| Oyagoi
Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Puerto Rico Posts: 1,228
|  |  |  |  Quote:
Originally Posted by junglegeorge12  Russ I agree the problem is not on the US side of the deal. The difficult part form what I read is over in the shipping country, to get the permit.
Here is an excerpt from the site. It speaks for itself if one looks closely.
" List of Nishikigoi farms eligible to receive fish health certificates for export issued by Niigata office These koi farms abide by “Guidelines for issuing Nishikigoi health certificates for export”, and take KHV & SVC tests every 6 months. The list has been renewed on 11, 08, 2006. " The list of breeders is quite extensive, but makes no mention of past certs, and the ones on the site do not appear to be in English. Now here is the parts of the document from APHIS with the areas of concern I am bringing up in bold. I think the guy in MD is the perfect one for the job btw, he is centrally located. [Federal Register: August 30, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 168)] [Rules and Regulations] [Page 51429-51437] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr30au06-5] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Peter L. Merrill, Aquaculture Specialist, National Center for Import and Export, VS, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 39, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231; (301) 734-0649; or Dr. Jill B. Rolland, Fishery Biologist, National Center for Animal Health Programs, VS, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 46, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231; (301) 734-7727. In April 2002, a koi farm in North Carolina experienced an outbreak of SVC. The outbreak occurred shortly after the facility spawned koi that had been imported from a production facility in an Asian country where the SVC-status is unconfirmed. At the North Carolina farm, incoming fish had not been pre-screened for SVC and, apart from new stock importation, the U.S. farm did not have any known risks for SVCV exposure. The farm sent a sample of the diseased koi to the Fish Disease Diagnostic Laboratories of the University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff, an APHIS-approved diagnostic laboratory. After a tentative positive diagnosis for SVC, the Arkansas laboratory forwarded the sample to the OIE reference laboratory for SVC in Weymouth, England. The OIE laboratory confirmed the tentative diagnosis of SVC on June 25, 2002. The confirmed case was reported to APHIS on July 3, 2002. The affected koi farm operated sites for hatching and resale in North Carolina and Virginia. Due to multiple transfers of fish between sites, both of the farm's sites were considered exposed to SVCV. Two additional cases of SVC were confirmed in the summer of 2004, in Missouri and Washington. In the Missouri outbreak, a shipment of fish to the facility preceded the SVC outbreak by 2 weeks. These fish came from a U.S. facility where a disease with symptoms similar to SVC had been previously encountered in the spring of each of the 2 prior years. This U.S. facility where the fish originated had also imported fish from Asian countries prior to the onset of its disease problems, but had ceased importations afterwards. In the Washington outbreak, a hobbyist had acquired fish from a U.S. distributor who had obtained SVC-susceptible fish from a pet store supplied by Asian sources. In both situations, the imported fish had not been screened for SVC prior to importation. An APHIS review of the details in both of these cases concluded that domestic U.S. populations of SVC-susceptible fish were not considered to have been at prior risk from SVCV exposure other than from fish of direct or indirect Asian origin brought onto their premises. After SVC outbreaks were reported, the site in Washington, owned by a backyard hobbyist, and the site in Missouri, a commercial operation, were completely depopulated, cleaned and disinfected, and restocked with SVC-negative fish. Tracebacks conducted at the affected facilities in North Carolina, Washington, and Missouri indicated that all three of the outbreaks in commercial facilities followed the introduction of imported fish from countries where SVC was known to exist or where the SVC status is unconfirmed. Furthermore, subsequent genetic identification of the viral strain involved in all U.S. farmed fish outbreaks of SVC determined that the virus was of Asian, rather than European, genotype, which is the only genotype of SVC that has been identified in previous testing of wild fish populations in the United States. As the Asian strain of SVC had not been previously detected or reported in the United States, or in the Western hemisphere, APHIS concluded that the SVC outbreaks in U.S. farmed fish were linked to the importation of SVC-infected fish. Currently, there are no Federal regulations that restrict the importation of SVC-susceptible species of fish to prevent the introduction of SVC. Based on our review of the 2002 and 2004 cases of SVC in the United States, we have determined it is necessary to restrict the importation of live fish, fertilized eggs, and gametes of SVC-susceptible species to ensure they are free of SVC. Accordingly, we are amending the animal import regulations in 9 CFR part 93 by adding a new subpart I, ``Aquatic Animal Species'' (Sec. Sec. 93.900 through 93.907, referred to below as the regulations). The regulations will restrict the importation of live fish, fertilized eggs, and gametes of SVC-susceptible species. In addition, the importation of live cultures of SVCV, preserved SVCV viral RNA or DNA, tissue samples containing viable SVCV, or other specimens intended for diagnostic or research purposes and which contain viable SVCV may be imported only under permit in accordance with 9 CFR part 122, ``Organisms and Vectors.'' The regulations in new subpart I are explained below, by section. Paragraph (b) of this section provides the address from which prospective importers may request import permit applications and to which completed applications should be sent. An application for an import permit must be submitted for each shipment of live fish, fertilized eggs, and gametes of SVC-susceptible species. Paragraph (c) specifies the information that must be included on an import permit application. It states that the application must include the name and address of the exporter; the proposed date of shipment; the name and address of the importer; the species and number of live fish, fertilized eggs, or gametes to be imported into the United States; the purpose of the importation; the ports of embarkation; the mode of transportation (airplane, boat, car, etc.) to be used to ship the live fish, fertilized eggs, or gametes to the United States; the route of travel, including all carrier stops en route; the port of entry; the proposed date of arrival; and the name and address of the person to whom the shipment of live fish, fertilized eggs, or gametes will be delivered in the United States. APHIS [[Page 51432]] needs this information to determine whether the live fish, fertilized eggs, or gametes are eligible for importation, to respond to an applicant, to identify the shipment at the port of entry, to ensure that inspectors and facilities are available for inspection in the United States, and to contact appropriate persons if any questions arise concerning the importation. Paragraph (d) explains what happens after we receive and review the application for an import permit. This paragraph provides that if, following our review, we determine that the live fish, fertilized eggs, or gametes are eligible to be imported, we will issue an import permit. This paragraph also specifies that an import permit does not guarantee that any live fish, fertilized eggs, or gametes will be allowed entry into the United States; the fish, fertilized eggs, or gametes will be allowed to enter the United States only if they meet all applicable requirements of the regulations. Health Certificate for Live Fish, Fertilized Eggs, and Gametes (Sec. 93.904) Paragraph (a) of Sec. 93.904 requires that SVC-susceptible species of live fish, fertilized eggs, and gametes that are imported into the United States from any part of the world be accompanied to the port of entry in the United States by a health certificate. The health certificate must be in English or contain an English translation and must be issued by a full-time salaried veterinarian of the national government of the exporting region, or issued by a certifying official and endorsed by the competent authority of the exporting region. The health certificate will be valid for 30 days from the date of issuance. In addition, the health certificate must state that the shipment was inspected by the veterinarian or certifying official who issued the certificate and found to be free of any clinical signs of disease consistent with SVC within 72 hours prior to the shipment being exported from the region of origin and that the live fish, fertilized eggs, or gametes covered by the health certificate meet the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section. Paragraph (b) of this section requires the live fish, fertilized eggs, or gametes to meet the following conditions to be eligible for importation into the United States: The live fish, fertilized eggs, or gametes must be under the supervision of the competent authority and must participate in a health surveillance program for SVC. The region or establishment from which the live fish, fertilized eggs, or gametes originate must demonstrate freedom from SVC through a minimum of 2-years' continuous health history, supported by laboratory testing by a pathogen detection facility approved for SVC viral assays by the competent authority. SVC-susceptible fish populations in the region or establishment must be tested at least twice annually, with at least 3 months between the tests and at times or under environmental conditions that would facilitate the detection of SVCV if it were present. Sampling procedures must utilize an assumed pathogen prevalence of 2 percent, with a corresponding confidence level of 95 percent. Samples must be collected and submitted by a certifying official or veterinarian recognized by the competent authority. The standard screening method for SVC must include isolation of SVCV in cell culture, using either the epithelioma papulosum cyprini (EPC) or fathead minnow (FHM) cell lines. However, the Administrator may authorize other assays for SVCV detection in lieu of virus isolation through cell culture, if the Administrator determines that such assays are robust enough to provide equal assurances of the SVC status of an exporting region or establishment. All viral testing results must be negative. These requirements will ensure that SVC-susceptible species of live fish, fertilized eggs, or gametes imported into the United States are not infected with SVCV. Immediate Action Immediate action is necessary to prevent further introductions of SVC into the United States. SVC is not currently present in farm-raised populations of fish in the United States. Each time SVC has been discovered in commercial fish sites, the disease has been eradicated. Tracebacks conducted at the affected facilities in North Carolina, Washington, and Missouri indicated that all three of the outbreaks in commercial facilities followed the introduction of imported fish from countries where SVC was known to exist or where the SVC status was unknown, and genetic identification of the viral strain involved in all U.S. farmed fish outbreaks of SVC determined that the virus was of Asian, rather than European, genotype, which is the only genotype of SVC that has been identified in previous testing of wild fish populations in the United States. The facilities did not have any known risks of SVCV exposure other than through such imports. Despite its current SVC-free status, the United States remains unprotected from continuing introductions of infected fish, since there are a number of known or suspected SVC-positive countries that export fish to the United States, and pre-testing of imported SVC-susceptible fish is not currently required. Therefore, it is necessary to implement regulations that will restrict such imports in as timely a manner as possible. Under these circumstances, the Administrator has found that notice and public procedures with respect to this action are contrary to the public interest and that there is good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553 for issuing this rule as an interim rule, rather than publishing a proposed rule. This rule will take effect 30 days after the date of publication to prevent detrimental effects to live fish, fertilized eggs, and gametes that were in transit to the United States prior to the publication date. We will consider comments we receive during the comment period for this interim rule (see DATES above). After the comment period closes, we will publish another document in the Federal Register. The document will include a discussion of any comments we receive and any amendments we are making to the rule. Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12866. The rule has been determined to be not significant for the purposes of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. We are amending the regulations to establish restrictions on the importation into the United States of live fish, fertilized eggs, and gametes of fish species that are susceptible to SVC. The total value of SVC-susceptible species in the United States industry was approximately $23.2 million in 1998.\2\ The small business size standards for animal aquaculture, as identified by the Small Business Administration (SBA), based upon the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 112511, is $750,000 or less in annual receipts. While the available data do not provide the number of U.S. farms producing SVC-susceptible species according to size, it is reasonable to assume that the majority of the operations are small businesses by SBA standards because of the value of sales compared to the total number of farms.\3\ In 1998, a total of 76 carp farms accounted for approximately $3.2 million in farm sales; 34 feeder goldfish farms accounted for approximately $9.3 million in sales; 115 koi farms accounted for approximately $3.9 million in sales; and 65 ornamental goldfish farms accounted for approximately $6.7 million in sales. The data above do not reveal the number of separate U.S. farms that produced the susceptible species in 1998, since some farms produced more than one species. APHIS welcomes information that would enable us to more precisely identify the number of small entities that may be affected by this rule. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ NASS/USDA, 1998 Census of Aquaculture. Note: 1998 is the most recent year in which census data for aquaculture are available. \3\ Based upon 2002 Census of Agriculture--State Data. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Existing data suggest that domestic producers of SVC-susceptible ornamental fish species (i.e., koi, Crucian carp, and goldfish) will benefit from this interim rule. The United States is a net importer of live ornamental fish. In 1998, the United States imported $45.1 million in live ornamental fish, with approximately 57 percent of that arriving primarily from Asia. In that same year, U.S. exports of live ornamental fish were $10.6 million, less than one-fourth the value of imports.\4\ This rule will ensure SVC-susceptible live fish, fertilized eggs, and gametes imported by these producers are free of SVC. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \4\ Global Trade Atlas, 1998. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The United States is a net exporter of live carp (i.e., common carp (excluding koi), grass carp, silver carp, bighead carp, tench, and sheatfish). In 1998, the United States exported approximately $1.7 million in live carp, while importing roughly $0.2 million. Approximately 98 percent of U.S. exports of live carp are sent to Canada. U.S. producers who export live carp will also benefit from this interim rule because it will help to provide continued assurance of the SVC-free status of U.S. exports. U.S. imports of live carp come primarily from Japan, Hong Kong, and Israel,\5\ which are considered to be potential sources of SVCV- infected fish. Japan accounted for 87 percent of the U.S. live carp import market in 2003, [[Page 51434]] and Hong Kong and Israel accounted for about 7 and 6 percent, respectively.\6\ SVC-susceptible fish imported from these and other regions of the world will have to be certified as being from a region or establishment determined to be free of SVC. The user fees set forth in this interim rule are financial targets, with the goal of recovering the cost of agency operations. Profit margins of some importers could decline due to the user fees, depending upon the extent to which they are unable to pass these costs on to their buyers. One possible response of buyers of imported SVC- susceptible species to price increases may be to shift to domestic sources for ornamental fish, and limit imports to the more expensive species, such as koi. Given their limited domestic availability, price changes that may occur because of the user fees incurred by importers should not have a large effect on the quantities imported. APHIS welcomes information from the public as to the domestic wholesale supply of the various SVC-susceptible species, compared to quantities imported. While it is anticipated that the permit and inspection costs may have a discernable impact on prices of SVC-susceptible species, we believe the benefits of preventing future introduction of SVC into the United States, in terms of forgone depopulation and cleaning and disinfecting expenditures, will exceed any negative price effects. We are soliciting comments from the public (as well as affected agencies) concerning our information collection and recordkeeping requirements. These comments will help us: (1) Evaluate whether the information collection is necessary for the proper performance of our agency's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the information collection, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) Minimize the burden of the information collection on those who are to respond (such as through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology; e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses). Region. Any defined geographic land area identifiable by geological, political, or surveyed boundaries. A region may consist of any of the following: (1) A national entity (country); [[Page 51436]] (2) Part of a national entity (zone, county, department, municipality, parish, Province, State, etc.); (3) Parts of several national entities combined into an area; or (4) A group of national entities (countries) combined into a single area. Spring viremia of carp (SVC). A disease caused by infection with spring viremia of carp virus, a rhabodivrus capable of infecting several carp species, in addition to some other cyprinid and ictalurid fish species. Sec. 93.902 Ports designated for the importation of live fish, fertilized eggs, and gametes. (a) The following ports are designated as ports of entry for live fish, fertilized eggs, and gametes of SVC-susceptible species imported under this subpart: (1) Air and ocean ports. Los Angeles and San Francisco, CA; Miami and Tampa, FL; Atlanta, GA; Honolulu, HI; Chicago, IL; Boston, MA; Newark, NJ; New York, NY; Portland, OR; Dallas-Ft. Worth, TX; and San Juan, PR. (2) Canadian border ports. Detroit, MI; Buffalo-Niagara, NY; and Blaine and Seattle, WA. (3) Mexican border ports. Otay Mesa, CA. (b) Designation of other ports. Other ports may be designated by the Administrator in specific cases with the concurrence of the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. Sec. 93.903 Import permits for live fish, fertilized eggs, and gametes. (a) General. All live fish, fertilized eggs, and gametes of SVC- susceptible species that are imported from any region of the world must be accompanied by a health certificate issued by a full-time salaried veterinarian of the national government of the exporting region, or issued by a certifying official and endorsed by the competent authority of that country. The health certificate must be written in English or contain an English translation. The health certificate will be valid for 30 days from the date of issuance. The health certificate for the live fish, fertilized eggs, or gametes must state that: (2) The region or establishment must demonstrate freedom from SVC through a minimum of 2-years' continuous health history, supported by laboratory testing by a pathogen detection facility approved for SVC viral assays by the competent authority. (3) SVC-susceptible fish populations in the region or establishment must be tested at least twice annually, with at least 3 months between the tests and at times or under environmental conditions that would facilitate the detection of SVCV if it were present. Sampling procedures must utilize an assumed pathogen prevalence of 2 percent, with a corresponding confidence level of 95 percent. Samples must be collected and submitted by a certifying official or veterinarian recognized by the competent authority. The standard screening method for SVC must include isolation of SVCV in cell culture, using either the epithelioma papulosum cyprini (EPC) or fathead minnow (FHM) cell lines. However, the Administrator may authorize other assays for SVCV detection in lieu of virus isolation through cell culture, if the Administrator determines that such assays provide equivalent assurance of the SVC status of an exporting region or establishment. All viral testing results must be negative. (b) Shipments refused entry, unless exported within a time fixed in each case by the Administrator, and in accordance with other provisions he or she may require in each case for their handling, shall be disposed of as the Administrator may direct. (Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 0579-0301) Done in Washington, DC, this 24th day of August 2006. Kevin Shea, Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. |  | |  | Just a thought, we all know that Dr. Merrill is jus the poor guy who gets to answer all the dumb questions and reply to the angry masses. But this Kevin Shea, who is his boss? Anyone know? I am just curious how it all really works, who calls the shots on d-day etc. etc.
|
09-16-2006
Nisai, Sansai and Older Koi Spring Harvest News