Comment from Tad Hardy, Louisiana Department of Agriculture & Forestry

September 18, 2006 Docket No. APHIS-2006-0114 Regulatory Analysis and Development PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8 4700 River Road Unit 118 Riverdale, MD 20737-1238 RE: Citrus Canker; Quarantine of the State of Florida Please accept the following comments offered in response to amended regulations governing the movement of regulated citrus articles from the state of Florida. In April 2006 USDA-APHIS-PPQ gave consideration to three interim strategy options for handling the movement of regulated citrus articles, including citrus fruit, out of Florida. These options offered decreasing degrees of restrictive measures and were designated Option A, Option B and Option C, respectively. In May 2006 the state of Louisiana, a citrus-producing state, responded to the USDA- APHIS-PPQ request for response with the following comments: ?The state of Louisiana favors Option C of the federal talking points. Option C is not significantly different than the current safeguarding measures currently followed for movement of Florida citrus fruit into citrus-producing states. In addition, the state of Florida has proposed a 60-day pre-harvest inspection interval and intends to add additional resources at the packing process level to inspect for evidence of canker as part of the Option C proposal. The USDA document ?Evaluation of asymptomatic citrus fruit as a pathway for the introduction of citrus canker disease (USDA-APHIS March 2006)? clearly indicates that movement of viable canker inoculum on packing house fruit is highly unlikely, concluding that the risk of infestation through this pathway is minimal. Any one of the three options offered will place an additional regulatory burden on citrus-producing states; however, Option C probably places the least burden. Florida citrus fruit originating from quarantined areas would be labeled as such, simplifying spot checks at retail and wholesale sites. Under Option A or B, no Florida citrus fruit would be allowed to enter Louisiana, yet transshipments of Florida fruit from non citrus-producing states is likely, thus increasing and complicating our spot-check activities. Transshipped fruit will likely have lost its origin and it will be difficult to determine whether it should or should not be entering the state. If no Florida citrus fruit is available to Louisiana retail and wholesale locations, the likelihood of smuggled fruit will increase. In addition, the shipment of foreign- source citrus fruit into Louisiana and other citrus-producing states will increase significantly, possibly increasing pest risks that are greater than those posed by Option C. ? The state of Louisiana has not changed its stance on this response. We believe the interim rule is more restrictive than is necessary to properly safeguard citrus-producing states from the minimal threat of citrus canker movement and introduction on fruit that has undergone mitigative treatments. Therefore, we do not support the rule as amended. In addition to imposing undue restrictions, the provisions of this interim rule will be extremely difficult to enforce. PPQ presence in some citrus-producing states, including Louisiana, is limited. Accidental introduction, transshipment, movement to retail/wholesale distribution centers and purposeful movement of prohibited fruit will be common occurrences. Limited permit fruit will continually be brought in by retailers, wholesalers and the general public, often without complete knowledge of the federal quarantine restrictions. Regulatory action on the part of PPQ will present a constant drain on time and resources. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this issue. Sincerely, Tad N. Hardy, Admin. Coordinator Quarantine Programs