2008 Farm Bill: Section 10201 Plant Pest and Disease...

United States Department of AgricultureAnimal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Plant Protection and Quarantine

2008 Farm Bill: Section 10201 2008 Farm Bill: Section 10201

Plant Pest and Disease Management Plant Pest and Disease Management and Disaster Preventionand Disaster Prevention

July 2010July 2010

D M tt RD M tt R

Section

10201 Dr. Matt RoyerDr. Matt RoyerEmergency and Domestic ProgramsEmergency and Domestic Programs

10201

July 2010

1



The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 Sec. 10201Sec. 10201

Secretary is to make available Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) funds for early

RequirementsRequirementsCredit Corporation (CCC) funds for early detection and rapid response of pest threats.

The 5 year Farm Bill specifies that these funds The 5-year Farm Bill specifies that these funds are to be made available incrementally, starting with $12 million in FY09, $45 million in FY10,

Section

10201

and $50 million in FY11 and thereafter.

July 2010

2




RequirementsRequirements

In consultation with the National Plant Board and other interested parties, to oa d a d ot e te ested pa t es, toenter into a cooperative agreement with each State department of agriculture …Section

10201

July 2010

3





To establish a threat identification and mitigation program to determine and address threats to the domestic address threats to the domestic production of crops.

Section

10201

July 2010

4



The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 Sec. 10201


Develop risk assessments of the potential threat to the agricultural industry of the United States from foreign sources, g ,collaborate with the NPB, and implement action plans for high consequence plant pests and diseases

Section

10201pests and diseases.

July 2010

5




T id f d d t h i l i t


To provide funds and technical assistance … for audit-based certification systems and nursery plant pest risk management systems, in collaboration with the nursery industry, research institutions, and other entities to address plant pests.

Section

10201 address plant pests.

July 2010

6



FY09FY09

$12M$12M63 projects/procurements63 projects/procurements63 projects/procurements63 projects/procurements

21 states and other cooperators21 states and other cooperators

July 2010

7



FY10FY10FY10FY10

$45M$45M280 projects/procurements280 projects/procurements280 projects/procurements280 projects/procurements

over 50 external partiesover 50 external parties

Adjustments are made as Adjustments are made as workplansworkplans and cooperative and cooperative agreements are developedagreements are developed

July 2010

8



FY 2011: New processFY 2011: New process

Participation:NPB• NPB

• Specialty Crops Farm Bill Alliance• US Forest Service• National Institute of Food & Agriculture• Agricultural Research Service

~43 people (24 non-APHIS)

Suggestion format shortened to 2 pages

July 2010

9

Suggestion format shortened to 2 pages.



Select Only One Goal for the Suggestion: y gg

1. Enhance analysis and survey2 Target domestic inspection activities 2. Target domestic inspection activities 3. Pest identification & technology

enhancement4 S f di d ti4. Safeguarding nursery production5. Outreach and education6. Enhance mitigation capabilities g p

July 2010

10



Not a competitive grant program.ot a co pet t e g a t p og a

Suggestion is not confidential.

APHIS must retain flexibility to administer Section 10201Section 10201.

Suggestions are a major part but not the only Suggestions are a major part, but not the only input used to prepare a spending plan.

July 2010

11



Evaluation Process

Primary/secondary review y/ y

– In-depth analysis

– Consult subject matter experts

– Rate the suggestion

– Document strengths and weaknesses (for feedback)

– Fairly discuss the suggestion with other i

July 2010

12

reviewers



Evaluation Criteria

Criteria 1: Alignment with Section 10201g

Criteria 2: Impact

Criteria 3: Technical approach

July 2010

13



Suggestion open period May 3 - June 18 gg p p y

539 Suggestions received

July 2010

14



July 13 15 2010 MeetingJuly 13-15, 2010 Meeting

27 reviewers prepared a draft FY11 project slate

Suggestions were randomly assigned to primary and secondary reviewers, assuring there was no conflict of interest prior to the meeting of interest, prior to the meeting.

Additional assignments were made at the meeting for reviews not completed beforehand. The primary reviews not completed beforehand. The primary reviewer was tasked with documenting evaluations.

July 2010

15



3 rounds of evaluation• Individual reviewers• Panels broken out into Goal areas• Discussion in the large assembly of 27 reviewers

Many suggestions had merit; but the amount of funding available ($50 million minus ~10% program support

t ) li it h t b f d d costs) limit what can be funded.

Some suggestions were moved to different goals for a better fit than the one indicated on the suggestion better fit than the one indicated on the suggestion form.

July 2010

16

Goal Sugg. $ Request RenewMulti‐Year

$ to Fund? $ TargetYear

1 184 43,068,515 5 1 16,455,270 14,000,000

2 19 9,049,669 3 5 7,856,310 8,000,000

3 113 25,641,699 32 64 4,993,000 5,000,000

4 50 6,410,143 14 0 2,698,319 3,000,000, , , , , ,

5 115 20,460,519 20 0 2,867,500 3,000,000

6 58 13,714,798 9 0 6,737,623 17,000,000

SUM 539 118,345,343 83 70 41,608,022 50,000,000



GOAL 1: Enhance plant pest/disease analysis and surveyand survey

Multi-state surveys were emphasized with targeted pests e gpests, e.g.

• Pollinators (Honey bees)• Asian Defoliators • Grapes/Lobesia botranaGrapes/Lobesia botrana• Tomato/Tuta absoluta• Phytophthora. ramorum• 1000 Cankers/Walnut Twig Beetle• Plum Pox Virus• Misc Surveys

Pathway and risk-based analysis suggestions were d

July 2010

18

supported



GOAL 2: Target domestic inspection activities at vulnerable points in the safeguarding at vulnerable points in the safeguarding continuum

• Detector Dogs

• Inspection of facilities that receive Inspection of facilities that receive imported cargo moving inland.

July 2010

19



GOAL 3. Enhance and strengthen pest identification and technologyidentification and technology

Broad taxa were addressed

Several suggestions were grouped by similarity: • Fruit flies• Wood borers and bark beetles• Web-based multimedia pest identification tools• Regional taxonomic support

July 2010

20



GOAL 4 – Safeguarding Nursery Production

• Emphasis on projects harmonizing certification standards and on pilot projects to implement those standards.

• Control and management practices for Phytophthora• Control and management practices for Phytophthoraramorum at the National Ornamentals Research Site, Dominican University of California

P j t f i b d b d i iti ti ti th • Projects forming a broad-based initiative supporting the development, validation, and implementation of audit-based systems for safeguarding nursery production

• Initiatives to develop and pilot harmonized nursery stock certification programs for economically important and high-risk specialty crops, including fruit trees, blueberries and strawberries

July 2010

21

blueberries, and strawberries



GOAL 5: Conduct outreach and education to increase public understanding, acceptance, and increase public understanding, acceptance, and support of plant pest and disease eradication and control efforts

• Many suggestions were commodity or pest specific.

• 63 of 115 suggestions were either related to the movement ggof firewood or about citizen volunteer surveys.

• Suggestions that were regional/national in scope, or were adaptable to other states received high consideration e gadaptable to other states received high consideration, e.g.• Forest Pest Outreach and Survey• Citizen Volunteer Pest Survey• Don't Move Firewood

Training

July 2010

22

• Training• Outreach



GOAL 6: Enhance mitigation capabilities

The Team prioritized suggestions that:

• Addressed emerging or relatively new pestsAddressed emerging or relatively new pests•• Were short term responses rather than long

term management strategiesg g

• Had goals of eradication and containment rather than management

July 2010

23



In instances where funds will be spent In instances where funds will be spent directly by APHIS, it will ultimately benefit the states:

• Procuring traps and lures• Rapid Response assistance• Developing new technologies for early

detection and effective response• Training personnel and dog teamsTraining personnel and dog teams• Other endeavors that can most effectively

be accomplished at a national level

July 2010

24



Next StepsNext Steps

Seek Department approval

APHIS will contact many of the parties who submitted suggestions to request clarification and facilitate collaboration between similar suggestions that may benefit from broader cooperation and benefit from broader cooperation and coordination.

July 2010

25



APHIS will work with states and other APHIS will work with states and other potential cooperators to fund additional projects and activities, based upon the

l i t it ti evolving pest situation.

Release the FY11 spending plan as far in p g padvance of October 1, 2010 as is possible.

APHIS may not approach a cooperator to APHIS may not approach a cooperator to initiate the cooperative agreement or procurement process until October 1.

July 2010

26



APHIS 10201 Website

aphis sda go /section10201www.aphis.usda.gov/section10201

July 2010

27



Group Email Addressp

([email protected]@aphis.usda.gov

July 2010

28



[email protected]

301-734-7819

4700 Ri R d4700 River Road

Riverdale, MD 20737

July 2010

29

2008 Farm Bill: Section 10201 Plant Pest and Disease...

Documents

Transcript of 2008 Farm Bill: Section 10201 Plant Pest and Disease...