Australian Quarantine Review Secretariat Australian Quarantine a shared responsibility

10.4.2 Reporting Lines

An incursion of an exotic pest or disease may first be noted by people outside State or Commonwealth animal or plant health services. An incursion might first be suspected by a member of the general public (e.g. for weeds or other environmental pests), a farmer, a private veterinary practitioner, a plant health consultant or a research scientist. Such people need to know how to report their suspicion or concern, who they should advise, and how to do this quickly. The Review Committee believes the awareness campaign outlined previously (see Chapter 3 on Awareness and Consultation) needs to include specific information on reporting suspect exotic pests and diseases because early advice is often essential to allow prompt and effective containment leading to eradication and control. The Review Committee notes that in 1994 EXANDIS facilitated the commencement of the Disease Watch Hotline — a toll-free telephone number (1800 675 888) that connects callers to the relevant State officer to report concerns about any potential exotic pest or disease of animals. The hotline has also proven to be very useful during agricultural emergencies other than animal disease emergencies (e.g. the papaya fruit fly incursion and the chlorfluazuron residue incident in 1995). The Review Committee believes that consideration should be given to broadening the use of this hotline to include reporting suspected incursions of pests and diseases of plants.

10.4.3 Training and Awareness

EXANDIS has supported training of veterinarians overseas on specific exotic animal pests and diseases. It has also supported training in Australia using the high security facilities at the Australian Animal Health Laboratory (AAHL), which currently runs two exotic disease training courses for veterinarians each year, providing first-hand experience in the recognition of a range of exotic diseases. In 1995, AAHL ran two training courses — one for field veterinarians, the other for veterinary pathologists. It also ran a three-day workshop in conjunction with Emergency Management Australia to make those who would direct operations more aware of management techniques during an emergency. EXANDIS also supported two training sessions for private veterinary practitioners in 1995.

To raise awareness of exotic pests and diseases, EXANDIS sponsored the production of a series of videos and distributed a diagnostic manual (Geering et al. 1995) to all registered veterinarians. It also produced two full-colour posters showing the lesions of major exotic pests and diseases, and distributed them through major rural magazines in 1995. The Review Committee could find little evidence of similar nationally coordinated major training and awareness initiatives in the plant sector. It believes that this situation is unlikely to improve until the plant sector adopts similar mechanisms and structures to those that have allowed the animal sector to develop its current level of training in and awareness of exotic pests and diseases.

10.4.4 Field Services

States are responsible for pest and disease control within their respective jursidictions and have traditionally maintained strong field services. State Government field services need to be sufficiently resourced to enable a prompt response to be made to any reports of suspected incursions of exotic pests and diseases.

Many submissions to the Review expressed concern at the run down in State field services during the past decade, arguing that in many States they were now inadequate to ensure a prompt response to reports of incursions of exotic pests and diseases of both animals and plants. For example, the National Farmers' Federation argued that 'attaining a high level of integrated preparedness will require increased resources' and called for 'a moratorium on cuts to quarantine and agricultural health programs by the States and the Commonwealth'. However, it also acknowledged that exotic disease management and control should 'be funded by joint contributions from industry and government'. In particular, several submissions provided data on the decline in numbers of State and Commonwealth animal health field staff. They suggested that numbers were now so low that Australia might no longer pass other countries' evaluation of the effectiveness of its veterinary services. Such evaluation forms an important part of risk analysis that determines continued access of Australian exports to overseas markets (see Section 1.7 of Appendix D).

10.4.5 Diagnostic Capacity

Many submissions to the Review also expressed concern at the reduction of State diagnostic laboratory services, arguing that services were now inadequate to ensure rapid evaluation of any suspected case of an incursion of an exotic pest or disease — whether to confirm that the case is not exotic, to refer to reference laboratories any that can not be confirmed as endemic, or to confirm that it is an incursion of an exotic pest or disease.

10.4.5.1 Animals

In its submission to the Review, the Australian Veterinary Association argued that in the event of an outbreak of an exotic disease Australia 'may not be able to control it due to insufficient personnel and expertise in both field and laboratory situations'. Similarly, the National Registry of Domestic Animal Pathology noted that over the past six years 'there have been severe reductions in trained and experienced field and laboratory diagnosticians, particularly in the areas of farm animals, fish, poultry and wildlife'. It also flagged an increasing deficiency due to age profiles of staff, noting that remaining laboratory staff 'have an average age of 45–50 years' and that 'young diagnosticians are conspicuous by their absence'.

10.4.5.2 Plants

Several submissions to the Review, including that of the Australian Academy of Science, expressed concern at deficiencies in plant health disciplines such as entomology and forest health. For example, concern at the recent decline in both the number of practising taxonomists and the number of Australian universities offering training in taxonomy prompted the Australian Biological Resources Study to host a national workshop in 1995 (Visher 1996). The concern leading to the workshop was based on information that included trends such as the decrease in the number of practising botanical and zoological taxonomists at Australian universities from 193 in 1974 to only 64 in 1991. Similarly, information provided with the Queensland Department of Primary Industries' submission pointed out that the number of positions for forest entomologists and forest pathologists in State departments had fallen by almost 50% between 1990 and 1993 (the last year for which figures were readily available). The decline of available expertise in this area has lead to comment that the current level of resources is insufficient to guarantee protection of forest resources and native plant communities.

In its submission to the Review, the Australian Academy of Science noted that it had made representations in early 1996 to the Standing Committee on State Development of the Parliament of New South Wales to express concern at the proposed closure of the Biological and Chemical Research Institute at Rydalmere and of the Regional Veterinary Laboratory at Wagga Wagga. The Academy argued strongly that closure of the Rydalmere facility in particular would significantly compromise Australia's plant health diagnostic capacity, and noted the Institute's impressive record in identification of exotic pests and diseases of plants.
The Review Committee understands that AQIS intends to develop post-entry quarantine facilities and a plant health laboratory at Eastern Creek, near Sydney, to replace those that will no longer be available at Rydalmere. The Review Committee supports this initiative, which it sees as an essential but minimal requirement for maintaining Australia's capacity in plant health and quarantine.
Recommendation 97: The Review Committee recommends that Government establish plant diagnostic laboratories and secure post-entry quarantine facilities at Eastern Creek, near Sydney.
A few submissions — including those of CSIRO and the Australian Academy of Science — argued that there was a need for a national secure containment facility for plants to undertake a role similar to AAHL's role for animals. The Review Committee notes that the plant sector does not have a high security laboratory equivalent to AAHL to provide national diagnosis for exotic pests and diseases of plants, or to undertake research on exotic pests and pathogens that require a high level of security.
However, the Review Committee understands that diagnosis of and research on many exotic pests and some exotic pathogens of plants can be safely undertaken in secure facilities that are considerably less sophisticated than those required for animal pathogens such as at AAHL. Several facilities of this sort exist around Australia, providing in essence a decentralised capacity for diagnosis of and research on many exotic pests and some exotic diseases of plants. The Review Committee acknowledges that a more secure containment facility might be required for other exotic diseases of plants (e.g. pathogens that are dispersed in aerosols, requiring air filters and negative pressure for secure containment).
The Review Committee specifically sought the opinion of a number of State departments and industry organisations on their perception of the need for a secure containment facility (or facilities, if at more than one site) for plants. There appeared to be little agreement on the need for such a facility, its precise charter or role, or its optimal location. There also seemed to be little agreement on the need for a biocontainment facility in northern Australia that has been suggested might include some capacity in animal biotechnology in addition to plant protection activities. The Review Committee believes that this issue should be investigated in detail by APHC before any recommendations are made or additional funding is sought.
Recommendation 98: The Review Committee recommends that the Australian Plant Health Council investigate the need, optimal location and possible funding options for a national secure containment facility for plant pests and diseases.

10.4.6 Research Capacity

Australia has had a long history of leadership in agricultural research, including research into pests and diseases of animals and plants. Innovations from such research have increased productivity and contributed significantly to Australia's competitiveness as an exporter of high quality animals, plants and their products. However, with significant cuts to budgetary support at both Commonwealth and State levels, Australia's national capacity for research in agriculture — including animal and plant health — has been substantially eroded over the past decade.

Given that the focus of this Review was on quarantine and not on research, relatively few submissions specifically addressed agricultural research. However, a number of submissions did call for increased effort in research on animal and plant health and quarantine. The Australian Academy of Science argued that there was a need to encourage more research in quarantine-related issues and proposed that this could be done through competitive grants for relevant research projects. It also advocated a system of competitive grants to support quarantine-related pest and disease diagnosis and research, administered through a peer review system like that of the Australian Research Council or the National Health and Medical Research Council. Several submissions noted that there was a need for more research to improve knowledge of Australia's native animals and plants, including knowledge of their pest and disease status. The Australasian Mycological Society raised concern at how little is known about native Australian fungi. In addition, representatives of communities in the Torres Strait region and the Tiwi Islands noted the need for research on local plants and insects to provide baseline information on native species in northern Australia.
During the course of the Review, the Review Committee became aware of a specific gap in facilities for investigating the potential biological control of aquatic pests. Australia has experienced a number of incursions of significant aquatic pests, particularly associated with ship fouling and ballast water (see Section 6.2.1.1 and Appendix B). The Review Committee noted that work by the Cooperative Research Centre for Research on Imported Marine Pests had identified several potential biological control agents for some of the most important of these pests. However, research to assess their potential for biological control is hampered by of the lack of a secure facility in Australia for conducting such studies.

10.4.7 Diagnostic and Research Needs

As noted previously, several submissions to the Review expressed concern at significant human resource deficiencies in particular disciplines such as entomology, veterinary diagnostic pathology and aquatic animal health. Some submissions to the Review also stressed the importance of animal and plant health authorities having access to other agencies with potential diagnostic expertise, including museums, universities, and research organisations such as CSIRO. However, they noted that such organisations have introduced charges for services that were previously provided free. The Review Committee noted the inconsistency of the Government providing significant funding for AAHL to undertake diagnosis of exotic pests and diseases of animals while providing little funding for similar services for plants (e.g. for identification of insect pests). It believes that the Board of Quarantine Australia might address this anomaly and consider developing a contract or contracts for the identification of pests and diseases of plants (e.g. of pests found on imported goods inspected at the border).

Australia needs to maintain its capacity to undertake research into pests and diseases of animals and plants, both offshore (as discussed in Section 6.2) and within Australia. A strong research capacity in this area is central to the development of sound strategies for preparedness for and response to incursions of exotic pests and diseases. The Review Committee notes that AAHC's Task Group on Animal Health Services (see Section 9.6.1) is reviewing Australia's field, diagnostic and research capacity in animal health in relation to national and international requirements. The Review Committee commends this initiative and would expect that, once formed, APHC would undertake a similar review of plant health capacity and requirements.
Recommendation 99: The Review Committee recommends that the Australian Animal Health Council and the Australian Plant Health Council review national field, diagnostic and research capacity in animal and plant health.

Directory: SiteCollectionDocuments
SiteCollectionDocuments -> Emerging Transport Technologies
SiteCollectionDocuments -> Lesson Plan What are smart goals?
SiteCollectionDocuments -> Melbourne Library Service Policy Public Access Internet and Computer Use Policy
SiteCollectionDocuments -> Navy Drug Screening Laboratory Jacksonville
SiteCollectionDocuments -> Building Management Systems (bms) Seminar 2 Advanced Management and Improvement Opportunities
SiteCollectionDocuments -> Commitments and Pledges for Training and Capacity Building 2014-15
SiteCollectionDocuments -> Galileo® and Apollo® Systems – Airline Participants
SiteCollectionDocuments -> Northern Australia Quarantine Strategy 25 years of protecting Australia
SiteCollectionDocuments -> Final pest risk analysis report for Drosophila suzukii April 2013
SiteCollectionDocuments -> Permitted Seeds List – 16 June 2016

Download 1.49 Mb.

Share with your friends: