NEW Zealand is under siege and its defences are inadequate, according to a
recent report. This time, the threat is not French commandos or any other
nation鈥檚 army or navy, but biological invaders. Potential plant and animal pest
species are battering NZ鈥檚 defence systems in increasing numbers, the report
says.
New Zealand under SIEGE is the latest report from NZ鈥檚 Parliamentary
Commissioner for the Environment (PCE). It argues biosecurity 鈥渋s every bit as
important as national security鈥�. The country鈥檚 biodiversity is already in
decline because of introduced plants and animals that have become pests, the
report says. But introduced species are not just a threat to NZ鈥檚 unique biota,
they also pose a risk to vital economic activities such as agriculture.
And there will be nasty flow-on effects if pests destroy the clean, green
image which is the basis of the country鈥檚 trade and tourism. It鈥檚 a vicious
circle, because increasing trade and tourism opens up new pathways to introduce
diseases and pests.
Advertisement
The report identifies four main problems鈥攈itch-hiking, smuggling, and
oblivious and careless people. Hitch-hikers are organisms imported by chance
with foreign goods, such as forest pests in timber. Smuggling, on the other
hand, is the deliberate introduction of prohibited organisms, like the covert
importation in 1997 of the calicivirus to kill rabbits.
Visitors from countries where it is common practice to travel with food or
animals are often oblivious to the damage they can cause. One air traveller was
caught bringing in a live giant African snail, of a type which has devastated
the South Pacific islands. It was apparently intended for 鈥渁 gourmet meal鈥�. More
careless are returning residents who know about quarantine restrictions, but try
to bring in fruit which could contain fruit fly larvae.
But that is only part of the problem. One study of 45 tents being brought
back by air travellers found live insects in six of them. In fact, there is a
real risk of returning campers bringing pathogens or insect pests back with
them, the report concludes.
In his December news-sheet, PCE Morgan Williams calls for urgent action.
While NZ鈥檚 biosecurity systems are generally good, he says, 鈥渢hey need to be
better than the best because of our unique needs. Comparison with our other
trading partners is a recipe for disaster鈥攅cologically and for our biotic
economy鈥�. New Zealand has a Minister for Biosecurity, and related advisory
bodies such as a Biosecurity Council. Williams argues for widening
representation on the Consultative Forum and the Technical Forum which advise
the minister through the Council.
The PCE report has been released for public comment in NZ. It covers crucial
issues which deserve wide public attention on both sides of the Tasman. The
arguments in New Zealand under SIEGE apply equally to Australia, which has no
Minister for Biosecurity or advisory bodies equivalent to NZ. In fact, the
report deserves just as much attention in Canberra as in Wellington.
SHOULD Australia be producing its honey from native bees? Commercial honey
bees were introduced from Europe about 180 years ago. But there are more than
2000 species of native bees. Most are solitary creatures, but about 10 species
live in hives and store honey.
Fifteen years ago, native bees were almost never used for honey production in
Australia. Nowadays, honey generated by native bees has become an important
cottage industry. Much wider use of native bees is urged in a recent review by
two entomologists, Tim Heard of the CSIRO and Anne Dollin, co-founder of the
Australian Native Bee Society. And, because they don鈥檛 sting, native bees can be
kept safely in residential areas.
Heard argues that more people should be encouraged to keep these bees because
they are important for pollinating native plants. And he also believes keeping
native bees is a good way to ensure their survival. Many species have already
become endangered because of the clearing of bush.