The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT - RURAL DIRECTORATE
Consultation on future management of risks from Phytophthora Ramorum and Phytophthora Kernoviae

Introduction

1. Phytophthora ramorum (P. ramorum) and Phytophthora kernoviae (P. kernoviae) are fungus-like pathogens of plants which are thought to have arrived in Great Britain ( GB) within the last ten to twenty years. There is evidence that in GB they both have the ability to kill trees and cause serious damage to some garden shrubs, and have the potential to kill native heathland species.

2. You are invited to contribute to a review of the management of risks from these diseases. The review will help Scottish Ministers decide what approach should be taken towards them in the future. The costs of controlling the diseases need to be balanced against the impact on trade and the environment if they continue to spread. Since this is a GB-wide problem, a similar consultation is being undertaken by Defra for England and Wales. An interdepartmental Programme Board with representatives from the Scottish Government, Defra and the Forestry Commission exists to co-ordinate action against P. ramorum and P. kernoviae across GB.

3. EU legislation is in place aiming to eradicate P. ramorum from commercial plant production and prevent it spreading between Member States. These measures are to be reviewed in 2008. For P. kernoviae, which has not been found in other Member States, GB has implemented emergency measures. These have recently been examined by a mission from the EU Food and Veterinary Office which will report soon on its findings. Comments are invited on what would be an appropriate minimum EU control level for these diseases, to inform the UK's line in discussions.

4. The attached Partial Regulatory Impact Assessment ( RIA) sets out the history and current distribution of the diseases in GB, their biology and the current control measures in place. Three options for future management are offered, with an analysis of the likely impacts of each option.

5. Written views are requested on the three options, and on the assumptions and data used to analyse their impacts. We welcome comments from anyone with an interest in these pathogens. Views would be welcome particularly from commercial growers and traders of plant material, owners and managers of woodland and moorland, and those responsible for historic and public gardens.

Options

6. The options under consideration are:

Option 1: Meet EU minimum requirements on control of P. ramorum and remove all controls against P. kernoviae, other than maintaining a ban on the movement of infected plants to other countries. This option recognises that the minimum EU control levels of P. ramorum are under review and invites comments on where that level should be set, although the cost benefit analysis can only include the impact of current requirements.

Option 2: Increased activity, aimed at eradicating the diseases or reducing the level of inoculum to epidemiologically insignificant levels, by removal of infected sporulating hosts in woodlands and the wider environment, combined with enhanced containment and eradication measures in infected gardens and nursery sites, and the identification and control of any new outbreaks.

Option 3: Holding option; a further two years of the current level of containment and eradication activity whilst more evidence is gathered, after which a decision on long-term action would be taken.

Questions

7. We are seeking specific comments on the following points. Views on any other aspect of the options and the assumptions set out in the RIA are also welcome.

1. Which of the proposed options do you favour? Please give your reasons for your preference, if possible explaining why you do not favour the alternatives.

2. Should separate policy approaches be adopted for each disease or should the same policy be applied to both?

3. Should measures continue to be taken to prevent these pathogens moving on nursery stock within the EU?

4. The current level of EU minimum controls is due to be reviewed by EC Standing Committee on Plant Health. What do you think are appropriate levels of controls for P. ramorum and P. kernoviae both on nurseries and in the wider environment ? How should these levels be reflected in EU law?

Option 1

5. Please indicate any other impacts option 1 would have, apart from those considered in the RIA.

6. Option 1 identifies that trade in host material may be affected. How would a ban on exports to non- EU countries and limits on other trade of host material impact on the Scottish horticultural trade?

Option 2

7. Please indicate any other impacts option 2 would have, apart from those considered in the RIA.

8. Option 2 will involve enforced clearance of Rhododendron ponticum from gardens and woodland where infection is found.

a. Should enforced clearance of infected sporulating hosts be applied in all cases?

b. Should infected plants of historic significance be regarded differently from other sporulating hosts? If so how?

9. Option 2 offers the opportunity to reduce inoculum levels to epidemiologically insignificant levels. How do you perceive the risk that the diseases may continue to spread regardless of increased activity?

10. Are the measures described under option 2 sufficient to reduce the disease inoculum to epidemiologically insignificant levels? Would you suggest any other measures?

Option 3

11. Please indicate any impacts Option 3 would have, apart from those considered under Options 1 and 2 in the RIA.

12. What other evidence should be sought during the 2-year holding period?

8. It would greatly help our analysis if you were also willing to give us some basic information about your own experience. Your answers to these further questions will not be made publicly available, nor used for any other purpose. There is, however, no obligation to complete this section.

i) Are you:

• an association or representative body;
• a nursery stock grower;
• a nursery stock wholesaler;
• a nursery stock retailer ( i.e. garden centre)
• owner of a garden open to the public;
• a land manager;
• a conservation organisation;
• other (please specify).

ii) What has been the impact (positive or negative) on you or your business of these two pathogens and the measures taken against them?

iii) Have you had an outbreak of either P. ramorum or P. kernoviae on land where you are the owner or occupier?

iv) If the answer to iii) is yes, what has been the impact (positive or negative) on you or your land of either of the disease and the measures taken against it?

Responding to this consultation paper

9. We are inviting written responses to this consultation paper by 7 October 2008. Views and contributions are welcome from all individuals and organisations with an interest in the issue. Please:

i) Read the consultation paper and RIA;

ii) Consider the questions at paragraph 7 (and 8) of this consultation paper;

iii) Complete the Respondent Information Form attached.

iv) Send your response and Respondent Information Form by email to: jean.waddie@scotland.gsi.gov.uk , or by post to:

CRE 1044

If you have any queries contact Jean Waddie on 0131 244 4895.

10. We are also considering holding a consultation meeting of interested parties, probably in September, to help formulate views before comments are submitted. If you would be interested in attending such a meeting, please contact Jean Waddie, as above, no later than 12 August

This consultation, and all other Scottish Government consultation exercises, can be viewed online on the consultation web pages of the Scottish Government website at http://www.scotland.gov.uk/consultations. You can telephone Freephone 0800 77 1234 to find out where your nearest public internet access point is.

The Scottish Government now has an e-mail alert system for consultations (seConsult at http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Consultations/seConsult). This system allows stakeholder individuals and organisations to register and receive a weekly email containing details of all new consultations (including web links). seConsult complements, but in no way replaces Scottish Government distribution lists, and is designed to allow stakeholders to keep up to date with all Scottish Government consultation activity, and therefore be alerted at the earliest opportunity to those of most interest. We would encourage you to register.

Handling your response

We need to know how you wish your response to be handled and, in particular, whether you are happy for your response to be made public. Please complete and return the Respondent Information Form as this will ensure that we treat your response appropriately. If you ask for your response not to be published we will regard it as confidential, and we will treat it accordingly.

All respondents should be aware that the Scottish Government is subject to the provisions of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 and would therefore have to consider any request made to it under the Act for information relating to responses made to this consultation exercise.

Next steps in the process

Where respondents have given permission for their response to be made public (see the attached Respondent Information Form), these will be made available to the public in the Scottish Government Library and on the website by 11 November 2008. We will check all responses where agreement to publish has been given for any potentially defamatory material before logging them in the library or placing them on the website. You can make arrangements to view responses by contacting the Scottish Government Library on 0131 244 4552. Responses can be copied and sent to you, but a charge may be made for this service.

What happens next?

Following the closing date, all responses will be analysed and considered along with any other available evidence to help us determine how we proceed with our proposed changes.

Comments and complaints

If you have any comments about how this consultation exercise has been conducted, please send them to:

John Speirs

« Previous | Contents | Next »