Inspection manual for Thaumatotibia leucotreta
(Meyrick) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae),
False Codling Moth on capsicums for pack house, field
and border inspection points
Technical assistant provided by Samuel. K. Muchemi with financial support from EDES
26th-29th October 2015
Preface
Kenya’s fresh capsicum exports to the EU have been characterized by increased frequencies of
interceptions in the recent years due to presence of harmful organism, the False Codling Moth (FCM),
Thaumatotibia leucotreta. A high number of interceptions have been noted on Kenyan capsicum in the
EU market in the recent past. For instance, in 2014, there were a total of 11 interceptions associated
with FCM on capsicums and by September of 2015, a total of 45 interceptions were as a result of FCM.
This trend is alarming and if no action is taken, the EU commission may consider instituting actions
which will affect trade in capsicums. The EU plant health regulatory systems aims to protect crops, fruit,
vegetables, flowers, ornamentals and forests from harmful pests and diseases by preventing the
introduction and spread into the EU or within the EU.
Based on the provisions laid down in the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC), council
Directive 2000/29/EC establishes the regulatory basis for this objective. Directive 2000/29/EC lists
harmful organisms that may be targeted by specific control measures and a number of control Directives
and Emergency Measures support this Directive. Emergency temporary measures may be taken by the
EU if the danger originates from consignments of plants, plant products or other objects from third
countries if there is an imminent danger of introduction or spread of such a harmful organism.
At the present time, the European Commission (EC) is taking action against recurring Phytosanitary noncompliances in plants and plant products imported from a number of third countries, including Kenya
where high numbers of FCM interceptions in the last two years suggests that they pose a high
Phytosanitary risk.
The Kenyan Authorities were required to provide reasons for the non-compliances and take corrective
action to ensure that capsicums being exported to the EU are free from FCM. The Kenyan authorities
were also required to provide the EC with a national action plan; failure to which the EC would have to
take emergency measures to restrict imports of the problem commodities. In 2014 EDES supported
Kenya with the development of this national action plan.
The Kenyan National Plant Protection Organization (NPPO) has contacted EDES to further seek technical
assistance for the NNPO staff carrying produce certification as a measure to mitigate presence of FCM
on Capsicum sp. To support the NPPO in Kenya (KEPHIS), EDES program has sought to provide a
consultant to assist in the capacity building required to mitigate FCM on capsicum as part of its
realization to the Action Plan for Phytosanitary Measures. The development of an inspection manual is
one of the outputs of this support.
1
Acknowledgements
This manual has been compiled with technical inputs of the following persons working for the NPPO in
Kenya;
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Phillip Njoroge, Trade and standards office
Faith Ndunge, Head phytosanitary inspections
Isaac Macharia, Regional Manager, Mombasa
George Momanyi, officer-in-Charge, Plant quarantine and biosecurity station
Asenath Koech, Inspector at Head Quarters
Pamela Kibwage, Inspector at Plant quarantine and biosecurity station
Isaac Nyateng, Inspector at JKIA exit point
Pamela Kipyang, projects office
This document was compiled based on the EU directive 2000/29/EC on the introduction of harmful
organisms in the EU, the Pest Risk Analysis (PRA) of 2013 by EPPO and EPPO pets list, ISPM 7, 23 and 31.
2
Contents
Preface .......................................................................................................................................................... 1
Acknowledgements....................................................................................................................................... 2
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 4
Purpose ......................................................................................................................................................... 4
Scope ............................................................................................................................................................. 4
Pest information ........................................................................................................................................... 4
Pest ecology .............................................................................................................................................. 4
Biology....................................................................................................................................................... 5
Eggs: ...................................................................................................................................................... 5
Larva: ..................................................................................................................................................... 5
Pupa: ..................................................................................................................................................... 5
Adult: ..................................................................................................................................................... 5
IDENTIFICATION FEATURES FOR DETECTION................................................................................................ 6
Eggs ........................................................................................................................................................... 6
Larva .......................................................................................................................................................... 6
Pupa .......................................................................................................................................................... 7
Adult .......................................................................................................................................................... 7
How to differences between female and male adult FCM ................................................................... 8
Damage symptoms caused by FCM on capsicums ....................................................................................... 8
Eggs on fruits............................................................................................................................................. 8
Entry holes ................................................................................................................................................ 8
Frass .......................................................................................................................................................... 8
Exit holes ................................................................................................................................................... 9
Premature ripening and fruit drop ........................................................................................................... 9
Fruit deformity .......................................................................................................................................... 9
PEST MANAGEMENT/CONTROL.................................................................................................................. 10
FCM Risk mitigation by Inspectors .............................................................................................................. 10
Procedures for field inspections ............................................................................................................. 10
Current field inspection procedure..................................................................................................... 10
Proposed field inspection procedure .................................................................................................. 10
Pack house inspection procedure ........................................................................................................... 11
Current procedure .............................................................................................................................. 11
Proposed pack house inspection procedure....................................................................................... 11
Development of a communication strategy ............................................................................................... 12
Communication strategy explained ........................................................................................................ 13
Induction program ...................................................................................................................................... 13
Annexes I. Interceptions data ..................................................................................................................... 14
Annex III. Current field inspection procedure............................................................................................. 15
Annex III: Pack house inspection procedure ............................................................................................... 17
Annex IV. Sampling tables .......................................................................................................................... 18
Annex V Communication of inspection results ........................................................................................... 19
REPORT WRITING AFTER INSPECTION ........................................................................................................ 19
3
Introduction
T. leucotreta, herein referred to as false codling moth (FCM) is a regulated pest the in EU since 1st
October 2014 following a risk assessment which indicated that it can establish in EU member states with
economic consequences thus requiring intervention. T. leucotreta has been categorized as an A2 pest
thus qualifying for inclusion as a harmful organism. It is a pest endemic to Africa attacking a wide range
of host plants. The Food and Veterinary Office (FVO) of has audited the South Africa citrus production
systems for FCM mitigation.
It became an important pest in capsicum from Kenya for export in the recent years and has frequently
been intercepted in EU with at total of 56 interceptions on capsicums within a span of less than a year
since October 2014 to September 2015 (Figure 1). Currently inspection frequency in the EU entry points
for Kenyan capsicum is at 50%.
Purpose
The manual is designed to assist in the detection and inspection of FCM on capsicum for export to the
EU. It is also designed to assist in training of Trainers of Trainers (ToTs) and technical personnel in
capsicum production and export chain. The manual will serve as a reference document for FCM in
capsicums.
Scope
This manual provides information from FCM identification to phytosanitary certification of capsicum for
export.
Pest information
FCM is classified as follows;
Class: Insecta
Order: Lepidopteran
Family: Totricidae
Genus: Thaumatotibia
Species: Leucotreta
Author Meyrick 1913
Pest ecology
Thaumatotibia leucotreta is endemic to tropical Africa occurring in the sub-Sahara Africa region of
Angola, Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo
(Democratic Republic of), Côte d’Ivoire, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gambia, Ghana, Kenya, Madagascar, Malawi,
Mali, Mauritius, Mozambique, Niger, Nigeria, Reunion, Rwanda, Saint Helena, Senegal, Sierra Leone,
Somalia, South Africa, Sudan, Swaziland, Tanzania, Togo, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe.. It has been
detected in Europe through export consignments
4
It is polyphagous pests which can feed on more than 70 host plants within 40 plant families. It can attack
many cultivated and wild fruit species, such as: avocado (Persea americana), cacao (Theobroma cacao),
carambola (Averrhoa carambola), citrus species (particularly C. sinensis and C. paradisi but C. limon is
considered to be an unsuitable host), coffee (Coffea spp.), guava (Psidium guajava), litchi (Litchi
sinensis), macadamia (Macadamia ternifolia), peach (Prunus persica), pepper (Capsicum spp.),
persimmon (Diospyros kaki), pomegranate (Punica granatum). It is also a pest of field crops such as:
beans (Phaseolus spp.), cotton (Gossypium hirsutum), castor bean (Ricinus communis), and maize (Zea
mays). Damage is caused by larva feeding on affected parts and upto 90% losses have been reported on
some hosts. Feeding damage can also lead to the development of secondary infections by fungi or
bacteria.
Thaumatotibia leucotreta is a quarantine pest in several countries (e.g. Israel, Jordan, South American
countries, USA). The establishment of T. leucotreta into new areas would probably trigger restrictions on
trade and market losses for the areas concerned. T. leucotreta is a tropical/sub-tropical species whose
development is limited by cold temperatures. However, further studies are needed to evaluate its
potential for establishment in the southern parts of the EPPO region, as this pest may present a risk in
particular to citrus-growing countries.
Biology
The life cycle has four stages comprising of egg, larva, pupa and adult. Development is completed
between 30-174 days depending on climatic conditions. With uninterrupted food supply, FCM occurs
throughout the year with upto ten generation per year.
Eggs: Females lay eggs upto 800 during her life span by night singly or bunches on bolls or fruits on
ridges or near the calyx of fruits or on foliage and debris. The eggs are small in size (< 1mm), white to
creamish in color when freshly laid, flat and oval with shinny reticulate sculpture. Eggs take 2-22 days to
hatch depending on temperature.
Larva: There are five larval instars varying in size and color. Upon hatching, the neonate larva chews
through the skin and feeds within the fruit where larval development takes place. Not more than three
larvae are found in a fruit due to cannibalism. The first three instars are white to creamish in color while
the fourth and fifth instar is bright red of pink. The head capsule is brownish black for the early instars
tending to light maroon in fully grown larva. Larval size ranges from 1 mm in first instar to 20 mm in 5th
larval instar. Mature larva exits the fruit and drops on the ground on silken threads for pupation or in
dropped fruits, crevices under the back or within galls. Larval period lasts 12-67 days depending on
temperature.
Pupa: cream yellow to dark brown in color when mature. Females take shorter period to emerge 11-39
days while males take 13-47 days. The male pupa is small in size than female and has two knobs side by
side in the center lacking in females. Both female and male pupae have serrated posterior ending.
Adult: are active at night and spends days while resting in shaded portions of the host. Are poor flyers
with limited dispersal and moth activity increases with the onset of host flowering thus larval presence is
common in the late fruiting season. Adults measures 6-9 mm in length and 2.5mm in width while at rest
5
and are grayish-brown to dark brown in color. Males are attracted to females for mating by pheromones
release by females after dark. Female moths are larger than males and their longevity is higher (16-70
days) than males (14-57 days). Adults are affected by water and temperature.
IDENTIFICATION FEATURES FOR DETECTION
Eggs
Length 1 mm,
Color translucent white/ cream,
flat and oval in shape
surface with shiny reticulate sculpture
Fig. 1. FCM egg
Larva
1-3rd instar
Length 1 -1.3 mm
Body color creamy white with minute black spots, each with a short hair;
Head color brownish black.
4th and 5th instar
Length 12 to 20 mm
Body color diffuse overall pink tending to orange yellow on the sides,
top and legs;
Head color light maroon;
Pronotum is yellowish brown and juts out in front, to both sides and
to the rear
Anal comb with 2 to 7 teeth (fig. 3)
Fig. 2.The five larval instars of false codling moth (Image courtesy of S. Bloem and J. Hofmeyr)
Pronotum
teeth
Fig 3 b).Lateral view of anal comb
6
Fig. 3. a) Lateral view of 5th instar larval stage of FCM
Pupa
Length 7 mm,
Color yellow to dark brown,
Segments with transverse row spines,
Males smaller than females
Males ventral side of ninth abdominal segment with two knobs side by
side in the center, females lack knobs
Fig 4.a Male (top) and female (bottom) pupae
Pupating larvae may encase in soil particles or plant fragments
Fig 4.b. Pupation in the soil
Adult
Double posterior crest
Fig. 5 a) Side elevation of adult FCM at rest on plant foliage,
b) ventral view of adult FCM at rest
Adults are small measuring 6 to 9 mm in length and 2.5 mm width. Wing span 16 to 20 mm, are grayish
brown to dark brown or black in color. The forewings are broad, elongate with black triangular patch
and fringed with hairs. Hind wings lighter grayish brown, darker towards outer margins with a white dot
and a question mark along the margins when in spread position. Thorax with double posterior crest
7
How to differences between female and male adult FCM
Larger than males, hind wings lack the semicircular pockets
The question mark symbol
White dot on hind wings
wing
Fig. 6 a. Female adult with wings spread
Semicircular pocket
Males with the following characters: Genital tuft large, pale
gray; Hind legs with dense brush of grayish white hairs; inner
side of hind tibia with tufts of modified scales; and Hind wings
with deep semicircular pocket
Fig. 6 b. Male adult
Damage symptoms caused by FCM on capsicums
Eggs on fruits
Adult moths lay eggs on the capsicum fruit mainly near the calyx or in depressions of the fruit singly or in
batches.
Entry holes
Shortly after hatching, the first larval instars chew through the skin creating a small entry hole which is
difficult to detect, mainly near the calyx. A scar may be left at the point of entry when healing occurs.
Feeding is restricted near the skin surface by the young larvae but once they mature, they move deeper
into the fruit.
Frass (darkish in color) and damage inside infested fruit
Larvae feed on the fresh and darkish granular excreta can be
seen when the fruit is cut open.
8
Exit holes
A mature larva exits the fruit by eating through the skin for
pupation leaving an opening for. Secondary infestation by
fungus and scavengers may occur further damaging the fruit.
Premature ripening and fruit drop
Infested fruits by FCM may discolor and drop prematurely
Fruit deformity
Fruit deformation is a likely resultant effect of FCM infestation
9
PEST MANAGEMENT/CONTROL
System approach is the best option and includes IPM strategies which have been developed to control
it. This may include:







Orchard sanitation (removal of infested fruits and disposal by solarization or deep burying (> 90
cm). Removal of residual crops is recommended as they may serve as a reservoir,
Mating disruption by use of pheromone traps in attract and kill strategies
Chemical control. . Use of registered pest control products in Kenya for FCM management such
as Collagen, cypermethrin, and Insect Growth Regulators (IGR), such as lufenuron which are is
recommended. However, management using pesticides is usually difficult because of the
overlapping generations and the fact those larvae live inside fruits shortly after hatching and the
risk of resistance development,
Sterile insect techniques,
Biological control (e.g. with the egg parasitoid Trichogrammatoidea cryptophlebiae).
Phytosanitary measures such cold treatments (e.g. -0.5°C or below for 22 days) are approved to
eliminate the pest from citrus fruits. Eggs have been reported to be killed by temperatures
below 1°C, and the exposure to temperatures below 10°C reduces survival or development of
several life stages. Restricted movement of capsicums from infested farms to un infested places,
Cultural methods such as use of physical barrier e.g. growing capsicums under green houses,
reduced plant population and pruning to reduce hiding places, filed and exit inspections leading
to certifications.
FCM Risk mitigation by Inspectors
Procedures for field inspections
Current field inspection procedure
The current field inspection procedure is outlined in annex III;
Proposed field inspection procedure
To mitigate FCM at production level it is proposed that;
1. Determine beforehand conditions for field inspections in terms of requirements by inspector
such knowledge of FCM, history of the farm and their capacity to detect FCM
2. Registration status of the grower-A registered grower/ exporter with relevant government
agency such as Horticultural Development Authority, Ministry of Agriculture County Office,
Kenya Plant Health Inspectorate Service is required.
3. The growing stage of capsicum crop (fruiting stage)
4. Permission from the farmer to access the production site
5. Availability of an inspection check list (in place) and tools for scouting
6. Evaluate scouting and sampling procedures in the farm and the expected procedure. This goes
hand in hand with records.
10
7. Evaluate FCM management strategies adapted at farm level as sufficient to manage the pest
(system approach). Light and sticky traps may not be specific for FCM management and
compromises on biodiversity of Lepidopterans. Pesticides use should be specific for FCM and the
challenges of targeting FCM should be identified.
8. Based on the findings, establish the risk categorization of the grower. Remember FCM threshold
is zero more particularly if the crop is at fruiting stage.
9. Compile a report to communicate the results to relevant stakeholders (annex III)
Pack house inspection procedure
Current procedure
The current procedure is as described in annex IV.
Proposed pack house inspection procedure
The proposed procedure identifies the gaps and recommendations for its improvement.
1. Conditions for inspection: the pack house should have minimum basic requirements to enable
effective inspection for FCM. The follow are requirements to observe;
a. Lighting- all areas of pack house to be well light with light equivalent to natural light
b. Records- all operations of pack house to be recorded and records maintained and
availed for audit
c. Pack house flow- all sections of the pack house show be well labeled with their
respective operations.
d. Receiving area-clean and spacious to allow for entry, separated from other pack house
operations
e. Identification of lots- all incoming capsicums to be identified by lots. For instance,
capsicums from one block to be treated as a lot, a small farmer to be treated a lot and
this should have traceability
f. Ability of operators to detect FCM: Appropriate sampling for FCM inspection by
selecting one fruit for every 100 fruits at the minimum (or according to sampling in
annex IV) from a lot and takes this to the inspection table. A sampling table can be
useful to determine the confidence interval that is high (99.9%). Visual checks for FCM
symptoms of infestation and narrowing down to the suspected fruits can increase
detection probability.
g. Inspection table- with white top and a knife. Once sampling is done, cut open the fruits
one by one and inspect for the presence of FCM stages in the fruit. Mind the locations of
entry, entry holes, tunnels, frass and the larval instars.
h. Rejection/ Acceptance for grading-Remember FCM is at zero tolerance and its presence
in a lot a direct rejection which not proceed for grading.
i. Rejected capsicum isolation-rejected materials should be physically isolated from any
other produce (remember, FCM larva easily craws away on the floor to suitable hiding
11
places including uninfested fruits). The isolation location should be well labeled and
records of rejected material maintained.
j. Grading- Only capsicums from lots which have been found not to be infested by FCM are
allowed beyond the inspection table for grading. The grading tables should be well
raised and white. The graders should be well versed with FCM symptoms of damage so
that they too can pick out infested materials. During grading, another check of FCM
infestation should be conducted by cutting open the capsicums and if found, then lots to
be rejected.
k. Actions taken to prevent future inclusion of such consignments may include;
Supervised disposal
Processing of such fruits by drying and or use in sauce processing
Follow up to the production
Risk categorization of the grower/ exporter
Development of a communication strategy
In order to safe guard trade and promote exports of capsicums from Kenya, it is paramount that trade
concerns are addressed by engaging the relevant stakeholders in the process. As such, it is of
importance for the exporting country NPPO to establish a communication strategy with the importing
countries NPPOs and the private sector. The WTO SPS agreement and IPPC have guidelines on dealing
with SPS issues which facilitates trade in plants and plant products. None the less, bilateral agreements
are key in trade negotiations. Therefore, under the current FCM concerns in Kenyan capsicums, the
most appropriate mechanism to contain the problem will be by establishing a structure which involves
ad informs all the stakeholders on the developments underway or established to deal with the situation
or any other emerging challenge. Below is a proposed flow chart structure indicating communication
strategy.
Bilateral agreements, negotiations on
acceptable measures
Exporting NPPO
Importing NPPO
Taskforce
Private sector (exporters,
growers, associations, clearing
agents)
-Trainings
-Measures to adopt
-Funding intervention measures
Other government agencies
(MoA, MoT, HCDA, PCPB,
Customs, County governments)
-Policies to regulate the industry
-Funding intervention measures
12
Communication strategy explained
1. Importing country NPPO (EC) lays down import requirements which are communicated vide
directive 2000/29/EC
2. Exporting country certifies capsicum as free from FCM during export
3. Importing country NPPO evaluates certification by inspection and communicates to exporting
country NPPO on non-compliances and actions taken on the consignment or uses the WTO
channel of communication to report non-compliances.
4. Exporting NPPO confirms existence of non-conformities to the importing country NPPO and
proposes actions to be taken to mitigate FCM presence
5. NPPO liaises with private sector directly and other government agencies or through the national
taskforce on appropriate actions to be taken. Such action plans are communicated to the
importing country risk management agencies through the NPPO.
6. Private sector and other governmental agencies develop policies and implements measures to
contain the FCM challenge. Such registration of growers and exporters, capacity building.
7. The exporting country NPPO may institute mitigation measures in the PRA area including
creation of pest free areas, rejection of consignments
8. Exporting country NPPO may build capacity by creating awareness to stakeholders in the
clearing and forwarding and middlemen on certification processes.
Induction program
Mentorship program for new inspectors in exporting country NPPO is an important step towards
mitigation of harmful organisms in the export commodities. Currently KEPHIS lacks a structured
internship program and inspectors are taking the responsibilities of inspecting without the appropriate
exposure. There is need to setup through the training office of an internship program that takes the
new staff to perform as expected. KEPHIS enjoys the hosting of COPE secretariat, which is a key
instrument in capacity building for its new inspectors and refresher trainings for the existing inspectors.
The induction package should consist of the following;
a. Defining period that one should be inducted: 3 months on the minimum in which an
inspector is trained on the following aspects;
i. Capacity in identification and detection of pests important to the export market
including FCM
ii. Pest management strategies at production
iii. Regulations governing the introduction of harmful organisms to the market
iv. Sampling procedures and protocols and related ISPMS
v. Pest mitigation measures including certification
vi. Document management
vii. Professional ethics
13
b. Testing and graduating: Upon completion of the training, an inspector should be tested
in all the above areas and upon attaining minimum set grade, should be accredited to
practice inspections
c. Refresher training: These should be organized for all those who have been accredited to
conduct inspections once par year to update them on emerging challenges and
regulations dynamics on certification.
Annexes I. Interceptions data
Figure 1 FCM interceptions in capsicum consignments from Kenya in the EU
2014
2014
2014
2015
2015
2015
2015
2015
2015
2015
2015
2015
FCM
interceptions Total interceptions
October
2
4
November
7
9
December
2
3
January
1
6
February
0
2
March
1
6
April
4
5
May
6
9
June
4
7
July
5
10
August
2
4
September
22
29
%
33.33333
43.75
40
14.28571
0
14.28571
44.44444
40
36.36364
33.33333
33.33333
43.13725
35
30
25
20
15
10
FCM interceptions
5
Total intercptions
September
August
July
June
May
April
March
February
January
December
November
October
0
2014 2014 2014 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015
14
Annex III. Current field inspection procedure
FARM DETAILS
Name and address of the company
Name of Contact person
Location of farm(s)
Farm
Crop
Area under production
Source of planting material
Market destination
Farm management familiarity with market
requirements
Presence of quality assurance systems at farm level
(Kenya-GAP; Tesco; KFC; MPS etc.)
PEST MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
Documented Pest management protocol/or procedures
in place
Number of scouts on the farm
Training and /or Experience of Scout/s in pest
identification
Area allocated to each scout per day and /or per week
Scouting methods used
Frequency of scouting per farm, greenhouse/ or block
Pest monitoring methods used
Scouting records available
Pest reporting channels
Pest control methods used (Tick appropriate)
Spray programs in place
No
Yes (directives)
No
Yes (documents)
No
Yes (briefly describe)
No
Yes (briefly describe)
Describe
light traps
sticky traps
pheromone traps
Others(specify)
No
Yes (documents)
(briefly describe)
Chemical
Biological
Cultural
IPM
Others (Specify)
No
Yes (documents)
GENERAL FARM PRACTICES
 Scouts
Training and/or experience
Ability to identify pests of concern
Area scouted per day
Frequency of scouting greenhouse/block/farm per week
Scout has scouting sheets or book
Scouting tools used (list)
15
Acreage
Pests of concern captured in records
Scouting reporting channels
Carry out random inspection
Any pests or pest signs detected
No
Yes (list)
Pest traps in place
No
Yes (No. per area)
Check the pest traps- Any pests of concern trapped
No
Yes (list)
High
Medium
Low (details)
Block/Greenhouse supervisor, general workers (production)/Farmer
 Block supervisor/farmer
Greenhouse/farm sanitary status
Awareness on pests of concern
Training on pests of concern
Ability to detect pest and pest signs
Role in pest reporting system (Any records available)

General workers
Awareness on pests of concern
Training on pests of concern
Ability to detect pest and pest signs
Role in pest reporting system (Any records available)
16
Annex III: Pack house inspection procedure
PACK HOUSE QUALITY CONTROL SYSTEM
Quality management procedures in place
Quality control check points in place
Quality control personnel awareness on pests of
concern
Ability of quality control personnel to detect pest and
pest signs
PACK HOUSE PRACTICES
Pack house sanitation status
Quality management procedures in place
No
Yes (documents)
No
Yes (List)
No
Yes
No
Yes
High
Medium
Low (details)
No
Yes (list)
How many quality control points (List)
Quality control personnel awareness on pests of
concern
Ability to detect pest and pest signs
What is the reporting channel for pest detection
Graders aware of pests and pest signs
Produce handling and post harvest management
Produce handling protocol/procedures to ensure
integrity and no re-infestation in place
Appropriate hygiene protocols in place
Quality assurance personnel familiar with post harvest
treatments/challenges
Quality assurance personnel familiar with market
requirements/challenges
Traceability system used
Trace back to what level (tick appropriate)
Transport of produce from farm to Airport/point of
exit
Detected pest records in place
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Greenhouse/farm
Block/sector/region
Crop/ variety
Farm/Company transport
Freight company
Other (Specify)
No
Yes
17
Annex IV. Sampling tables
18
Annex V Communication of inspection results
RECOMMENDATION
Farm to be approved to export
Farm not approved (reasons)
OVERALL ASSESSMENT
Farm management involvement in pest control
Pest Management System
Pack House Quality Management System
Traceability system
High
Low
Excellent
Good
Poor
Excellent
Good
Poor
Excellent
Good
Poor
REPORT WRITING AFTER INSPECTION
COMPONENTS OF THE REPORT




Results in Brief: Audit purpose, scope, objective(s) and conclusion and key recommendations.
Background: Give proper justifications for the audit, scope, methodology
Objectives: State them and say what you did to accomplish the objectives
Findings and recommendations: should give an answer to each of the objectives. Each finding
to also possibly have a recommendation.
 Conclusion: Should be useful in decision making by the managers, state whether objectives
were achieved.
FEATURES OF THE REPORT
 Farm characteristics- location, contacts, size, important features that can influence pest status,
production volumes.
 Management familiarity with market requirements: destination markets, plant health
requirements for those markets
 Pest Prevention- a number of measures geared towards minimizing the introduction of pests
e.g. use of clean and preferably certified planting material, use of appropriately treated soil &
closed doors(for green house production)
 Pest Monitoring systems-Done for early detection and rapid response. Include placement of
yellow or blue sticky monitoring cards or any appropriate traps in production areas to help
identify pest problems. These traps can also be used to help reduce minor populations of certain
insects
 Availability for SOPs: Hygiene protocols, pest mgt protocols, Post harvest handling protocols
(farms with global certifications have no problem with this).
 Availability of records: e.g. spray programs, pest monitoring/scouting data, training data.
19
 Quarantine procedures in place: aimed at minimizing the spread of pests. May include “order of
entry” protocols that consists of entering clean or minimally infested greenhouses/farms before
entering any that have moderate or serious pest populations. Staff may use an order of entry
protocol for daily watering and pest scouting.
 Insects can easily attach themselves to clothing, especially sleeves, so avoid brushing
against infested plants.
 Wearing a field coats/ appropriate shoes and later removing them will help prevent
insects from getting on to your clothes and being moved to other areas.
 Wash or wipe down any equipment that you have taken into an infested chamber or
greenhouse before exiting or proceeding to a new area.
 Use of IPM systems: is an established system utilizing a combination of resources to effectively
combat pests; the goal being to keep pest populations within acceptable limits.
 IPM resources such as insect bio-control, physical means, sanitation and monitoring to
reduce reliance on restricted chemical pesticides, which is also an option in the IPM
management system.
 An action plan- used for guidance in implementing pest control procedures and in preventing
the spread of the insect into other locations
20