2454 final report.pdf - Agra CEAS Consulting

3.4.9 Need for measures addressing passenger transport
Evaluation of the Community Plant Health Regime: Final Report
DG SANCO Evaluation Framework Contract Lot 3 (Food Chain)
Article 13b(3) of Council Directive 2000/29/EC allows derogation from obligations of
inspections in the case of ―small quantities of plants, plant products, foodstuffs or animal feeding
stuffs as far as they relate to plants or plant products, where they are intended for use by the
owner or recipient for non-industrial and non-commercial purposes, or for consumption
purposes‖ (Annex 1, Theme 2).
This section examines the extent to which measures need to be introduced to address passenger
transport, as is the case in several countries such as Australia and the USA when considering
international passengers.
In the view of some interviewees, the Directive implicitly includes the control on passengers‘
transport, as Annex 5b does not specify quantities. The derogation laid down in Art. 13b(3)
exempts MS for carrying out these checks on passengers for small quantities intended for
consumption or non-commercial purposes. The large majority of MS apply this exemption;
however, some MS, such as the Netherlands, perform random checks on specific flights from
countries of origin considered to be more at risk. Plant health inspectors join the customs and
food safety inspectors, to perform sample inspections on specific flights from certain high risk
third countries for interception of Annex 3 items. The customs perform a first control, and if
plant health material is found, the plant health inspectors intervene. This procedure was indicated
to apply also in Italy, Latvia, the UK and Belgium, where passenger controls are carried out by
the Plant Protection Service when requested by Customs.
There is growing concern among MS on the risks associated with passenger transport and
therefore the need to reconsider the application of such derogation. Many international
passengers arriving in a country do not see any risks in bringing in plants and plant products.
However, as reported by several interviewees, examples exist of the introduction of HOs into the
EU through passengers, and a potential risk always exists. For example, small quantities of plant
material transported by passengers can carry pathogens as was the case with Citrus tristeza
closterovirus. Another example that was mentioned during the interviews is the case of
introduction and spread of Aculops fuchsiae, that was apparently introduced into the EU via plant
material collectors: the PRA for this HO lists among the likely pathways of introduction the
―Inadvertent transport on cuttings shared between amateur gardeners and Fuchsia enthusiasts‖
and states that ―the initial finding of A. fuchsiae in Brittany on plants in private collections led to
the belief that it entered Europe by exchange of plant material between growers (Streito, et al.,
2004), and it seems likely that this happened in Germany also (Euro-fuchsia News, 2007)
(source: CSL PRA for Aculops Fuchsiae, 2007).
The results of the general survey show that the majority of the MS advocate the introduction of
measures to address passengers‘ controls. In particular, plants, seeds and propagating material
are considered as risky materials (also cut flowers are included in the risky items).
General survey results
Q3.9.p (CAs) and 3.7.p (stakeholders):
Extent to which measures to address passenger transport should be included in the CPHR
Food Chain Evaluation Consortium 106