Because of Japanese import duties, it is advantageous
to ship fruit into Japan after May. This results in an abnormal shipping pattern for Florida grapefruit. Historically, shipments in the domestic market have been minimal after May, but the Japanese trade was substantially
expanded after that date as compared with the earlier
portions of the shipping season. Thus, there was a much
greater concentration of late-picked fruit going into Japan
than would have been the case in the domestic market.
Flies have been found as far north as Jacksonville and
are present during most of the year throughout the citrus
growing area. For practical purposes, economic losses
from Caribbean fruit fly have not occurred on grapefruit
in Florida under normal conditions, but flies have been
found and larvae recovered from fruit particularly in the
late spring of the year. Surveys of groves on the east
coast along the Indian River and in central Florida are
inadequate to establish definitive ecological information at
the present time.
The Florida grapefruit industry needs the Japanese market to stay in a profit situation. Grapefruit production is
increasing both in Florida and Texas. Domestic sales of
fresh Florida grapefruit have been declining in recent
years. Sales of processed products had shown substantial
increases, but currently there is a tendency to level off
with increases only for frozen concentrate and for chilled
juice. These products are minor as compared with canned
grapefruit juice. Therefore, the Florida grapefruit grower
needs the Japanese market.
It now appears that we will have a satisfactory working
arrangement with Japan for the fumigation of fruit. We
believe this program can be effective. However, it points
up the frailty of human decision making. We made an
apparently valid decision not to eradicate Caribbean fruit
fly. We lived for a number of years with no problems.
Suddenly we are faced with a very specific problem from
the infestation. In this international trade, we need the
cooperation of the Japanese, along with our Federal and
State officials, in order to evolve a program that will adequately protect the Japanese citrus industry and, at the
same time, permit us to continue to ship fruit in the
volume which we have enjoyed for the last 2 or 3 years.
At this point I would be complimentary of the cooperation that we have had from the Foreign Agricultural
Service and those other USDA agencies which have been
involved in this matter. I do believe that we need an
expanded effort from the Plant Protection Agency to
define the ecology of the Caribbean fruit fly in Florida
citrus groves. With this background, it should be possible
to evolve procedures which can essentially guarantee f1yfree fruit in the groves even though that fruit has been
held into Mayor even June. I believe this is possible.
We are hopefully going to have specific recommendations
for this in the near future.
In summary, let me say that we in Florida have enjoyed a good relationship with plant protection agencies.
We feel that nothing can insure our safety more than adequate sanitation in those countries where plant materials
are produced that will be for importation into Florida. On
the other side of the coin, we believe our best hope for
producing pest-free fruit for export to other countries
also lies in field sanitation. We are in agreement that
today a phytosanitary certificate from any specific country cannot be relied upon. We prefer that the certificate
be signed by a U.S. employee in the foreign country, but
even if it is, adequate inspection and compulsory treatment of plant materials, used equipment, airplanes, or
boats themselves-in
fact, everything which arrives at
ports of debarcation within Florida-are
absolutely essential. If more funds are needed, we should ask Congress
for those funds. Money spent on preventing the importation of pests is a cheap investment as compared with an
eradication campaign.
INTERNATIONAL CONTROL PROGRAMS
By L. G. K.
IVERSON
USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Washington, D.C.
Bringing plant pests under control isn't just a matter of
national concern. It's a problem of international proportions. Plant pests do not respect international borders
and are not hindered by passport requirements. Insect and
other pest organisms spread as fast and as far as weather,
food . . . and man . . . will allow. Thus, eradicating a
pest in one country will not end the problem if the nation
next-door is also infested. That's the practical reason for
international cooperation in control of plant pests. But,
there's an even more important humanitarian reason.
In many parts of the world, there simply isn't enough
food to go around. Right now in Africa and the Orient,
people are starving because insects and plant diseases take
more than their fair share of available food supplies.
Sharing our food provides only a temporary answer to
this problem. The long-range solution lies in the sharing
of our knowledge and the time and efforts of our highly
skilled technicians.
ing nations. During that year, we dispatched an aerial
application unit and insecticides to Iran to help in putting
down one of that nation's worst locust outbreaks on
record.
Ever since, APHIS has been the technical resource
base for the U.S. Government's participation in international locust control. Requests for aid are originated by
nations needing help. They don't go directly to APHIS,
but are processed through AID, the Agency for International Development.
For 15 years, the volume of such requests was so heavy
that we maintained a regional office in Beirut, Lebanon.
During the height of its activities, this office directed the
work of more than 20 USDA entomologists and spray
pilots scattered across the Middle East, North Africa,
and Southwest Asia.
Our Beirut office was phased out in 1965. But, APHIS
remains "on call" to provide short-term international assistance against locust outbreaks.
In 1951, The U.S. Department of Agriculture began
assisting in controlling serious pest outbreaks in develop-
103
Earlier this year, for example, three APHIS experts
were detailed to West Africa to organize a large-scale
locust control project. The outbreak area had suffered a
7-year drought, with many natives reduced to living at
starvation level. If the locust outbreak hadn't been
brought under control, the fragile West African ecosystem might have been irretrievably damaged.
Of course, our foreign technical assistance is not limited
to helping stop locust outbreaks. Our personnel may turn
up anywhere in the world-working
on a wide range of
pest control projects sponsored by AID or by FAa, the
United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organization.
Last year, for example, an APHIS entomologist received one of the Department's highest awards for helping organize and direct efforts to control rice stem borers
in Pakistan. Heavy flooding had destroyed a large portion of that country's rice crop, and famine might have
resulted if the borers were allowed to take their normal
share of the remaining rice.
Although the Department has been rendering international aid since 1951, we didn't formally join the International Plant Protection Convention (LP.P.e.)
until
1973. The 63 nations currently in this FAa sponsored
organization work together to control plant pests and
diseases and to prevent their spread across international
boundaries.
In addition to representing the United States on the
LP.P.e., APHIS entomologists serve as officers of, and
advisors to, subordinate regional organizations.
For example, one of my staff officers currently heads up FAa's
Caribbean Plant Protection Committee. And APHIS
was instrumental in establishing Committee training programs to strengthen the quarantine operations of Jamaica,
the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Trinidad, and other Caribbean countries.
Another case in point is our participation in FAa's
North American Forestry Commission. This regional
organization consists of the United States, Canada, and
Mexico. APHIS' primary area of concern is the Commission study group that delves into quarantines affecting
forest trees, related plants and pests. This group summarized and compared the quarantine operations of the
three member countries and made recommendations for
future cooperation and development of uniform regulations and procedures.
The desirability of a North American-continentalapproach to pest control has long been apparent. The
United States and Mexico, for instance, began cooperating on plant protection way back in 1916. That original
program involved the pink bollworm. But, within a short
time, a number of cooperative survey and control projects
were underway.
In 1943, the U.S. and Mexican Departments of Agriculture signed formal agreements establishing a USDA
organization in Mexico to work on problems of mutual
interest. This organization still exists today as the Mexico Region of APHIS' Plant Protection and Quarantine
Programs.
expertise plus partial funding for these activities in
Mexico. Our southern neighbor furnished the balance of
the funds as well as the necessary regulatory support and
legal authorities.
Now that the khapra beetle has been eradicated, the
United States and Mexico are continuing to work handin-glove to keep this destructive pest from regaining a
foothold on the continent. In particular, communication
channels have been developed for keeping each other upto-date on the discovery and whereabouts of khapra beetle-infested ships-the
most likely source of future beetle
invasions.
Another of our joint programs with Mexico is an outstanding example of the ancient proverb, "One good turn
deserves another."
Several years ago, the Department
imported a foreign parasite and helped Mexico set up a
rearing and release program to control citrus blackfly in
northern Mexico. Now, this Mexican rearing facility is
providing us with parasites to combat an outbreak of
blackflies in Texas and an invasion of orange spiny whiteflies in Hawaii.
Up to this point, cooperation with Canada has not involved direct participation in Canadian pest control programs. There is, however, an active exchange of information and sharing of technical advice.
When golden nematodes were discovered on Vancouver Island in 1965, for example, the Canadians borrowed
one of our experts as a consultant. His analysis of the
problem and recommendations were of valuable aid in
establishing quarantine, research, and control activities to
combat this pest.
This same scientist performed similar golden nematode
consultations for Panama in 1967 and for Chile earlier
this year.
The United States and Canada also have a long history
of cooperation in the fight to control gypsy moths. Parallel quarantines have been established and there is a free
flow of information back and forth-we provide the Canadians with traps and bait for their survey. Both nations
recently participated in a research trial held on an island
in the St. Lawrence River.
Canada and the United States on the one hand, and
Mexico and the United States on the other, have been
holding annual meetings for a number of years to discuss
mutual plant pest problems. In 1972, top plant protection
officials from the three nations met to begin laying the
groundwork for a new organization that would take a
continental approach to meeting pest control needs. My
colleague, Ing. Ortega, Director General of Sanidad Vegetal, Mexico, will go into detail about NAPPO-the
North
American Plant Protection Organization-a
little later
during this symposium.
fly.
Hopefully, by now, I've made my point-that
APHIS
and the Department of Agriculture are firmly committed
to the goal of international control of plant pests. Our
work through AID and with FAa and NAPPO is aimed
at producing standardization, worldwide standardization
of quarantine, inspection, and treatment procedures. Our
end goal is CONTROL-effective
control of pests-not
in the receiving country but at the source, before international shipment occurs.
The most successful of these cooperative projects resulted in the eradication of the khapra beetle from North
America. The Department provided survey and control
While we want to keep foreign pests out of this country,
we also have the responsibility for making sure that insect
introductions do not go the other way. For several years,
Some of our current cooperative programs with Mexico
involve efforts to prevent or limit spread of the pink
bollworm, boll weevil, citrus blackfly, and Mexican fruit
104
for instance, the Azores have been experiencing an outbreak of Japanese beetles. Included in the infested area
is a gigantic U.S. Air Force base.
We sent a member of my staff to the Azores on several
occasions to study the situation and recommend survey
and control actions. You see, there are regular flights
from our military base in the Azores to Europe and we
want to make sure that this country is not responsible for
spreading potentially destructive pests to other nations.
This concludes my discussion of international cooperation and technical assistance in the plant protection area.
I will be happy to answer any questions, or to cover any
of our programs that have not been discussed and that
might be of special interest to this group.
INTERNATIONAL CERTIFICATION
By D. S.
MACLACHLAN
Canada Department of Agriculture, Plant Protection Division, Ottawa, Canada
Most countries of the world are today faced with rapidly increasing food prices and many with shortages of
food and fibre. Every agency involved in the food chain
must, more than ever before, be extremely concerned with
finding methods to increase production and reduce costs
of production. Although plant quarantine agencies are
usually considered as those organizations which attempt
to prevent the dissemination of pests and diseases from
country to country and within domestic boundaries, their
role is much more basic than that. In preventing the introduction to any country of new pests and diseases, we
playa vital role in both reducing costs of production by
precluding the need for costly pesticide control programs,
and increasing production by reducing losses due to infection of the crop by pests and diseases.
Having established the role plant quarantine agencies
play in the food economy of a country, I will now consider some of the methods used in preventing international
spread of pests and diseases. In dealing with this subject,
we must recognize that we are in the midst of a transportation revolution. The increasing use of aircraft and
containerization (lash barges, container ships) in general
ensures that plants and plant materials shipped by these
2. Require treatment at origin of those plants and plant
materials which are produced in areas infested with exotic
pests and diseases but which can be rendered safe by appropriate pesticidal treatments.
3. Require that certain plant species be produced under
specified cultural and disease and insect-control practices
which must be monitored by the plant protection agency
in the country of origin.
4. In a very limited way, require treatment
agricultural commodities on arrival in Canada.
of certain
S. In cases where it is most economical and practical,
carry out preshipment inspection in the country of origin.
6. In all cases, Canada reserves the right to inspect
imports at port of arrival or at final destination, and, as
a result of this inspection, to release the shipment or require it to be treated, destroyed, or returned to the country of origin. If certified shipments are found to be infested with insects or diseases, the certifying agency is
immediately notified of the problem and informed of the
consequences of continuing to ship plants and plant products which do not meet Canadian requirements.
methods arrive at destination in a much better condition
7. At one time it was possible to perform a 100% in-
than was formerly the case. At the same time, these same
improvements in shipping methods also ensure that the
pests associated with such shipments also arrive in better
condition.
spection of plants in commercial shipments to Canada.
Because of the tremendous increase in volume of imports
and the increasing demands on the time of inspectors in
other areas of plant protection activity, such inspection
is no longer possible. We are now in the process of developing a pest risk assessment for agricultural products
imported to Canada. On the basis of this assessment, we
should be able to assign inspection priority to certain highrisk commodities and give low priority or waive inspection on those with low-risk ratings.
The International
Plant Protection
Convention-to
which most of the large trading countries of the world
are signatory-provides
that plants and plant materials
moving in international trade shall be certified by the
exporting country as meeting all the plant health requirements of the importing country. This committment would
appear to give all assurances necessary to an importing
country, but, unfortunately, this is not the case. The
strengths of the Plant Quarantine Services-and
by this
I mean the educational and experience qualifications of the
staff as well as numbers of staff-vary
considerably from
country to country, and this naturally affects the reliability
of the phytosanitary certificate issued. It is, therefore,
obvious that other safeguards, beside the issuance of a
phytosanitary certificate, are necessary.
The Canadian approach
as follows:
to international
certificates
is
8. In addition to the above requirements, we plan, in
the near future, to post a senior plant quarantine specialist
in Europe, whose responsibilities will include: keeping
headquarters in Ottawa informed of new outbreaks of
pests and diseases in his territory; investigating survey
and pest control methods in exporting countries; explaining Canadian quarantine requirements to plant quarantine
agencies in his territory; and keeping the Canadian Plant
Protection Division informed of changes in the plant
health requirements of countries to which we export.
Exports
Imports
The Canadian Plant Protection Service attempts to
keep up-to-date on plant health requirements of other
countries. This is accomplished through the assistance of
our embassy staffs in other countries and to a great degree through the use of the United States Summaries.
1. Prohibit the importation of those plant species which
are in themselves known vectors of exotic pests and diseases, or which are a biological obstacle to the control of
pests and diseases in Canada.
105