Application for the Reassessment of a Hazardous Substance under ...

outbreak, MAF‘s ability to demonstrate the effectiveness of the surveillanceprogramme meant that barriers to New Zealand‘s trade were substantially reduced.4.7.41 With New Zealand remaining fruit fly free the horticultural industry enjoys somecompetitive advantages. Production costs are reduced (no additional physical orchemical treatments to produce, no added insecticide treatments to crops). Productquality can maintain a high standard; fruit fly attack causes the premature drop offruit as well as making fruit inedible (maggots in fruit).4.7.42 The most recent fruit fly detection occurred in 1996 when two Mediterranean fruitflies were trapped in Mt Roskill. All flies located as part of the subsequenteradication campaign were detected within 200 m of the original identification site.The reported cost of eradication and monitoring to confirm the success of theprogramme is $6 million.4.7.43 The cost of the programme is not insignificant, however it is considered theeconomic benefit to New Zealand horticultural industry and international tradejustifies the investment in this biosecurity programme.4.7.44 Without an effective active and rapid surveillance programme to detect fruit flypopulations rapidly, should these pests become established it is anticipated thateradication would cost $100 million. There would be additional costs associatedwith the impact on existing exports (see above).4.7.45 Early detection of an unwanted pest such as the fruit fly means that a population canbe eradicated more easily than would be the case when the pest becomes established.This means eradication is faster and at a lesser cost.4.7.46 With people and goods passing through New Zealand borders every day fromregions where fruit fly is well-established, the likelihood of a possible incursion isrelatively high.4.7.47 Taking into account the high cost of eradication of pests as well as the likelihood ofincursion, ERMA New Zealand considers that a moderate benefit is unlikely tolikely, resulting in a low to medium level of positive effect.Overall evaluation of effects on the market economy4.7.48 No adverse effects on the market economy have been identified for either thebaseline Outcome Scenario (continued use with current controls) or OutcomeScenario (b) (continued use with revised controls). This is primarily becausepotential adverse effects on trade are managed commercially by adherence toCODEX MRLs, and the requirements of export markets.4.7.49 With respect to the Cymbidium and cut flower industries the conclusion reachedabove it that the level of benefit to the overall market economy from use ofdichlorvos is these industries is negligible, based on the conclusions that while theexport crop of cymbidium is significant to that industry, the contribution ofdichlorvos to cymbidium production in terms of a national benefit is not significant.ERMA New Zealand would value further information in this area. However, sincethere are no adverse effects on the market economy from the continued use ofdichlorvos, the positive effects (albeit small) must be considered to outweigh theadverse effects for both continued use with existing controls and continued use withrevised controls.4.7.50 Similarly, while the level of economic benefit from the use of dichlorvos forfumigation of large structures (public health use) is not considered to be significant,the positive effects of its use outweigh the adverse effects for both OutcomeDichlorvos reassessment – application Page 63 of 436