Australia Opens
Market to U.S. Pacific Northwest Cherries
Effective June 15, 2000, the
Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service (AQIS)
modified its existing protocol to allow the entry of
sweet cherries produced in approved counties of
Washington, Oregon, and Idaho. With the Pacific Northwest
(PNW) cherry season now underway, the opening is expected
to offer a promising new outlet for exporters in the
current season. The cherries must be fumigated with
methyl bromide prior to export, as is the case with
California cherries. Prior to this development, only
fresh sweet cherries produced in 12 California counties,
were allowed to be shipped to Australia, under a May 1996
agreement between USDA’s Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service (APHIS) and its Australian
counterpart, AQIS. USDA and the PNW cherry industry
coordinated efforts in bringing about this expanded
access agreement. California sweet cherry exports to
Australia in 1999 totaled 319,000 tons, valued at $1.4
million.
Taiwan Lifts
Excessive Pesticide Sampling of Washington State Apples
Effective June 18
In response to a U.S.
non-profit organization’s survey of Washington State
apples in which pesticide residues at levels dangerous to
children were reportedly detected, Taiwan began
lot-by-lot inspection of Washington State apple shipments
on April 7. After protests from the American Institute in
Taiwan that the survey findings did not show any residues
above permitted U.S. tolerance levels and that 100
percent sampling violated a July 1999 Agreement to sample
only one in forty lots of fresh produce, the Taiwan
authorities reduced the sampling rate to one in ten lots
on May 18. Finally, after multiple representations and no
violative shipments, the Taiwan authorities agreed to
return to a one in forty inspection rate effective June
18. U.S. apple exports to Taiwan were valued at $56.5
million in 1999. Taiwan is the 3rd largest
market for U.S. apples, with the United States enjoying a
97 percent market share.
Korea’s
Market is Ripe for U.S. Wine Exports
The Republic of Korea has
recovered strongly from the impact of the 1998 economic
downturn and its wine imports are expected to grow at
double digit rates through 2005, according to June 12
report submitted by ATO/Seoul. Korea’s wine imports
in the first quarter of 2000 were up 156 percent from the
same period of 1999. From 1992 to 1997, Korea’s
total wine imports from all sources more than quadrupled
from $5.6 million to $22.8 million. In 1999, U.S. exports
to Korea reached $2.7 million, up just slightly from the
previous year, and climbing back toward the record $3.5
million posted in 1997 In addition, U.S. exporters’
share of the market continues to increase, reaching
nearly 15 percent on a value basis in 1999. Although U.S.
wine exports to Korea are assessed a tariff of 15
percent, along with assorted taxes (30 percent liquor
tax, plus a 10 percent education tax), there are abundant
and growing opportunities for U.S. exporters.
New Zealand Wine
Production and Exports To Continue Rapid Expansion
New Zealand’s 2000
grape harvest is expected to increase to as much as
90,000 tons, exceeding last year’s record 79,000
tons, due in part to the additional area of vines in
production. A smaller harvest in Marlborough, New
Zealand’s largest wine producing area, is expected
due to a cool wet flowering period. However, this will be
offset by the exceptionally large harvests in other
regions. During 1999, exports accounted for 30 percent of
New Zealand wine sales, and this number is expected to
rise to almost 50 percent by 2003 and 66 percent by 2010,
according to the Wine Institute of New Zealand. Its
largest export markets are the United Kingdom, Australia,
and the United States. U.S. wine imports from New Zealand
rose from $7.8 million in 1998 to $12.1 million in 1999.
The New Zealand industry projects that exports will reach
$140 million by 2003, almost triple the 1998 total.
Argentine Citrus
To Be Allowed into the United States
USDA is amending its
regulations to recognize four states within Argentina
(Catamarca, Jujuy, Salta, and Tucuman, all located in
northwestern Argentina) as being free from citrus canker.
The regulations have also been amended to allow the
importation into the continental United States of
grapefruit, lemons, and oranges from these areas under
certain conditions and with limited distribution. The
citrus will be imported according to a systems approach
of tiered and overlapping measures, which will allow for
mitigation of pest and disease risk. These regulations
will be phased in over the course of four years. Such an
initiative will enable USDA to demonstrate, under actual
production and distribution conditions, the effectiveness
of the systems approach prior to allowing imports into
U.S. citrus-producing areas. If problems are encountered
during the first phase-in implementation period, the next
phase-in will not be implemented until the problems are
corrected.
During the 2000-2001
shipping season, the first stage of the implementation,
fruit that meets the requirement will be eligible for
entry into 34 northern-tier states in the continental
United States. Fruit will not be allowed entry into any
citrus-producing states or any of the 10 buffer states
that border citrus-producing states. The second stage
begins during the 2002 shipping season and will allow
eligible fruit to be shipped to the 34 first-stage states
and the 10 buffer states. Fruit still will not be allowed
entry to citrus-producing states. Phase three begins with
the 2004 shipping season and will allow eligible fruit to
be shipped to all areas of the continental United States,
only if the mitigating measures are working properly.
USDA Establishes
Quarantine Zone for Plum Pox
USDA announced that it is
quarantining part of Adams County, Pa., due to the
detection of plum pox. This action is necessary to
prevent the spread of plum pox into non-infected areas of
the United States. USDA has imposed restrictions on the
interstate movement of regulated articles from and
through the quarantined area. Plum pox was discovered in
Adams County in the fall of 1999. Surveys of orchards in
the county established that portions of Latimore and
Huntington townships were infested with plum pox. The
state of Pennsylvania immediately placed the area under
quarantine. After further delimitation, APHIS determined
that a federal quarantine is necessary. Prior to the
discovery in Pennsylvania, plum pox had not been detected
in the United States. APHIS, and the Pennsylvania
Department of Agriculture are continuing an intensive
survey and eradication program in and around the infested
area. Plum pox virus, also known as sharka, infects stone
fruit species including peaches, apricots, plums, and
almonds. Most strains, including the one present in
Pennsylvania, do not affect cherries. Fruit from infected
trees may be deformed or blemished with spots or rings.
The virus can also cause fruit to drop prematurely from
the tree. Plum pox virus is transmitted from
infected trees either by grafting (joining a bud with a
growing plant) or by aphid vectors (insect suck sap from
plants then carry the virus to other plants). No foreign
restrictions on trade in these fruits due to plum pox
exist, as the disease is not transmitted by the actual
fruit.
EPA Proposes
Revoking Methyl Parathion Tolerances
EPA is proposing to revoke
or amend the maximum pesticide residue limits (called
tolerances) for the organophosphate insecticide methyl
parathion on many fruits and vegetables such as apples,
broccoli, brussels sprouts, carrots, celery, cherries,
grapes, nectarines, peaches, pears and plums. This
proposal follows up on the cancellations by the
registrant of the use of methyl parathion on these and
other commodities that EPA announced on Aug. 2, 1999.
This decision was based on EPA's determination that
showed acute dietary risks from methyl parathion in food
did not meet current requirements for an extra margin of
safety under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act as
amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996
(FQPA). EPA made that determination after completing a
comprehensive review of methyl parathion's uses. EPA
proposes to make these revocations and amendments
effective upon publication of the final rule. EPA is
working with the Food and Drug Administration, who issued
guidance on how it will handle situations involving
methyl parathion residues in foods that were legally
treated with methyl parathion before January.
FAS Report on
the EU Fruit and Vegetable Regime2000
The EU fresh fruit and
vegetable regime was reformed in 1996. This reform
allowed the Commission to tackle specific weaknesses of
the old regime such as the abuse of the withdrawal scheme
in some Member States. The new regime reinforces the role
of producer organizations, introduces the entry price
system and takes account of the Uruguay Round accord. The
EU processed fruit and vegetables regime was also
reformed in 1996. The main objective of this regime is to
provide financial assistance (production aid) to the
processing industry. Neither the fresh nor the processed
fruit and vegetable sector was part of last year’s
Agenda 2000 reforms. However, the EU Commission is
required to review both regimes by the end of the year
2000 and present recommendations to the EU Council and
Parliament. At this time, no major overhaul of EU support
programs is expected. This report reviews the current
system and how it is applied and is available online at: /scriptsw/attacherep/attache_lout.asp.
Mexico Lifts
Quarantine on California Plums
USDA announced that Mexico
has lifted a quarantine on California plums and will
resume the importation of the fruit effective
immediately. In 1999, California exported 7,000 metric
tons of plums to Mexico worth about $5 million. At the
time, Mexico was the fourth largest market in the world
for California plums. Through negotiations with Mexican
agricultural officials, APHIS was able to reopen the
market for California plums in time for the 2000 shipping
season. The market was closed after Mexican inspectors at
the border detected the Oriental fruit moth in several
shipments. Mexico does not have the Oriental fruit moth
and considers it a quarantine pest. The fruit will now be
exported under a management plan that requires a series
of pest mitigation measures that include trapping and
spraying. In addition, all California groves that export
plums to Mexico must be registered with APHIS.
History of the
WTO Sanitary and Phytosanitary Agreement
The following is the first
in a series of four articles on the WTO SPS Agreement:
It was in the context of the
GATT Uruguay Round negotiations (1986-1994) that
countries negotiated the reduction of agricultural
tariffs as well as rules to control the use of sanitary
and phytosanitary regulations in trade. These issues came
together because negotiators realized that as tariffs
came down governments could, unless rules were in place,
resort to the use of sanitary or phytosanitary measures
as a new form of trade protectionism.
In addition to establishing
new rules to govern the use of sanitary and phytosanitary
requirements in trade, the Uruguay Round also resulted in
the establishment of the World Trade Organization (WTO),
including several Committees within the WTO structure to
monitor implementation of the various agreements
(including the SPS Agreement) and to administer the
dispute settlement procedures. Under the dispute
settlement procedures, negotiated during the Uruguay
Round, WTO member countries have the right to challenge
other WTO member whose import measures or policies are
inconsistent with the SPS Agreement.
The SPS Agreement recognizes
the fundamental right of countries to protect the health
and life of their consumers, animals, and plants against
pests, diseases, and other threats to health.
Furthermore, the SPS Agreement explicitly recognizes the
sovereign rights of countries to set their level of
protection for pest or disease threats at the level they
deem appropriate. However, the basic right to protect
against harmful pests and disease is tempered by several
rules aimed at preventing the use of health measures in
an unjustified, arbitrary, or discriminatory fashion. The
primary obligation is that SPS protection measures must
be based on either a relevant international standard that
is established either by the international standards body
recognized by the SPS Agreement or a scientific risk
assessment. For plant quarantine authorities, this means
being able to demonstrate the threat of a particular pest
of disease of concern that makes a particular
phytosanitary regulation (i.e., import requirements or
border controls) necessary.
