status to regulations. The strategy sets up a pest
management agency responsible for implementing the
strategy and the basis for funding the strategy. The
pest management agency is responsible for developing a
detailed operational plan and providing an annual
report to the Minister. The Government has approved
funding for a facilitator to lead the process of
developing a management plan for varroa.
The process of developing a management plan for varroa
would require explicit consideration of:
the purpose for which Varroa was to be managed;
an appropriate management agency;
the benefits and costs of management options;
the statutory powers required;
what obligations would be placed on individuals; and
appropriate funding arrangements including any
compensation.
Because of the national significance of Varroa and the
potential for conflicting industry interests, it is
considered that the development of a management plan
would be led by MAF in partnership with industry.
Additional funding has been approved to enable MAF to
employ a facilitator for the strategy. A management
plan for Varroa would not preclude or necessarily
require future Government involvement. Long-term
varroa control at apiaries will involve monitoring
mite populations and treating infested hives, which
will kill the mites and leave the hives intact.
- How much will the joint Government / industry response
cost?
The cost of the response will depend to some extent on
whether there is an incursion in the South Island and
the extent to which Government pays for disease
management.
Costs of three-tier plan:
Preliminary estimates of the cost of a two-year
interim Varroa control programme incorporates:
research costs of $2 Million;
a one-off South Island surveillance programme to
confirm freedom from varroa, plus an on-going
surveillance to monitor for incursions $10 Million;
eradication of each incursion to the South Island $8
Million;
North Island extension programmes, movement controls
and quality systems $2 Million; and
disease management (dependant on the extent of
Government involvement) up to 17 Million.
- When will chemical controls for varroa mite be
registered and available for use?
There are currently no chemicals registered in New
Zealand for the treatment of varroa. In April the
Minister of Agriculture instructed MAF to fast track
the approvals process for chemicals to be used in
beehives to treat varroa. Approval of such chemicals
is required under the Animal Products (Ancillary and
Transitional Provisions) Act 1999. The process used to
assess and approve chemicals under this legislation
closely mirrors that for animal remedies or
pesticides. Two products are going through the
approval process. It is expected that one or both of
these products will be available for use in July.
- Are there any human health or environmental impacts of
the joint Government / industry response?
There are not expected to be any significant human
health or environmental impacts from the control
programme. Potential issues and necessary safeguards
are being addressed during the statutory process of
registering treatments for use. (MAF Agricultural
Compounds unit facilitates this process and issues the
registration).
- Will there be compensation for Beekeepers?
Compensation is not expected to be a significant issue
with the joint industry and Government response
because the treatment regime leaves hives intact and
productive.
- What are the expected long-term impacts of Varroa on
beekeepers?
It is expected that beekeepers involved in providing
pollination services will be able to successfully
adapt to the presence of varroa, because the profit
margins in horticulture should enable the costs of
varroa management to be passed on.
Small and medium sized beekeepers focussing on honey
production may not be able to successfully adapt to
the presence of varroa, as the current profit margins
for honey products are insufficient to meet treatment
costs. Large sized honey producers will be assisted by
economies of scale and are expected to adapt.
- How will the Government respond to hardship caused to
beekeepers by Varroa?
Cabinet has asked MAF and the Ministry of Social
Policy, in consultation with the beekeeping industry,
to review the need for rural sector support measures,
and report back to Government by the end of August
2000 with a proposal.
- How is industry likely to react to the decision to
manage varroa rather than eradicate?
It is expected that the decision by Cabinet not to
pursue eradication will be met with an angry response
from some industry participants. In the end though
eradication was simply not feasible, and we hope that
once beekeepers have had an opportunity to consider
the decision carefully, they will recognise this. The
Government is committed to assisting industry to
manage Varroa mite, and we will be looking to work in
partnership with beekeepers to develop the best
possible response.
MAF will continue to work with beekeepers to further
explain the Government's planned Varroa initiatives,
and to finalise a control plan.
- How is the public likely to react to the decision to
manage varroa rather than eradicate?
The public is likely to be concerned at the
establishment of a new organism in New Zealand. It is
anticipated that like beekeepers they will come to
accept the proposed response as being the best of the
available options.
- Is there a need to review Border Controls as a result
of this and other recent incursions?
MAF has been asked for options on enhancing New
Zealand's overall biosecurity. This will require MAF
to undertake careful analysis of the range of existing
and potential measures and ensure that any new
proposals fit within the existing integrated risk
management approach. An initial report is expected in
about a month.
- How has industry been involved in considering the
response to Varroa?
- Industry representatives have participated in
technical groups considering the economic impacts of
Varroa, the technical feasibility of eradication and
development of options for controlling the impacts of
the mite. Industry has had an opportunity to make
submissions on draft eradication and control plans.
There have been meetings and conference phone calls to
ensure that industry has been informed of key
developments.
- What does the management option mean for pollination?
- There should be minimal impact on pollination services
as the management option enables viable hives to be
available for pollination.