Regulatory Discussion Group

Potato Late Blight On-line Workshop
February 17, 1996
Late Blight Management
Discussion Forums

Regulatory

Sixteen individuals attended the Regulatory break-out session at the North American Potato Late Blight Workshop in Tucson, Arizona, representing the following interests - research and extension personnel, certification agencies, plant regulators, producers, and potato industry boards. The facilitator distributed the following list of issues to focus the discussion:

1. Is regulatory control of Late Blight feasible? Possible?
2. Quarantines - are they effective? How do they work?
3. Late Blight regulatory control strategies - what should be done about:

a. Cull piles
b. Volunteers
c. Feed operations
d. Imported seed
e. Requiring fungicide applications (how does this affect organic producers?)
f. Gardens, garden centers, catalog seed sales
g. Seed: Mandatory planting of certified seed (who enforces? how?)

- Seed lot screening standards needed
- Tolerance in seed

h. Eradication of blight infections (under what conditions does eradication make sense?)

- Hot spots
- Whole fields

i. Greenhouse operations
j. Infected tomatoes/potatoes in stores
k. Varietal restrictions

4. Disclosure, notification, area reporting (1-800 #’s).
5. Need for a quick, accurate test for identification.
6. Regulatory Policy - who should set? National Potato Council? Potato Association of America? Certification Programs? USDA? Plant Regulatory Officials?
7. Shipping Point Inspection - some states require that statements be added to shipping point certificates (e.g., a lot is free of Late Blight) which are difficult to meet.
8. Training of inspectors - Regional workshops.
9. Research needs to support regulation.

From the discussion, the group developed the following summary of recommendations:

1. Research is needed to determine an "acceptable level" (maximum tolerance) of Late Blight in a seed lot.

2. An educational program is needed to remind growers of the threat that Late Blight poses to their operations. Another educational effort is needed to ensure that seed potato inspectors can properly identify the fungus visually.

3. A voluntary National Late Blight Screening Program is needed for use by growers. Research is also needed to determine the reliability of a screening program, the appropriate sample size, incubation period, environmental conditions during incubation, etc.

4. A quick, reliable and inexpensive method to test for Late Blight in the laboratory, storage and field is needed to be able to confirm the presence of the pathogen in a tuber.

5. Research is needed to determine the efficacy of the various methods of disposing of infected seed potatoes.

In addition to these research/education priorities, the group recommended that each state, province or production area develops its own regulatory plan to manage Late Blight.

What do you think about the issues list above, the recommendations of the group, or regulatory strategies to manage late blight? Add your comments to this discussion and see what your colleagues think!

Terry Bourgoin - 05:02pm Feb 24, 1997
We in Maine have established a Late Blight Task Force to try and tighten up some of the pathways that blight can be introduced and/or survive in the industry. The Task Force is comprised of state, University, federal, and industry representatives. At our first meeting, we struggled with the question of whether the state should have the authority to order fields, or portions of fields, to be destroyed if heavily infected with late blight to prevent the spread to other fields. Do any other states have that authority? If so, has it been used to order fields destroyed? (We had such authority last year on an emergency basis and used it to order one field to be plowed up.)

Hamm Phil - 09:38pm Feb 25, 1997
Oregon has no power to require growers to destroy fields heavily infected with late blight. I for one would be very careful how this power was used.

Willie Kirk - 06:00pm Mar 7, 1997
Michigan has an act from 1951 that does not permit pests to be transmitted from any source that can threaten agricultural production. For details of this act call Michigan Dept. of Agriculture, Right to Farm director Mr Wayne Whitman. 517-355-5849. For the potato crop, and late blight in particular, these threats include culls, rock-piles, unharvested fields, unprotected or inadequately protected potato crops, be they commercial or domestic. MDA are awaiting the first (and probably the last) perpetration of a nuisance situation.

Terry Bourgoin - 04:42pm Mar 31, 1997
As an update, Maine's Late Blight Task Force sponsored three open grower meetings to take input from the industry about this topic. Essentially, the industry has indicated that without $ for compensation, the State should not be able to order growers to destroy fields heavily infected with late blight. Instead, growers felt that a Crisis team of Extension, State and industry representatives be established to make best management recommendations to growers who have fields in distress. These recommendations would not be binding, but if they are not followed, growers would have no protection, through "Right to Farm" legislation, against lawsuits. Guess we'll give that a try and hope its enough to encourage growers to take appropriate remedial action in fields that are heavily infected with late blight.