On 14 May 2009, a working group meeting was held in Pretoria to discuss the outbreak of American Foulbrood (AFB) in the Western Cape.

Minutes of the Working Group Meeting on the outbreak of American Foulbrood in the Western Cape, held on 14/05/09, 11:00-15:00, at the DoA/DAFF Harvest House (HH304), Pretoria

Present

Mr Eben Rademeyer -(Chairman) DoA - Chief Director PHIS This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
Mr Mooketsa Ramasodi - DoA – Directorate APIS This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
Ms Alice Baxter - (Secretariat) DoA – Directorate PH This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
Mr JanHendrik Venter - DoA – Directorate PH This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it  
Mr Mike Allsopp - ARC-PPRI This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
Dr Rami Kfir - ARC-PPRI This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
Mr Eddie van Zyl - Vice-Chairman SABIO This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
Dr Gininda Msiza - WC Department of Agriculture This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
Mr John Moodie - Chairman SABIO This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
Mr Dawid Smit - SABIO This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
Mr Hugh Campbell - DFPT This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
Mr Koos Geldenhuys - DoA Directorate Budgets & Reporting  This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
Dr Pine Pienaar - SANSOR This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
Ms Priscilla T. Sehoole - DoA - Chief Communications Officer This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

Apologies       
None

1. Opening and Welcome
The Chairman welcomed all present, emphasising departmental support for all agricultural industries including the honeybee industry, giving the example of additional posts recently obtained to strengthen departmental bio-security infrastructure, e.g. some 150 additional inspectors recently appointed. Further, the legislation that is in place is to support industry. In addition, there is a need for all role players to work together.
Mr E. Rademeyer

1.1 Attendance register / Apologies
An attendance register was circulated for signature.
No apologies were received. 

1.2 Adoption of the Agenda
Adopted without amendments.
The Chair noted that the department has established an operational forum and all present are welcome to participate. The aim of the meeting was therefore not to focus on operational matters but to focus on policy matters relating to the path forward and the decisions required to implement the required urgent actions in what is a complicated environment and an interesting industry.

2. Background/ report on the current situation of AFB known to DoA/ DAFF in SA, and control actions of the Department Mr Venter gave a presentation with the relevant legislation as a starting point, namely the Agricultural Pests Act (Act no. 36 of 1983), noting that because of the pressure on the department to change its stringent import conditions in respect of American Foulbrood (AFB), a national survey was launched as part of departmental early warning systems for quarantine pests.
Presentation text attached.
The meeting concurred that Mr Allsopp provide his presentation as the next agenda point.
Mr JH. Venter

3 Update and Status report on AFB surveys conducted for DoA/ DAFF by the ARC: 2006 to date AFB is a global disease present in many areas in the world since at least the 1700s. In sub-Saharan Africa it has been found only as spores in honey samples, but to date not in bees. Whereas bee populations in affected countries can be expected to have developed some resistance, our bee populations may not have developed this. The AFB pathogen affects only bees; the pathogen is a spore-former with highly resistant spores, and requires specialised identification. The minimum timeframe for an identification to be made is one week. Infections can be sub-clinical: nurse bees clean out infected larvae so only when the colony has lost control are clinical symptoms seen: this can take 2-3 years, and internationally it is accepted that such colonies will die if not treated. This effect is currently being seen in the Western Cape (WC).

In 2003 a report was published by Hansen et al. of spores found in shelf honey in SA. This contributed to the institution of the SA DoA survey in contract with the ARC. However, it is difficult to prove absence as opposed to presence. Sampling and testing is costly, so only the big cities, ports and big beekeepers were targeted. Samples were taken both from hives and retail outlets as well as craft markets. The last samples in terms of this survey were concluded in February 2009: some 285 results have been concluded and about 15 are outstanding.

In December 2008, Mr Allsopp was contacted by a beekeeper whose hives had symptoms, although this was thought to be European Foulbrood (EFB), but this was confirmed as AFB towards the end of February 2009. After receiving confirmation, Mr Allsopp informed the DoA the next day.
Some 6 beekeepers and probably less than 2500 colonies are currently clinically infected, with the PPRI infection thought to have been obtained 3-4 years ago. Some colonies have been killed, including the 2 PPRI colonies; some have been concentrated at a central dumpsite, currently awaiting destruction; one farmer has used the shook-swarm method to separate healthy bees from the infected hives. None of these were sampled in the national survey and it is highly likely that considerably more are affected.

In terms of the strategy, no one other than the currently known beekeepers has reported this disease yet. In Africa, only SA requires irradiation, and that only since the Agricultural Pests Act was promulgated in 1983, yet this is the first report of AFB in sub-Saharan Africa, hence the theory that our bees has developed resistance. This indicates that something has changed, for instance in terms of stressors that may have made bees in the WC more vulnerable, or a more virulent strain of AFB, or another factor. There is no way of predicting how bee populations in SA will react, so any strategy must be long term. The premise of resistance does not appear to be appropriate given the current situation and symptoms. An eradication- versus a management approach must be decided. In terms of containment, AFB appears to be restricted to the WC, so it needs to be contained and managed there.

For eradication, SA must reduce the infestation by some 90%, therefore requiring full cooperation from all beekeepers. For the WC, this must be done by the time pollinators are moved in July/ August. Eradication would require standstill orders and compensation, which would play a key role.
Mr M. Allsopp

4. Industry needs, expectations and cooperation:  

4.1 Seed industry Dr Pienaar notes that the seed industry is very specialized and will render all support that it can.  The WC is a major area for the production of vegetable seed. He referred to the meeting in the WC where the requirement for registration of beekeepers was noted, and that the seed trade would request its members to support only registered bee farmers within the organized bee industry.
Dr Pine Pienaar

4.2 Deciduous Fruit Industry Mr Campbell indicated that the deciduous fruit industry recognised that long-term effects needed to be considered rather than only this year’s pollination needs, as well as the complexity of the issues at hand. It is a given that deciduous fruit requires pollination to set a crop. There is however, an opportunity to prioritise the inspections of hives to ensure that the majority of hives destined for pollination are inspected prior to the beginning of pollination.  In principle supports the ideal of an eradication strategy if there is an opportunity to do this, recognizing the potential negative implications for pollination in the short term.   The Deciduous fruit industry is also available to assist – where possible.  It has a well-structured communication network and can get in contact with its growers at short notice.
Mr Campbell

4.3 Honeybee industry Mr Moodie pointed out that there is a wide range of needs within the Honeybee industry and that their needs differ from those of other industries. Further, the health of the bees must be ensured. In terms of expectations, the results of the survey have not yet been made known. Eradication/ elimination would be supported as an ideal priority if economically feasible. Since the original announcement this is the fourth or fifth meeting, however, insufficient actions have been taken so the relevant expectations must be answered recognizing that the timeline is critical and urgent at this stage. It is essential that clearance be given in terms of ensuring that clean hives go to clean areas. Mr Moodie emphasized that the next two and a half months are crucial. A clear policy and plan of action must emanate.

Mr Moodie also pointed out that registration has been compulsory since the 1990s in terms of the Agricultural Pests Act, and that this is done currently through SABIO although distinct from SABIO membership. However, it is currently not possible to enforce this because of the lack of a penalty system. Mr Allsopp pointed out that internationally registration is done primarily for AFB and that this therefore needs to be a government function.  Mr Rademeyer acknowledged that although the SA government had taken an alternative route in the past, i.e. registration through the relevant Industry body, and that this matter was not directly relevant to the purpose of the current meeting, this could be reviewed in future.
Mr Moodie

(no point 5)

6. Discussion session: The way forward
Mr Allsopp emphasised the need to act on the premise that AFB is only in the WC and the need to act with urgency not to spread it from the WC.

Mr Rademeyer reported that the DoA had decided on a progressive eradication plan as a distillation of the four possibilities that Mr Allsopp had tabled. For the first phase, 25 DoA personnel have been allocated to carry this out: 20 in the WC focussing on infected sites and three on other sites; two inspectors will also sample outside the WC. Their actions will be carried out in terms of the Agricultural Pests Act: the details of this are available through the Director APIS. The second phase combines the delimiting survey with progressive eradication, prioritising the pollination issue and timeline, however as information is gathered, further decisions will be taken. The relevant regulation is in the process of promulgation, to prevent movement of AFB, including out of the WC. A bigger eradication campaign would involve 100 officials and could cost R30-80 million or more. Although standstill is an element of the current plan with regard to orders issued, a blanket standstill would require more personnel. Mr  Allsopp reported that from March to July a standstill order would not have a major negative effect on the industry. Mr Moodie emphasised that pollination was necessary from mid-August to December.

Mr Rademeyer emphasised that the larger campaign and standstill issues could be implemented as soon as the capacity matters around sampling and testing can be addressed, and provided that it will not negatively impact on the pollination actions should it have to continue past mid-August. The first phase had started in the current week.

The issue of capacity in terms of implementing a standstill order and achieving possible eradication within the required timeline was discussed. Mr Allsopp addressed the matter of making sufficient laboratory capacity available and an estimation of requirements for the ARC laboratory to deal with 400 samples per week as it cannot yet do this, but that this could be done only when financial commitment had been obtained. In terms of equipment this would cost an estimated R500 000. Mr Rademeyer reported that use of other laboratory capacity is being explored, as this is one of the major constraints. Dr Kfir indicated that there is a possibility that equipment may be borrowed from the ARC Vegetable & Ornamental Plant Institute (VOPI), and that it would take one day for him to follow up on this and provide the relevant budget and needs to Mr Venter.

Mr Rademeyer emphasised that in terms of legislation and compensation, the Agricultural Pests Act differs from veterinary legislation in that the ministers of Agriculture and Finance may consider applications.

Mr Rademeyer emphasised that under the precautionary principle inspectors have the capacity to issue orders for destruction.

In respect of compensation, which is seen as a key factor in this campaign, one hive costs an estimated R2000, which members of industry in the meeting confirmed as sufficient. They also indicated that other losses e.g. salaries and income, should not be compensated for. 

Mr Smit proposed that a timeframe could be put on compensation, e.g. R5 million monthly for a month or two in order to encourage producers to come forward with infected hives.

Mr Ramasodi urged participants to take part in the scenario planning of the Operational SteerCo meeting planned to take place in Stellenbosch next Monday, where the relevant decision-making would take place.

In terms of exports to other countries, in principle the import risk management matters rest with the importing country in accordance with international practice; however, DoA would look into the possibility of addressing the issue in terms of the Agricultural Product Standards Act for this.

Mr Geldenhuys proposed that the bee industry should compensate for destruction as its contribution to this campaign. The Honeybee industry, however, indicated that there were no funds available for this in view of the structure and size of the industry.

The way forward:
Mr Rademeyer summarised as follows, namely that
-The Operational SteerCo comprises Mr Mooketsa Ramasodi (Director DoA APIS: Chair), Mr JanHendrik Venter (DoA DPH), Mr Willie Gentle (DoA APIS), Mr Riaan van Zyl (DoA APIS), Mr Dawid Smit (SABIO) and Mr Mike Allsopp (ARC-PPRI), in support of which a Joint Operations Centre (JOC) has been established. The SteerCo would meet next Monday (18th May 2009) in Stellenbosch, where the relevant inspectors are available, and would deal with the following:
  -Ensuring that there are no obstacles in the current exercise where inspectors are visiting infected sites and the programme thereafter as part of phase 1;
  -With regard to a second phase possible standstill regulation
    -Laboratory capacity issues will be discussed, in respect of which the ARC will provide further information, and the possible use of other identified laboratories be finalised;
    -The required inspection capacity to implement a standstill order will be investigated, i.e. 25 versus 100 inspectors;
-The current meeting indicates in principle support for a standstill to be implemented provided the above issues can be sorted out and recognising the required ministerial approval processes and as far as regulations are concerned;
-The meeting noted the structure of the Agricultural Pests Act with regard to compensation in that applications must be submitted to the executive officer after actions taken, for motivation to the Minister who may consider this in cooperation with the Minister of Finance. The meeting, however, requested Mr Rademeyer to seek more clarity on giving assurances to producers beforehand;
-A policy/ decision-making forum was established: Mr Eben Rademeyer (Chair), Mr John Moodie and Mr Eddie van Zyl (SABIO), Dr Rami Kfir (ARC), Ms Alice Baxter and Mr Mooketsa Ramasodi (DoA);
-The draft Minutes of this meeting would be sent later today and participants would give feedback tomorrow (Friday 15/05/09) for finalising these;
-A media release would be drafted according to the finalised Minutes as a matter of urgency regarding the current meeting, and future releases would be dealt with jointly;
-The implemented plan must ensure that pollinators will be available from mid-August;
-All industries present supported compulsory registration and committed themselves to using only registered producers and marked hives;
-The meeting supported that everything possible would be done to embark on and finalise the progressive eradication programme, and the possibility of making compensation available for only a month or two, to the extent of R5 million;
-Honeybee Industry will urgently provide information on compensation costs to Mr Rademeyer:
For their participation in departmental forums to be established, and
On any issues they envisage with regard to AFB actions taken. 

7. Acceptance of the Minutes the DoA undertook to provide the draft Minutes today. A news release will be compiled on the basis of the approved Minutes for release on 17/05/09.
Ms Sehoole indicated that the news statement should go out by Monday.
DoA

8. Closure Mr Rademeyer thanked participants for their participation, noting that a high level of concurrence had been achieved.

The Honeybee Industry thanked the Department for the spirit of cooperation in which the proceedings took place.