CHAIRMAN: Session 3 of Commission I is called to order. On our agenda is Item 6.2, Progress of the Campaign against Locusts and Grasshoppers. May I request Mr Brader to introduce the subject?
L. BRADER (Director, Plant Production and Protection Division): The subject is presented to you in C 87/22. In introducing the report on the 1986/87 control campaigns against locusts and grasshoppers, I should like first to draw a clear distinction between the two pests.
The grasshopper species in the Sahel, against which most of the campaign was directed, are basically national pests, and a chronic problem. They do not migrate great distances, only following the Inter-Tropical Convergence Zone north and south with the progress of the season. The Sahel has huge uncultivated areas: the biggest danger grasshoppers pose is when climatic conditions result in large numbers of insects in the bush invading the crops.
On the other hand, the Desert Locust (the most dangerous migratory locust species), is an international threat in a belt from the Indian sub-continent to the Atlantic coast of West Africa. In times of recession, small numbers of insects live scattered over the deserts of the region. When rain falls and vegetation appears in an area where there are locusts, their numbers can increase extremely rapidly. They then become gregarious and ultimately migrate in swarms down the prevailing winds, sometimes grenat distances, into agricultural areas where they can do immense damage. Favourable conditions in the areas they invade then maintain the plague.
There are, of course, many similarities between grasshoppers and locusts. For both, rains, especially good rains after long drought (as in 1974 and 1985), are the key factor setting off an upsurge, probably because the populations increase faster than their natural parasites and predators. The same pesticides and equipment are used against both, but the control strategies are very different.
Grasshoppers are combatted at national level, by national crop protection services, and the strategy is to protect crops, not overall population reduction. This means equipping farmers in early season to control hoppers in their crops, and intervening with greater means against migrating winged adults with rapidly-acting pesticides later in the season when they threaten crops. Whether control is worthwhile is a function of the crops at risk: often it is not.
The strategy against the Desert Locust is survey and preventive control, that is to permanently monitor the vast recession area for rainfall and vegetation which might favour reproduction and to intervene to destroy populations which have become gregarious. The strategy is international and aims at preventing plagues, not at protecting crops. In spite of the vast areas which must be covered, preventive control of the Desert Locust therefore costs much less than grasshopper control.
The fact that grasshopper upsurges follow droughts made the task easier in 1985/86, as in 1974/75, as donors were already mobilized for the drought and were able to re-programme funds to meet the new threat.
There were a number of difficulties. One concerns pesticides. With a growing international consensus on the need to use less, and less persistent pesticides, to which the FAO International Code of Conduct has contributed, the most potent weapons for locust control are no longer available.
In a nutshell, without relatively persistent pesticides, which can be sprayed at very low dosages in strips in largely desert areas away from crops and left to do their work slowly, it becomes more difficult to destroy a widespread population of Desert Locust hoppers. With the ephemeral pesticides currently used, it is logistically almost impossible to rapidly mount either massive blanket spraying operations, or piecemeal, targeted interventions over large areas. It is also vastly more expensive and probably ecologically more destructive, because larger areas must be sprayed and resprayed as further hatching or migration occurs, with potentially disastrous effects on non-target organisms. The international community must be aware that, without persistent pesticides, the job will be much more costly, and perhaps impossible.
Another difficulty is that, in the period since the last plague, trained personnel has grown old and retired, without younger people having gained enough experience. Due to recent events, we can now say that we have begun training a new generation.
With economic conditions as parlous as they are in Africa, regional pest control organizations had in the meantime decayed, and national capacities were overwhelmed by events. Because of a lack of funds for day-to-day activities, countries are almost condemned to wait for a disaster and for receipt of assistance before acting against it.
In the event, the donors were most generous: some US$ 100 million were mobilized in 1986 and 1987, of which some $ 60 million were for the Sahel, and both bilateral and multilateral aid was given within the framework of the plans established by the FAO Emergency Centre for Locust Operations (ECLO). A meeting to evaluate this year's campaign in the Sahel will be held in Rome on 8 and 9 December. Without wanting to prejudge its conclusions, I think we can account it a success. On behalf of FAO, I thank all involved, the African countries themselves, and the donors, for the excellent cooperation we received.
The structures developed to coordinate the campaign were simple, but effective. In each country, a National Steering Committee was established with the participation of the Government, the Donors and FAO. Where needed, ECLO recruited technicians to advise these Committees. This meant that the process of identifying and meeting evolving needs could largely be carried out locally.
A major role for the FAO Emergency Centre was the analysis and dissemination of information on biological and climatic developments and on assistance needed and provided. There were two main information tools, a widely distributed periodic telex, and the series of meetings you see detailed in the report before you, which provided a forum in which plans could be discussed and agreed. Information was crucial to the success of the effort. It was expensive, and time-consuming, but essential.
ECLO also implemented perhaps a quarter of the assistance provided. For this to be possible, the Director General granted the Centre a waiver of certain administrative rules, which simplified procedures for contracts and purchases. Important funds, made available through FAO by various donors, allowed us to move in a flexible manner and, when required, very rapidly. For speed, too, FAO prefinanced multilateral aid. We often had overspent about US$ 1 million while awaiting transfers from donors.
In terms of staffing ECLO meant adding one professional and an average, at any one time, of three, general service staff to FAO's regular Migratory Pest Group in AGP.
This structure was deliberately light, and not intended to be permanent, as FAO does not believe that there is need for a permanent international effort against grasshoppers in the Sahel. These are national pests. International intervention is only indicated only where there is a major danger to crops which goes far beyond national capabilities, that is, where there is a real emergency.
One lesson from the current campaign is that, for this type of emergency, one should not plan ad hocactivities too long beforehand, and that to try and do so may be wasteful. In 1986, for example, under the pressure of events, over US$ 30 million was provided to the Sahel, largely channelled through FAO, almost all after August, mainly for pesticides and spray-planes. Although it has often been said that action was taken late, it proved possible to find and field aircraft rapidly, and to deliver pesticides by air at shipping costs of only about US$ 1.20 per kilogramme in bulk. In 1986, one tonne of pesticide, costing about US$ 7,500, and sufficient to treat 4,000 hectares, was delivered to the field for about US$ 1, 200.
At the evaluation meeting of December 1986, - that is, after the season - a decision was taken to plan for the early delivery of assistance worth about US$ 32 million for 1987. Following this plan, about US$ 29 million had already been committed and largely delivered by June. Donors, had, for example, already pledged no less than 35 aircraft to the campaign in the Sahel, almost the total number used in 1986. The pesticides needed had likewise been largely pledged and delivered.
In 1987, however, drought in June and July severely curtailed the early season infestations. If the campaign had been organized on the ad hocbasis of 1986, there is no doubt but that considerably fewer resources would have been committed. There is an inevitable trade-off between planning early and getting cheaper prices at the risk of providing what is not, in the event, needed or waiting to the last minute and acquiring only what is needed though at somewhat higher prices. The lesson to be drawn from this is that one should wait for this type of emergency until data from the field justifies action.
Now, at the end of two years of emergency, Plant Protection Services in Africa have probably received more supplies and equipment than they have in the previous 20 years. This is an enormous capital, to which must be added the human capital, the tens of thousands of farmers trained, particularly in the Sahel, and the national plant protection technicians trained on the job and at special seminars in the region and abroad. The task now, and the role of donors, is to build on what has been gained, to reintegrate grasshopper control into general plant protection, and to strengthen and support national plant protection services. If this is done, any future upsurge will be much more easily combatted.
The latest reports from the field suggest that the grasshopper situation in the Sahel is very variable. There are still large populations in Chad, northern Nigeria, central Niger, and the Mauritania-Mali border area, but in other areas the situation is relatively calm. Good rains in late September resulted in a late final generation and the number of females which have laid eggs is not yet known. Egg-pod surveys to be undertaken in the next months will provide a pointer to the scale of the infestations in 1988 but the major factor will be the amount and distribution of the 1988 rains.
The situation with regard to the Desert Locust continues to be very preoccupying. Following two generations of summer breeding in Western Sudan, Chad and Niger, swarms crossed the Sahara on a broad front in October of this year. Some reached the Mediterranean coastal plain in Algeria and others the southern foothills of the Anti-Atlas mountains in Morocco. Swarms have also been seen in eastern Algeria and these may reach southern Tunisia and western Libya. High density breeding spread westwards to Mali in September and any swarm produced may move to Morocco in December. There are increasing numbers of adults in Mauritania and breeding is taking place. By contrast, the situation in eastern Africa is relatively calm, although some winter breeding will almost certainly occur in the Red Sea coast of Sudan and northern Ethiopia.
The outlook for 1988 will be crucially dependent on the effectiveness of the control measures being launched against the swarms now in north west Africa and of the donor supported campaigns under way against the desert locust populations in West Africa.
The current situation has already been discussed during the last few days with the countries concerned. An emergency plan has been adopted and a proposal for medium-term assistance has been agreed upon. The implementation of these activities will very much depend on the support they will receive from the donor community.
The current crisis has unfortunately not resulted in strengthening the regional capacity in West Africa for the preventive control of the Desert Locust. The regional body charged with this task, OCLALAV, has great financial and organizational problems, and it is now very unclear how preventive control will be assured in future. There appears to be a move towards the establishment of national desert locust control units in the Sahel countries in which gregarization areas are found, and it will probably be necessary to build upon such a formula. The active involvement of the Maghreb countries in actual surveillance and control in the Sahel is a very hopeful development. Nonetheless, at this dangerous moment, no adequate structure is in place.
I shall not review the situation of the other locust species, where the upsurge seems to have been contained, nor of the desert locust in East Africa and Arabia, where the latest threat appears to have diminished. FAO will continue to bring to the notice of the international community any further developments likely to necessitate further invention.
On current information, then,it appears that the grasshopper problem in the Sahel has declined considerably during 1987. The countries involved are also now much better equipped and prepared to face local upsurges during the 1988 season. But the situation with the desert locust remains very worrying and emergency assistance will continue to be required in the near future. When the picture becomes clearer and the threat from the desert locust recedes, it would then be possible to wind up the FAO Emergency Centre for Locust Operations.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Dr Brader, for your lucid presentation in which you updated the information contained in the document. You also made clear the distinction between the grasshopper which tends normally to be national but becomes intermittently international, and the locust which seems to be by nature always international.
The general picture and prospects have been vividly brought out by you, along with the three major problems, namely in terms first of the plant protection chemicals; secondly, the speed and scale of donor response; and thirdly, recruitment, training and positioning of staff for tackling the menace when it appears. The subject is now open for discussion.
Magelela NGWENYA (Swaziland): My delegation is very satisfied with the manner in which you have conducted the affairs of this Commission. I wish to put on record our appreciation for the excellent brief by Dr Brader. In our view the document summarizes adequately the real situation with respect to locusts and grasshoppers in Sub-Saharan Africa; the situation pertaining to red and brown locusts in our view is still serious and requires further attention.
I want to record also that the current locust outbreak in southern Africa particularly caught us with our pants down. Had it not been for the swift FAO action, the emergency control programme, we would be in a very serious situation indeed. This is why we believe strongly that the TCP programme is very important.
We wanted to thank FAO for their role in the current control programme and the international community for their financial and material support. We wish to make the following recommendations. Firstly, that this Commission recommend to the Conference an increased allocation of financial resources to the TCP programme in order that the threat of locusts in our region can be contained. Secondly, that FAO should continue to mobilize resources for the strengthening of regional and national plant protection services. Thirdly, FAO should initiate research programmes on efficient locust control measures. Fourthly, the design and implementation of a regional training programme is important. That is very important and I was very pleased that Dr Brader emphasized the same point.
It is very important, in our view, that national specialists be trained and should acquire the necessary experience for us to contain the continual threat of locusts in the region. Also, attention must be paid to the dissemination of information and coordination between the affected member countries.
C. Reynaldo TREMINIO CHAVARRIA (Nicaragua): Gracias, señor Presidente. Señores, las campañas contra langostas y saltamontes son acciones que deben fortalecerse tanto en su dinámica de implementación como en el contenido técnico y científico.
La FAO debe atender este problema en Africa con mayor tenacidad en los próximos años. También es fundamental que la FAO disponga acciones para mantener un sistema de vigilancia y control sobre dichas plagas en otras regiones donde ya se presentan situaciones de emergencia por saltamontes, como las ocurridas en Centroamérica en el presente año especialmente en Honduras, Costa Rica y Nicaragua.
Señor Presidente, estamos de acuerdo con la evaluación contenida en el informe. La lucha contra estas plagas debe tener carácter regional, estableciéndose vínculos activos y ágiles de apoyo y cooperación técnica fitosanitaria entre los diferentes países. De igual manera se requiere establecer o reforzar los servicios nacionales de vigilancia y control de dicha plaga.
La acción de capacitación a técnicos y productores es fundamental para el desarrollo adecuado de este tipo de campañas.
La cooperación internacional deberá crecer en cantidad y calidad para que la logística y el flujo oportuno de recursos garanticen el éxito de las campañas contra langostas y saltamontes. Gracias señor Presidente.
M.R. MULELE (Zambia)i Mr Chairman, allow me in the first instance to thank you for giving my delegation this opportunity to make some observations on the paper under discussion, that is document C 87/22.
I wish also to thank the Director of the Plant Protection Division for his lucid introduction to the paper under discussion.
As usual, the Secretariat has produced an excellent document highlighting the progress made in the campaign against locusts and grasshoppers. I am sure that we all know how much serious damage can be caused to crops and food production by ravaging swarms of locusts and grasshoppers. There is no doubt, therefore, that the control of these menacing pests would directly enhance efforts by threatened member countries to promote agricultural production in order to ensure food security.
In our view, the FAO Technical Cooperation Programme should be fully supported to enable the Organization to respond to emergency situations, as experience has already shown. In that regard I should like to associate myself with the remarks made by the delegate of Swaziland.
In the light of that, my delegation wishes to plead for the continuation of the Technical Cooperation Programme. In fact, we would certainly welcome any move to increase the budgetary allocation to the TCP.
As locusts and grasshoppers know no boundaries or borders it is imperative that countries under threat join hands to plan strategies and actions for the control of these pests. It is thus gratifying to note that several organizations have already been formed for this and other purposes. Nevertheless, we know that financial, material and technical assistance to these bodies is still required. My delegation would thus appreciate any form of support to be given to these organizations from all quarters of the world.
Although the locust situation in Zambia appears to be under control, at least for the time being, there is no doubt that further threats are looming signalling the urgency of the need for preparedness on our part. It is in this vein that I once again call for more support to our regional locust organizations by FAO and international donor agencies.
I wish to end my remarks by expressing our appreciation to FAO, to donor agencies and donor countries for the assistance given to Zambia in her efforts to contain the locust outbreaks in the recent past.
Milan KARIC (Yugoslavia): First of all allow me to thank Dr Brader for his excellent introduction.
Though we appreciate the progress achieved in the 1986-87 campaign against locusts and grasshoppers in Africa as it greatly contributed to reducing harvest losses in many countries, my delegation cannot but mention that the action was rather late and expensive owing to the fact that more than half of the area treated in 1986 was sprayed after the sowing and after the locusts and grasshoppers had already laid their eggs due to which the achieved results in checking their population were unsatisfactory.
The 1986 and 1987 campaigns showed that large-scale emergency operations for the control of locusts and grasshopeers in Africa can be organized, but that they require considerable external financial resources. In the mobilization of these resources as well as in the coordination of all the relevant activities, the role and importance of FAO merits special emphasis. It is, therefore, essential that the acquired experiences be more fully taken advantage of in the forthcoming campaigns against locusts and grasshoppers.
Finally, I wish also to remind delegates that Yugoslavia also joined the 1986 campaign by delivering 100 motor sprayers to the countries of the Sahel region.
DONG OING SONG (China) (original language Chinese): In document C 87/22 we find a short statement regarding the campaign against desert locusts and grasshoppers, a campaign undertaken in Africa over the past two years.
After three consecutive drought years the African continent in 1985 had to endure attacks by desert locusts and grasshoppers, very seriously threatening agricultural production and the life of the inhabitants of many regions of Africa. In this respect the Chinese Government expressed to the African people its concern and sympathy. Three times through FAO it offered 150 tonnes of pesticides to African countries to assist them in their fight against this scourge, and to secure agricultural output. This was a modest contribution which my country was able to offer to the African countries and people within the limits of its capabilities.
We have noted with satisfaction that over the past two years the infestations of desert locusts and grasshoppers have been controlled efficiently thanks to the efforts deployed by the African people, and also thanks to the timely support of the international community. In this struggle the FAO has made a laudable effort in the field of monitoring these infestations, the provision of information and in the coordination of international aid operations.
We have also noted that the African continent might well again be threatened this year. We very much hope that the countries concerned and the international community will continue to attribute great importance to this problem, and that FAO, whilst following very closely the level of infestations, will take the necessary steps to control this calamity in time and as efficiently as possible.
Thomas Madubeng TAUKOBONG (Botswana): We should also like to thank Dr Brader for his introduction to this subject.
My delegation would like to make a few remarks in connection with the document now before us entitled "Progress of the Campaign against Locusts and Grasshoppers".
The Botswana delegation would like to thank the Director-General of FAO for the quick response he made to our call for assistance during the invasion of the brown locusts in 1986. We also wish to thank all the donor countries who responded very quickly to provide equipment, pesticides and financial assistance. The quick intervention by the International Red Locust Control Organization for Central and Southern Africa with equipment, especially aircraft, and experts was also very much appreciated.
It was mainly due to that quick and timely response that we were able to control the invasion and thus avoid damage to crops and pastures in the invasion areas.
The 1986 locust invasion was the first significant locust occurrence in Botswana in about forty years. As the delegate from Swaziland has rightly said, we were therefore caught unprepared and there was no local expertise on how to handle the situation. We were therefore totally dependent on outside assistance to help control the menace. Therefore, through the assistance of FAO we have begun to strengthen our plant protection service and to implement a permanent surveillance system within the country.
We are in total agreement with the conclusions of the document before us of the need for strengthening national and regional plant protection services and of the need to train locals in pesticide use and handling. We also support the need for continuous testing of new pesticides to identify the most efficient ones.
Another important area that we think should be followed up is that of exchanging information on effective ground spraying equipment, because we believe that for national purposes this is the best method to employ. We believe that FAO could be of great assistance in taking a leading role in identification and exchange of information on this type of equipment.
John Redman GOLDSACK (United Kingdom): I should like to thank Dr Brader for his useful and informative up-date to document C 87/22. First of all, I should like to pick up some of the points made in the report and then offer some comments and suggestions.
The report concludes that large-scale pest control campaigns can be mounted very rapidly in Africa given very extensive and expensive inputs by donors. In addition, these inputs can be effectively coordinated by emergency centres for locust operations in Rome with the support of the network of national coordinating committees in affected countries. It also concludes that the 1986/87 campaigns costing some US$ 93 million prevented major crop damage in all, the countries involved.
The report also recognized that the campaigns were generally late, and in 1986 in over half of the treated areas in West Africa crops had already been harvested and grasshoppers had already laid their eggs. The campaigns were wasteful in many areas. Areas were sprayed which did not need to be sprayed. It also recognizes that by far the largest single campaign against grasshoppers in the Sahel probably had little overall effect on the level of grasshopper populations or on the level of crop damage.
The report emphasizes that the present pest intelligence and forecasting systems are inadequate; that communications systems are inadequate; that there is a need for extensive training at all levels in pest control techniques; that there is a need for new pesticides; and that there is a need to strengthen national and regional pest control organizations.
It must be acknowledged that the campaigns referred to in this report were responses to sudden unexpected emergencies in which some tardiness and wasteful exercises, inefficiencies and ineffective practices were only to be expected. The results in terms of crop protection were perhaps about as good as could be expected in such emergency situations.
What the emergencies and campaigns they evoked have shown is that in Africa generally, and in West Africa in particular, pest control operations on this scale can only be mounted rapidly given very large and costly inputs by donors. West Africa in particular has little or no inherent capacity to counter the threat of migrant pests. It also shows that, extensive as these operations were, they were still parochial and remedial and not on a scale or not of a nature that could provide more permanent relief and prevent further upsurges and plagues. The threat remains.
It also shows a critical element of unpreparedness with the inadequacy of pest intelligence networks and forecasting systems resulting from a parochial, individual country approach rather than united regional reaction to the persistent problems of migrant pests.
The successful campaigns against locusts in southern, central and eastern Africa were instantly remedial but have also served to reduce the future threat of these pests throughout the region. Upsurges were reduced and plagues were prevented by region-wide campaigns involving all countries that centred on regional pest control organizations capable of monitoring, forecasting and addressing gregarious populations at their source and chasing and destroying any forms which escaped.
The report acknowledges the vital role of existing regional bodies and documents their successes but it fails to recognize the need for such a regional organization in the Sahel where as yet nothing has been done to reduce the future threat of either grasshoppers or locusts.
In our view some regional standing capacity is urgently needed in West Africa that can serve as the centre of the intelligence and forecasting, and serve as the preemptive strike force against the pests at their point of origin outside crop areas thus reducing the level of the pest population at large.
Finally, I should like to reaffirm the view of the United Kingdom that the FAO as the international centre for locusts forecasting has a central role to play in the strategic control of these and other migrant pests.
Arzouma KOUSSOUBE (Burkina Faso): Je voudrais joindre ma voix à celles des nombreux orateurs qui m'ont précédé pour vous féliciter de la manière dont vous menez les débats et de votre nomination à la tete de cette commission.
Je voudrais également remercier le Secrétariat pour l'excellent travail qu'il a accompli. En effet, le document C 87/22 situe exactement le sujet. Le délégation du Burkina Faso n'a pas d'observation particulière à faire. Cependant, je voudrais indiquer la situation que nous connaissons dans notre pays.
Contrairement à la campagne agricole 1986-87 qui a été dominée par une âpre lutte anti-acridiemme la campagne 1987-88, marquée par une installation tardive des pluies n'a pas été particulièrement favorable au développement généralisé et à une pullulation importante des différentes espèces de sauteriaux, notamment le criquet sénégalais. Par contre, les conditions écologiques caractérisées par les poches et trous de sécheresse ont beaucoup favorisé l'explosion de chenilles processionnaires.
Pour juguler ce fléau et redonner confiance aux producteurs une stratégie de lutte anti-acridienne qui repose essentiellement sur les populations organisées en cellules d'intervention phytosanitaires villageoises a été mise en place. Cette stratégie de lutte découpe la campagne agricole en deux phases dont la première s'est déroulée du 15 juin au 15 août 1987.
Elle a vu la mise en place de huit équipes terrestes et trois unités aériennes. Ce dispositif a permis de couvrir toute la zone sous menace acridienne et de suivre avec efficacité l'évolution du phénomène acridien. La clarté dans la définition des taches dévolues a chacun a permis de rendre le dispositif opérationnel. La forte mobilisation des producteurs. formés et équipés de sacs poudreurs et d'atomiseurs a donné des résultats satisfaisants, donc témoignent les traitements collectifs pour enrayer les foyers d'infestation.
Aussi au cours de cette première phase, 124 121 hectares ont été attaqués par les sauteriaux et 10 410 hectares par les chenilles; les superficies traitées ont été respectivement de 8 358 hectares et 10 410 hectares. Le faible niveau de surfaces traitées contre les sauteriaux s'explique par la faiblesse des densités observées.
Cependant il convient de noter que cela augmentait les risques d'infestation pendant la seconde phase (septembre - novembre).
Au cours de cette deuxième phase le dispositif de traitement de la première phase a été reconduit. Cependant il convient de préciser que si lors de la première phase, la stratégie a été basée surtout sur la participation des producteurs, la deuxième phase est plutôt axée sur les interventions aériennes avec cependant une participation des équipes de traitement terrestre.
Il est prévu durant cette phase le traitement de 25 000 ha par voie terrestre et 275 000 ha par voie aérienne, avec cependant une participation des équipes terrestres.
La fléau acridien ne peut être jugulé que grâce à la solidarité internationale, et le rôle des institutions comme la FAO demeure très important.
De même, les campagnes ponctuelles sont d'un résultat temporaire. Nous pensons que des actions jugulées, menées concomitamment dans les pays voisins peuvent venir à bout de ce fléau.
Nous profitons de la tribune pour également attirer l'attention de notre commission sur l'état de l'OCLAVAV. Cette filiale de la FAO connaît à l'heure actuelle des difficultés; nous voudrions que la commission puisse se pencher sur cette institution.
Mohamed EL Bashir MUFARAH (Sudan) (original language Arabic): I would like to congratulate you very warmly on your election because you represent the countries of the Third World in this Commission.
I should like to talk about locusts and grasshoppers at this stage, although there is another type of locust that I will discuss later. In 1986 a locust infestation took place. Nevertheless, the effects were fairly limited because of the very swift reaction of the anti-locust organization in spite of the scarcity of resources, and we should like to thank FAO for having supplied that assistance to us.
In 1987 the lack of rainfall during June and July meant that the grasshoppers were present in northern Sudan in the western region of Kordofan and north of Darfur and caused considerable damage before the plant protection sector was able to intervene. If there had been the physical means, that is, manual system, available to local organizations and services or available to farmers, as happened in northern Nigeria in 1974 in the anti-locust campaign,the damage would have been less.
As to the locusts themselves, the nocturnal or night-flying grasshopper is a grasshopper that is known as the tree-eating locust, which causes great damage to trees that produce gum arabic, mango trees and other fruit trees. There are no modern methods for controlling this particular pest. The only means available to farmers is to burn the pests on the tree which, obviously, results in much more serious damage than that caused by the actual grasshoppers. We recommend that FAO should take suitable measures against that type of grasshopper.
Our second recommendation is that manual systems should be included in the methods used for controlling grasshoppers. It should be possible to use manual labour in these campaigns with knapsack sprayers for farmers, and also to supply pesticides to the farmer in order that he will be able to control this type of grasshopper before it spreads.
CHAIRMAN: I am sure that Mr Brader and his colleagues have taken note of the type of grasshopper you have mentioned and will take appropriate action.
Malek BEN SALAH (Tunisie) (langue originale arabe): Nous intervenons sur le contenu de ce document qui nous est présenté par le Secrétariat général de la FAO et l'exposé de M. BRADER, responsable de ce secteur, contenu relatif au développement du criquet pèlerin, développement que la République tunisienne est en train de suivre depuis 1985, notamment par l'intermédiaire du Comité de lutte anti- acridienne de l'Afrique du nord-ouest qui fait partie de la FAO. Tout cela est susceptible de nous confirmer la gravité de la situation et doit nous inciter à être préparés au maximum.
La situation actuelle découle du fait que la résistance est insuffisante, pour plusieurs raisons, car, dans de nombreux pays de l'est et de l'ouest de l'Afrique cette faiblesse de résistance a fait que des essaims sont arrivés en Algérie et au Maroc et pourraient s'étendre à d'autres pays de l'Afrique du nord ainsi qu'à certains pays d'Europe riverains de la Méditerranée.
Cette situation doit préoccuper nos gouvernements et doit nous inciter à intervenir devant une situation d'urgence afin de protéger nos cultures et nos programmes de développement. Devant cette menace immédiate nous ne pouvons que recommander à tous les pays de resserrer les rangs et de mener la lutte selon un plan global permettant de lutter contre les criquets pèlerins là où l'infestation est la plus dense.
A cet effet, la délégation de la Tunisie propose une résolution à la Conférence générale pour que les pays concernés adoptent cette résistance le plus rapidement possible, dans le cadre d'une stratégie unique et intégrée,qui puisse rendre la situation comme elle était au cours des deux dernières décennies.
Nous pourrions demander au Secrétariat général de la FAO d'organiser et de superviser les préparatifs pour cette résistance et pour exécuter le plan y afférent. Et, comme cela est souligné dans le document C 87/22, on peut trouver que parmi les conclusions auxquelles on était parvenu après les évaluations de 1986, il est nécessaire de mettre au point un réseau de controle plus dense permettant de découvrir les premières manifestations du criquet pèlerin dès le début de la campagne agricole. La délégation tunisienne appuie cette proposition afin que soit intensifié le réseau de contrôle aérien dans les régions du Sahel et les régions désertiques de l'Afrique du nord ainsi que dans les pays riverains de la Mer Rouge, et la nécessité d'échanger les informations sur les climats entre les pays, afin de pouvoir découvrir immédiatement la menace et le danger.
Pour faciliter la tache du Secrétariat général, nous proposons ce qui suit:
- primo: la convocation d'un groupe d'experts et cela le plus rapidement possible, pour analyser la situation et mettre au point les mesures à prendre sur le plan national, régional et international afin que nous puissions avoir une stratégie unique et commune dans ce domaine;
- en deuxième lieu, il est nécessaire de convoquer une session extraordinaire du Comité de lutte anti-acridienne de la FAO pour examiner le rapport de ce groupe d'experts et pour rechercher les moyens financiers en vue de mettre en oeuvre le plan d'action qui sera établi par ce groupe de travail, ceci pour compléter l'effort considérable toujours déployé par la FAO.
CHAIRMAN: I am sure that so far as the resolution you want to propose is concerned, you will ensure that the formalities are completed by the Resolutions Committee, etc. so that it will come before the Commission for consideration and recommendation.
The Secretary suggests that I clarify the position: when the draft resolution is ready a copy of it may be handed over to the Secretary so that he can put it to the Resolutions Committee for appropriate consideration. Is the position clear? Thank you.
R. LALANDE (Canada): I should first of all like to thank Dr Brader for his introduction to this subject.
My comments under this item will be brief and will serve only to highlight the concern which Canada shares with others in the international community for the recurring problem of locust and grasshopper infestations. The current resurgence of locust and grasshopper swarms in some parts of Africa has come at a time when every effort is being made to rebuild and further to develop African agriculture. My delegation is, therefore, listening carefully to the comments of countries affected on the repercussions which the infestations have. Canada's concern at the most recent outbreak was the reason for our providing 4 million dollarson a bilateral basis to spray approximately 500 000 hectares in a number of affected countries.
However, the emergency efforts such as these to address sporadic, but yet predictable and cyclical events are no substitute for the ongoing monitoring and action by the regional organizations set up many years ago to control such outbreaks on a sustained basis. Canada is thus disappointed that in many cases these organizations have been allowed to atrophy. This happened at a time when the technical and expert resources these organizations should have are needed most. This has in large part made necessary the emergency efforts seen over the last two years. Emergency efforts of such magnitude are costly and can be damaging to the environment. Although the past campaign was generally successful, spraying operations mounted early in the hatching cycle, as identified by the regional organizations, would be less expensive, more efficient and more effective. We recognize and acknowledge the effort FAO is now making to improve and coordinate surveillance and control measures. However, these are no substitute for the maintainance and improvement of national plant protection services and regional organizations.
My delegation believes that medium- to long-term solutions such as institution building, training programmes and improvement in communication and maintainance are needed. We support FAO in monitoring this problem and in taking appropriate steps to support the revitalization and improvement of the regional organizations. We also support the strengthening of national plant protection services.
We believe that it is important to support the different national plant protection services, because it is at this level that the different training programmes of agricultural producers are the more efficient. We also believe that the regional organization has in the past, and will continue to be, required to face situations reaching over different national boundaries.
Guy FRADIN (France): En 1987, comme en 1986, la situation acridienne a fait l'objet d'un suivi attentif de la part des principaux bailleurs de fonds. La FAO a, cette année encore, joué un rôle particulier sur lequel je reviendrai un peu plus loin dans mon intervention.
En ce qui concerne la campagne 1987, ma délégation ne souhaite pas faire un historique de cette campagne mais souligner quelques aspects qui pourraient nous aider dans les années ultérieures.
C'est ainsi que, à nos yeux, la campagne de lutte contre le criquet pèlerin et les sautériaux en Afrique et plus particulièrement au Sahel menée au cours de l'hivernage 1987, a été marquée par 3 aspects particulièrement d'ignes d'intérêt:
- la mobilisation des donateurs
- la participation des gouvernements, des services nationaux et des agriculteurs
- l'organisation de la lutte sur le terrain.
Pour ce qui est de la coordinationentre les donateurs, nous pouvons souligner le rôle joué par la FAO qui, à plusieurs reprises, a donné une impulsion déterminante à cette coordination lors de réunions des représentants des différentes aides à Rome ou sur place par l'organisation de missions conjointes de supervision et d'évaluation.
De ce fait, un consensus a pu s'établir d'une part sur la méthodologie d'intervention et d'autre part sur les moyens à mettre en oeuvre, tant en ce qui concerne le type de lutte que l'importance des traitements à effectuer.
S'agissant de la participation locale:
Bien que la pullulation des criquets (et donc le danger pour les cultures) ait été moins importante cette année qu'en 1986, la mobilisation au niveau local est restée forte.
Je crois nécessaire de souligner également que la formation des techniciens et des agriculteurs a été menée correctement dans plusieurs pays, ce qui est un élément important pour les futures campagnes.
Enfin, pour ce qui est du troisième aspect positif de cette campagne, l'organisation de la lutte sur le terrain, celle-ci a bénéficié de l'appui d.'experts logisticiens. La FAO a, en effet, soit sur ses fonds propres, soit sur un financement accordé par les autres aides, mis ses experts à la disposition des comités locaux de coordination donateurs/services nationaux qui ont joué un rôle important. Dans le même ordre d'idées, doit être souligné l'apport des systèmes de surveillance et d'alerte mis en place par la FAO mais aussi par l'aide française, je pense à l'antenne du PRIFAS/CIRAD à Niamey.
Ma délégation souhaite également, pour préparer les campagnes ultérieures, relever quelques disfonctionnements dont nous pourrions tirer des enseignements pour les années à venir.
Tout d'abord, la répartition des produits insecticides et des aéronefs entre les différents Etats est un exercice délicat qui exigerait une concertation préalable plus approfondie car, dès lors que les moyens sont arrivés dans un pays, celui-ci répugne à les voir affecter dans un autre Etat, même si la situation y est plus difficile.
Ensuite, je soulignerai les difficultés pour proportionner les moyens aériens prévus en début de campagne à la menace réelle constatées: sur ce point les informations obtenues par les experts itinérants et l'antenne du CIRAD/PRIFAS de Niamey ont été prépondérantes et devraient nous aider à améliorer les dispositifs pour les années ultérieures.
Un autre élément contestable, que le rapport que nous examinons met d'ailleurs en avant, est le coût excessif de cette campagne. Cela se ressent d'autant plus cette année que les risques pour les récoltes ont été plus faibles du fait des conditions atmosphériques peu favorables pour le criquet sénégalaise.
Pour terminer, je souhaiterais revenir sur le rôle de la FAO et nous pensons que celui-ci peut être encore renforcé.
La FAO, soit a l'ECLO à Rome, soit par les représentations locales, devrait renforcer son rôle d'informateur et de coordonnateur que la plupart des bailleurs, et en particulier ma délégation, souhaitent lui voir jouer et pour lequel d'ailleurs des experts avaient été mis à sa disposition, notamment par la France.
La FAO pourrait en particulier intervenir auprès des principaux donateurs pour leur demander de modifier leurs prévisions d'aides de façon à les rapprocher des besoins effectifs.
En effet, aux yeux de ma délégation, si pour la lutte contre les sauteriaux il importe de renforcer les services nationaux de protection de végétaux, comme cela a été entrepris en 1986 et 1987, pour ce qui est de la lutte contre les criquets pèlerins, l'assistance extérieure, et à ce titre celle de la FAO, doit jouer un rôle majeur car elle a une longue expérience dans la lutte contre ce ravageur. De plus, elle entretient des liens avec les différentes zones menacées aussi bien l'Afrique de l'Ouest,dont nous avons parlé, que l'Afrique de l'Est, que le Maghreb, au sein de la Commission FAO/Afrique du Nord sur le criquet pèlerin.
La FAO dispose donc, selon nous, de nombreux atouts lui permettant d'accroître son rôle.
Michael Joseph RYAN (Australia): I should like to say from the outset that Australia supports the idea of FAO being involved in containing and eradicating the plague locust problem in large areas of Africa. I say this because I have several comments to make which could be construed as adverse on this subject and I wish to ensure that the Secretariat is aware that my comments are being offered in a spirit of constructive criticism with a view to improving the effectiveness of the campaign.
Australia has built up considerable expertise and a great deal of experience though an organization called the Australian Plague Locust Commission. It is our belief that there is a need to review the effectiveness and the environmental effects of the grasshopper control programmes currently being run in Africa. We look at the FAO figures, and it seems to us that the economic benefits of grasshopper control are rather marginal. Secondly, we have some serious reservations on environmental grounds about blanket aerial spraying of large areas of the countryside. This blanket spraying has a tendency to be indiscriminate, and we could expect the environmental effects to be much more severe than with locust control, where the areas to be covered are generally smaller and more controlled.
On locust control, we understand that it is FAO policy to strengthen the national and regional organizations undertaking locust control. Over the past two or three years considerable inputs have been made to these organizations. We believe that they are not working as effectively as they could do, as they should be. For example, the Desert Locust Control Organization for Eastern Africa, while having laudable and necessary aims, needs, we feel, to be restructured to operate effectively. As locust control is a highly variable activity and difficult to predict, it may be better to investigate alternative approaches rather than invest in training and equipping a large number of national services which may not have an opportunity to be involved in locust control for many years. For example, it may be opportune to investigate the feasibility of an African locust commission which would be responsible for all species of locust in Africa and could provide technical and training expertise to all countries. A restructured and expanded DLCO, merged with the International Red Locust Control Organization, could provide the basis for such an organization. The proposed organization would cooperate directly with national authorities and conduct joint survey and control operations. The organization would be capable of undertaking substantial control on behalf of Member States and would, on the surface at least, present several advantages over the existing policy.
While we see FAO's role in this area as essentially that of coordination, we feel that the FAO Emergency Centre for Locust Operations here in Rome does not appear to have sufficient experienced technical personnel to service the large number of locust projects that have been implemented over the last two or three years.
We feel that an essential prerequisite for effective locust control is a reliable communications system, yet to our knowledge no consultant has been appointed to advise on the most appropriate communications systems with which the relevant organizations should be equipped. This suggests to us that there is a need for greater contingency planning in FAO in this area, and we would suggest that the FAO review its overall response to locust emergencies and develop policy options and contingency plans in cooperation with donors.
Sind Ahmed CHENTOUF (Algérie): Monsieur le President, tout en remerciant l'éminent orateur qui nous a expliqué avec certainement plus de precisions que dans le document C 87/22 la situation sur l'état d'avancement de la campagne contre le criquet et les sauteriaux, je voudrais insister sur la gravité de la situation presente et encore plus sur tes conséquences à court terme.
En effet, la menace d'invasion acridienne mentionnée au paragraphe 23 du document C 87/22 s'est concrétisée, et il y a quelques semaines les essaims étaient signalés en Algérie.
Une campagne de lutte a été immédiatement engagée pour répondre à cette situation d'urgence. Mais le plus grand péril est encore à venir et risque de survenir au printemps prochain sur le nord de l'Algérie avec les conséquences que l'on sait sur l'agriculture.
L'infestation actuelle de centaines de milliers d'hectares dans tout le Maghreb risque en effet, selon les informations de la FAO, de se répandre sur l'ensemble du Maghreb à partir du mois de janvier prochain, tout comme elle pourrait se répandre sur le sud de l'Europe. S'il en était ainsi, les dégâts seraient plus grands.
Mon pays a déjà participé et participe aujourd'hui encore à des campagnes de lutte anti-acridienne dans les pays limitrophes par l'envoi d'équipes spécialisées et de matériel divers. Il est prêt à répondre à toute demande en ce sens dans la mesure de ses moyens. Ces actions sont en effet coûteuses.
En raison du regain d'activité du criquet pèlerin et de la poursuite de la formation d'essaims, il serait souhaitable que l'Organisation mette en place et coordonne un plan d'urgence de lutte anti-acridienne.
Nous lançons un appel à la communauté internationale pour se joindre à l'effort des pays concernés pour lutter dans l'immédiat contre ce fléau et nous incitons la FAO et son Directeur général à oeuvrer dans ce sens tout comme nous "proposons de demander à la FAO de revoir et d'actualiser en quelque sorte le Programme d'action mis en oeuvre depuis quelques années et de concevoir un nouveau programme ou un plan d'action à moyen terme qui tendrait à renforcer les moyens nationaux des pays intéressés.
Nils Ragnar KAMSVAG (Norway): Having ourselves participated in the campaign through bilateral aid of a couple of million US dollars, I will deal with just one aspect of this campaign, namely the environmental aspect.
The use of pesticides will always have to be balanced between limiting the pest threat to the harvest and the threat to the environment that pesticides can represent. This campaign has indeed also shown that we may not always be able to agree on how to find this balance.
The World Commission on Environment has shown the threat to our environment that we are facing today and hopefully represents a growing international recognition of this global threat. We therefore hope that in future we can avoid the position where donor countries offer pesticides which they themselves have forbidden the use of in their own countries, as happened in this campaign.
We further hope, that, through the experience gained in this campaign, we may be able to find methods to reduce the threat to the environment that the widespread use of pesticides can represent. In this connection, I should like to mention that a Norwegian NGO working in Mali has, through experimenting with different concentrations of pesticides in helicopter spraying, achieved impressive results with only a third of the concentration recommended by FAO. We think that this is very interesting and important.
We are therefore glad to learn that FAO is to arrange a meeting where, as we understand it, these experiences, among others, will be discussed. Hopefully, this indicates that FAO intends to strengthen its activity in this field, thus giving environmental concerns a more prominent place in its plant protection activities.
Fritz-Otto HAASE (Germany, Federal Republic o£)(original language German): We welcome what is stated in the document C 87/22 regarding the progress report on the international support with regard to locust control. Generally speaking, this document gives us a short, and succint overview as to the measures which have been taken so far to support locust control in Africa. The international community has, in fact, supported locust control in several African countries effectively, quickly and with large funds.
Special thanks should be addressed to FAO for the timely and comprehensive information which was provided regarding the locust control in the different countries, the immediate information regarding the needs of control means and transport capacities as well as the regular information regarding the individual pledges of the international donors.
My Government has supported this important activity of FAO with the means available to it. The German Agency for Technical Cooperation, our implementive organization, is in constant and direct contact with FAO. The experience based on the control measures in 1986 and 1987 encourages my Government that the coordination of measures should be carried out in the field with the assistance of the already existing instruments. We welcome the fact that the local FAO representatives have taken an active part in these coordination efforts in the field - as far as necessary.
In future, too, my Government feels that the effective coordination of all donors is ensured thanks to the relevant national organizations in very close cooperation with the international organizations represented in the individual countries.
May I go into some of the points on the document itself. Paragraph 12 on page 4 of the document has two sub-paragraphs in which there are contradictory statements. Paragraph 12 a) states the locust control campaign has been successful, whereas in paragraph 12 b), it is stated that the so far largest grasshopper campaign in Africa only had little effect on the grasshopper population at large. My delegation would therefore be very grateful if we could receive additional information and certain clarification on these two points.
As regards paragraph 12 e), also in connection with paragraph 28, my delegation would like to draw attention once again to the fact that we feel that an increased participation of the farmers in locust control at an early stage is more useful than spraying actions.
As regards the large-scale testing of new control substances my Government tends to feel that this is a dangerous approach since the effects on human beings and animals are hardly predictable. In order to avoid greater environmental damage, we advise to refrain from such steps, even if the substances used should only have a limited long-term effect; new substances therefore should only be used after extensive tests.
Our scientists are considering two new methods of locust control which are harmless to vertebrates. To conclude, I would like to give you a very short overview as to what the Federal Republic of Germany has done so far for locust control in Africa. As a direct support of locust control in 1985, up to the middle of 1987, DM 7.6 million were provided. Add to this DM 13.5 million which has already been made available in addition for locust control within the framework of already existing bilateral plant protection projects in African countries. Part of the material made available was transported by air to the individual countries. In addition to that, we envisage sending a coordinator for the Desert Locust Control Organization to Sudan, further supplies of insecticides, protective equipment, vehicles, spraying equipment to the countries concerned; the training of control and monitoring staff and the assessment of the ecological effects of the chemical locust control within the framework of a bilateral special programmine.
Abdelatif RAMI YAHYAOUI (Maroc): Monsieur le Président, je voudrais vous féliciter à l'occasion de votre nomination à la tete des travaux de la Commission. Je voudrais également féliciter le Secrétariat pour le travail qui apparaît à travers le document qui synthétise la situation des criquets et des sauteriaux.
Le chef de la délégation marocaine a axé son intervention en séance plénière sur la situation que subit le Maroc en matière d'invasions acridiennes et sur les risques énormes qui existent et qui menacent l'avenir immédiat des pays de la région du nord de l'Afrique et même des pays du sud de l'Europe.
Je voudrais encore une fois rendre hommage à la FAO et aux pays donateurs pour la célérité et l'efficacité de leurs interventions.
L'intervention du délégué marocain a permis de contribuer à mieux sensibiliser la communauté internationale à l'importance des impacts actuels et des risques certains qui existent pour l'avenir immédiat.
A la demande de mon pays et en marge de la Conférence, des réunions ont été tenues entre les pays les plus concernés, sous l'égide de la FAO, pour mieux coordonner les activités de prospection et de lutte. Je voudrais cependant insister sur le rôle fondamental de la FAO dans la mobilisation des fonds et la coordination des activités de lutte anti-acridienne.
Je me permets également de suggérer qu'en cas d'insuffisance de l'effort financier, notre Conférence puisse demander au Directeur Général de l'Organisation de l'alimentation et de l'agriculture de mobiliser d'autres fonds au titre des programmes d'urgence et ceci eu égard aux menaces qui pèsent sur l'économie de toute la région du nord-ouest africain et du Maghreb.
Moisés TELIZ ORTI'Z (Mexico): Como mis antecesores, mi país le expresa sus parabienes por su nominación en la conducción de estas sesiones confiando en su habilidad, que ha mostrado siempre, para llegar a las conclusiones procedentes de esta mesa. Expreso también mi felicitación al detallado documento c 87/22 que goza de varios privilegios como ser completo, breve y honesto. En casos como éste surge en forma muy significativa la ventaja, los beneficios de un organismo como la FAO ante problemas tan serios como pueden ser los de las langostas y los saltamontes.
Se indican en este documento los enormes esfuerzos y los recursos dedicados al problema de las plagas de langostas y saltamontes, en las cuales considero sería prolijo, en esta oportunidad, entrar a analizar individualmente las diferentes especies de insectos o los diferentes lugares atacados. Para mencionar simplemente aquellos puntos en los que encontramos similitudes en estas plagas, quisiera hacer referencia a la ardua labor que representa el atacar plagas como éstas, por su gran prolificidad, por sus hábitos voladores que los hacen a veces inalcanzables por su habilidad para esconderse, su gran voracidad, su característica polífaga que hace que puedan entrar a diferentes cultivos y a plantas silvestres a la vez, su gran organización y todo esto complicado por contingencias como las climáticas, los accidentes topográficos, las grandes extensiones afectadas que, repito, incluyen tanto áreas cultivadas como silvestres. Complementando esa complejidad tenemos también las restricciones existentes en el uso de paguicidas que serían los adecuados para esto por su persistencia pero que, visto de otro modo, representa también una gran inconveniencia.
Ante problemas come éste, se requiere de la máxima capacidad, de la máxima ingeniosidad para atacarlos, para conocer los hábitos de estas plagas; conocer y establecer, organizar y ejecutar las campañas correspondientes que radican en mucho su éxito en la oportunidad y la precisión de las aplicaciones de medidas, especialmente las de control químico, en el lugar y tiempo adecuados, que requieren de inspecciones frecuentes, y que requieren también de un factor muy importante como es la disponibilidad de recursos en forma oportuna.
El documento señala también, en forma reiterada, la dificultad que encontró ante diferentes circunstancias que deben constituir una interesante enseñanza para el futuro, como las que señala el documento en diferentes incisos en los que hace referencia a la falta de estudios de campo con que
se encontró, la falta de oportunidad para su aplicación, la insuficiencia de medios y la aplicación necesariamente en áreas extensas, pero muy reducidas en proporción con el área afectada . En algunos casos se menciona que no llegaban ni al 1 por ciento del área en que podría estar la plaga localizada, y en situaciones también que representaron gastos innecesarios como aquellas que se mencionan en que se hizo la aplicación cuando ya se había recogido, inclusive, la cosecha.
Nuestra delegación, señor Presidente, expresa su acuerdo con las medidas que cita este interesante documento en sus párrafos 13, secciones a), b), c) y d) contra los saltamontes, aquellos que establecen que debe crearse una red de seguimiento mucho más densa que permita localizar las infestaciones al comienzo de la campaña, que se precisan programas de capacitación en gran escala para enseñar a los agricultores las formas de identificación de los saltamontes y las técnicas de espolvoreo, que deben establecerse sistemas internos de comunicación,y también disponer el equipo y los suministros para distribuir en el interior de cada país antes del comienzo de la estación de lluvias.
Sin embargo, también coincido totalmente con la proposición que hace el Delegado de Australia, cuando indica la conveniencia de crear una comisión que, cita "contra la langosta africana" -yo diría contra las diferentes langostas-, que asesorara a este continente y a otros, cuando el problema surgiera,en aspectos que pudieran estar en contacto permanente con la FAO para movilizarse según las circunstancias lo indicaran.
Señor Presidente, quisiera hacer referencia a alguna experiencia que a este respecto hemos tenido en nuestro país México, y que constituye un caso exitoso, ya histórico, contra una importante plaga agrícola que, como tal, no reconoce límites internacionales. La plaga de langosta en México causó verdaderos desastres a la agricultura hasta antes de 1948, cuando se formaban grandes mangas sobre la vegetación de los países centroamericanos y la parte sureste de México. A consecuencia de ello, se abordó el problema en forma multilateral, y así en 1947 se estableció un convenio entre México y los Países centroamericanos para combatir la langosta y se abordó el problema en forma conjunta y oportuna de manera que se tiene prácticamente controlada el área y los problemas no son comparables, en su magnitud y en sus daños, con los de años anteriores. Asimismo, los esfuerzos y costos se han reducido al mínimo.
Desde 1947 se estableció en México una campaña permanente contra la langosta, ubicando en cada entidad con problema real o potencial una brigada que se encarga de realizar, año tras año, exploraciones y muestreos atendiendo al ciclo biológico y a los hábitos del insecto, seguido de la aplicación de medidas de control químico, cuando el caso lo merita, en aquellos lugares donde se reproduce el insecto, conocidos como los sitios de greparígenos, y que se tienen bien determinados en cada una de las entidades. De esta manera, el problema de la langosta se ha mantenido bajo control. Esporádicamente se presentan pequeños brotes, para cuyo combate se organizan campañas para evitar su dispersión y daños a los cultivos. El presupuesto requerido se programa con un año de anticipación.
En cuanto al financiamiento de la campaña permanente, el Gobierno Federal y los Gobiernos Estatales de las entidades afectadas aportan parte de los recursos requeridos. Nuestros agricultores aportan el faltante a través de sus organizaciones y contribuyen directamente con su mano de obra en la localización y combate de pequeñas mangas.
La referencia que estoy haciendo a la langosta incluye también a esas otras especies de saltamontes que en mucho comparten su peligrosidad con la langosta. La mayor parte del combate se hace en forma terrestre con aspersoras motorizadas y en una mínima superficie se requiere aplicaciones aéreas con aviones y helicópteros para evitar las deposiciones del insecto y su dispersión. Con las acciones señaladas, la plaga de la langosta y de otros optócteros en México, aunque no ha dejado de ser el problema potencial, no ha causado daños económicos a nuestra agricultura desde hace 40 años.
Francisco ZAMARRIEGO CRESPO (España): La delegación española estima que la presentación de la Secretaría ante este tema ha sido de gran precisión, y también queremos apreciar y reconocer el trabajo de la FAO en la materia.
Oímos con gran interés la declaración del Reino de Marruecos en el debate general poniendo de manifiesto la importancia de la plaga que está asolando a cerca de 100 000 hectáreas de este país.
Agradecemos a la FAO la eficacia de los sistemas de información en esta coyuntura.
España, así como lo hizo en las donaciones en la lucha contra las plagas de la langosta y el saltamontes en la región del El Sahel y colindantes, ha contribuido en la actual situación al combate de la plaga recién declarada mediante la donación de insecticidas, equipos y medios para la fumigación.
Estamos de acuerdo con la Secretaría en la ineficiencia, dados los actuales conocimientos existentes, de combatir las plagas con mucha anticipación, teniendo en cuenta los daños ecológicos que se producirían. La investigación, en lo que se refiere a mejorar los medios de lucha preventiva, debería incrementarse. Los efectos climatológicos son determinantes y pueden hacer inútil una reacción anticipada por sus efectos negativos desde el punto de vista económico. Estimamos que deben reforzarse los sistemas de información y los servicios nacionales de control, sin olvidar los medios para la detección precoz de las plagas.
La capacitación del personal de los países más amenazados debe incrementarse. El establecimiento de una red de control relacionada con el paso de las nubes de insectos, nos parece importante. España manifiesta su preferente atención a los futuros planes de emergencia.
Mohamed Mahmoud DESSOUKI (Egypt) (original language Arabic): My first remark is that regional cooperation among the countries concerned and the countries menaced by the locusts needs to be consolidated and coordinated. The FAO can play an important role in this respect.
The second remark is that in spite of the fact that the FAO and some of the donor countries provide assistance to the countries affected by locusts, they do not in fact give enough importance to the countries which are menaced by locusts or which might be considered as the first line of defence against locusts. Therefore, we appeal to FAO and to the donor countries to take the right actions so that instead of fighting the fire after it has broken out we first of all provide the means to prevent the fire.
We approve the draft proposal presented by Tunisia, that is to say to set up a committee of experts and to convene a meeting to discuss its report:
Abdesslam ABURAWI (Libya) (original language Arabic): First of all I would like to congratulate you on your election to chair this Commission. I should also like to thank you for the way in which you are running this debate which has enabled us to understand the statements made by the various delegates.
As for the subject under discussion, that is to say the campaign against grasshoppers and locusts, I should like to thank the Secretariat for their preparation of the subject.
Although locusts do not threaten my country according to the statement of the Secretariat, my country has taken the necessary measures, according to the means available to it, to fight this pest if these insects reach my country.
Our work should not be separated from the collective work which we do together with the countries concerned. We should coordinate our efforts with the countries concerned so that we can fight this pest. Therefore, I request the FAO to focus its efforts on information on the upsurge of this infestation so that we can take the right measures at the right time.
I should also like to express my approval of the Tunisian proposal to set us a committee of experts, so that this committee can prepare a programme of action in the right way. We also approve the setting up of a network to have early information about locust infestations.
Joan DUDIK-GAYOSO (United States of America): When the return of near normal rain in 1985 resulted in widespread infestation of grasshoppers in West Africa and locusts in eastern, central and southern Africa, the donor community and FAO mobilized to mount a campaign for locust control and plant protection services. As a result of this campaign major crop damage has been prevented in all countries with the exception of desert locusts threats to parts of Africa and grasshopper threats in Sahel countries.
We appreciate the introduction provided by the Secretariat, the very candid document and the up-dated statement which we heard this afternoon.
The United States recognizes that the international campaign to control locust and grasshopper infestations in 1985-86, although it was ad hoc, was generally successful. We believe the problem has been brought under control only temporarily and that 1987 infestations could well exceed previous levels. Unless control activities in 1987 are mounted early and effectively the cyclical nature of this problem could well cause major infestations in 1988 and beyond.
The United States recognizes the extraordinarily difficult task confronted by ECLO these last two years and the sizeable accomplishments in centrally coordinating between African governments and the entire donor community. Dr Brader and his colleagues deserve everyone's warm thanks.
We believe that paragraph 15 on page 6 of the document omits mention of a number of successful efforts, for example, at prepositioning chemicals, fuel and equipment, training and public information. Also, the countries mentioned are limited to those funded through FAO. As many have noted here this afternoon, this was a broad effort which included, for example, bilateral efforts of the German GTZ in Mali and elsewhere.
As regards the main conclusions and overall appraisal of the Progress of the Campaign against Locusts and Grasshoppers document, we view the results of the campaign to date as preliminary, as opposed to a final appraisal of the campaign efforts.
The United States generally agrees with the main operational lessons learned from the 1986 campaign. Specifically, the need to develop stronger monitoring networks, training programmes, better internal communications systems and equipment and supply distribution networks, all parallel to the United States strategy for dealing with the locusts and grasshopper problem over the short, medium and long-term.
It may be appropriate here to note that experience has demonstrated that defining action thresholds by farmers, government planners and donor agencies is essential for successful locust and grasshopper control. This implies the availability of large amounts of biological, economic, environmental and physical information, and a system to process the information for decision making.
While data inadequacies are likely to continue long into the future, work must be started on the development of a management system which will enable government agencies and donor planners to anticipate major grasshopper and locust infestations and develop, implement and monitor plans for their control.
We do disagree with several of the report's conclusions, however. For example, we believe that data on crop losses are incomplete and inconclusive and as such do not yet accurately reflect actual crop losses. We take exception also to the negative tone of the report's conclusions relating to overall cost and effect. We take exception as well to FAO's statement regarding the use of helicopters as a valuable means for spraying pesticides. Our delegation instead recommends a stronger emphasis on ground surveys as a means for detecting infestations.
We also believe that additional pesticide testing should be a high priority concern. Furthermore, in budgeting for application of pesticides, funds must be set aside to assure safety in handling from initial unloading to transport, to final use and clean-up. Recipient countries should clearly take responsibility for disposal of containers and unused over-age pesticides.
My delegation has several more detailed comments regarding factual errors and omissions that we found in the report , which we will be happy to provide to the Secretariat.
Finally, we have noted calls this afternoon for the allocation of additional resources to this problem. My delegation would only note that priorities must be chosen. We cannot do more of everything: resources are finite and there is always a limit to the size of the TCP and to the size of FAO's overall budget. It will be uncumbent upon all of us as members of FAO's governing body to ask ourselves what the priorities should be.
Tomofumi KUME (Japan): The efforts of FAO to collect and disseminate information promptly throughout the world through the emergency centre for locust operations, to mobilize resources and coordinate international assistance, is highly appreciated. It goes without saying that the quick response of the developed countries to provide technical as well as financial assistance is critically necessary.
Japan has positively contributed funds amounting to US$ 700 000 in 1987 to the locust control project through the FAO/Japan government cooperation programme that has been undertaken since 1982. Also, we provide pesticides through the bilateral cooperation programme, which amounted to about US$ 5 million in 1986. My country intends to continue to make these contributions and we hope that the FAO continues to play an important role in monitoring infestation during early stages and in coordinating the implementation of comprehensive control measures on a regional scale.
The delegates of Norway and the Federal Republic of Germany presented very informative suggestions, namely, control measures that would not have a harmful effect on the environment. Japan fully agrees with this proposal. I would like to call the attention of FAO donors and recipient countries to the need to promote control measures that take full account of the protection of the environment, including the health of people and animals.
Nguen SRISURUKSA (Thailand): The problem of grasshoppers and locusts is one that causes very important damage to food and agricultural products throughout producing countries, especially in the African nations. We all acknowledge this serious situation. However, it seems to us that the operation mode is costly. We should find appropriate ways and means to minimize its cost. My delegation believes that there is a need to monitor and evaluate the operation in this area.
However, my delegation supports the ideas being carried out in this campaign, especially as described in paragraphs 13 and 28, taking into account the financial constraints of the Organization and donor support. We are happy to see any solution along this line.
René LONCAN (Brésil): Le Brésil est aussi aux prises avec la croissance de la population de criquets sauteriaux, notamment dans les Etats du Randonie et du Mato Grosso. Depuis 1986, par conséquent, la FAO a promu, en collaboration avec notre Ministère de l'Agriculture, l'entraînement de techniciens brésiliens dans le combat de la plaie.
La délégation du Brésil voudrait donc se joindre aux conclusions et propositions du document C 87/22, en se permettant d'ajouter que, à son avis, la connaissance du cycle biologique du sauteriau, son étiologie et etologie sont plus importants que le combat chimique de l'espèce.
Gerard A. M. VAN DER GRIND (Netherlands): As this is the first time that the delegation has taken the floor in this Commission we want to congratulate you on your election as Chairman.
Document C 87/22, gives a good overview of the progress of the campaign against locust and grasshoppers, and the Dutch government has supported that campaign in recent years.
The document emphasizes the campaign in the Sahelian countries. On page 4, paragraph 12 the conclusion is drawn that because of the fact that the needed infrastructure and management were not available, the results of the campaign could not be optimum.
This brings us to the overall appraisal as written in paragraph 28 where it is mentioned that assistance is still required. In our view it is rightly stated that the campaign should continue and should pay more attention to the strengthening of national and regional plant protection services, the need for training in pesticide application techniques at all levels, and the need for large-scale testing of new pesticides.
We very much welcome FAO's initiatives and we hope to be able to cooperate with FAO in this field in the future, as well.
Washington ZUÑIGA TRELLES (Perú): Mi país no tiene mucha experiencia en el control de langostas; no tiene este problema pero cree que puede aportar algunas ideas acerca de este tema.
En primer lugar, debo felicitar a la FAO porque además de los documentos que se nos han presentado, constantemente se nota el interés de nuestra Organización para realizar una acción positiva sobre el control de esta plaga en Africa. Asimismo, los países donantes a los que a algunos de ellos acabamos de escuchar, y que han demostrado su gran interés de ayudar al Africa en la lucha contra esta plaga.
Estoy de acuerdo con lo que ha manifestado el Sr. delegado de México así como el de Estados Unidos en cuanto a la necesidad que hay, en el control de estas plagas, de la oportunidad y la constancia que debe hacerse de estos controles, así como también en la acción global.
Yo tengo algunos ejemplos sucedidos en mi país; claro que no es el ejemplo de los saltamontes cuyo control es más difícil. En algunas comarcas de la Sierra peruana se presentó una plaga de ratas. El control que hacía el Ministerio de Agricultura se reducía a controles locales y las ratas se pasaban de una comarca a otra y, por consiguiente, nunca terminaban de controlarse. Hasta que un día todas estas comarcas se pusieron de acuerdo en hacer un control simultáneo un día específico, ese día que lo llamaremos el día "D", todos los campesinos de esa comarca aplicaron los raticidas y las ratas desaparecieron por lo menos por un tiempo largo. Es por eso, que considero interesantes las propuestas de México y Estados Unidos de que estos ataques sean globales y oportunos.
Yo creo que si hay suficientes recursos económicos, ésta debiera ser una de las formas de controlar la langosta. Estoy de acuerdo también con Australia sobre el problema de que el uso intensivo de plaguicidas pueden afectar el medio ambiente, haciéndose peligroso a los seres humanos y a los animales; y no solamente esto, sino que puede liquidar a enemigos naturales de la langosta.
Según tengo informaciones, la langosta como muchas plagas, también tienen enemigos naturales que pueden desarrollarse y después ser un control biologico, constituirse en un control gratuito para estas plagas.
Sobre este aspecto, me permitiré sugerir que la FAO, su departamento de Investigación, pudiera ver la posibilidad de encontrar estos enemigos naturales de las langostas en algunos lugares del mundo donde existen langostas en situaciones que no ofrecen peligro, estudiarlos en laboratorio y propagarlos.
Quisiera contar un caso que sucedió en mi país, que podría servir de ejemplo. En Estados Unidos, en Luisiana creo, se presentaba La plaga del barreno de la caña producido por un insecto. Pero resultó que an el Perú, los investigadores americanos descubrieron que esto se debía a que el barreno en el Perú tenía un enemigo natural, una avispita. El Departamento de Agricultura de los Estados Unidos envió a sus investigadores que criaron en laboratorio miles, millones de huevos de esta avispita y la trasladaron a Luisiana, y realizaron un control biológico sin necesidad de plaguicidas.
Esto puede constituir, especulando un poco, pero basados en cierta experiencia un ejemplo que los investigadores descubran estos enemigos naturales de las langostas y puedan desarrollarlos. La ciencia es capaz de todo. Me permito lanzar esta propuesta aventurada quizás, pero que puede dar resultados positivos en la lucha contra la langosta.
Estoy también de acuerdo con las delegaciones de Túnez y de Australia de crear un Comité Especial para Africa contra la Langosta. Esto sería muy útil. Así como hace pocos días, en el Consejo se ha propuesto la creación de un Comité de Ganadería para América Latina y el Caribe, ¿por qué no puede existir un Comité de Lucha contra la Langosta para Africa?, que creo que sería efectivo, que podría unir a países donantes y países que sufren esta plaga, y sobre todo, tener técnicos de alta calidad, entomólogos que además no sólo combatan la plaga sino hagan investigaciones sobre un posible control biológico.
CHAIRMAN: I thank the distinguished delegate of Peru. I am sure that other delegates will have heard with as much interest as I did about experience in rodent control. We are happy to note that Peru has been able to kill most of the rats, although I am sure that if rats were able to fly like grasshoppers the problem possibly would have been more difficult.
Lutf AL-ANSY (Yemen Arab Republic) (original language Arabic): I should like to congratulate you on your election as the Chairman of this Commission and also for the way in which you have organized our work. I should also like to thank the Secretariat for the excellent preparation of the documents supplied to us.
I would like to join my voice to those of the delegates who have preceded me as to the desirability of outlining the steps to be taken against the desert locust and grasshopper, the proper use of insecticides, the exchange of information and experience, and the desirability of training supervisory staff in this field.
On behalf of my delegation I should like to reaffirm the desirability of coordinating activities between countries which are threatened by desert locusts and grasshoppers and the global action. I should also like to stress the importance of the role of FAO in this field.
I should also like to mention the necessity of undertaking a very intensive campaign in the traditionally infested regions so as to avoid an endemic problem, because it is a danger which constantly threatens agricultural production.
Our country is sometimes confronted with swarms of desert locusts and grasshoppers which come from neighbouring regions, and which of course leads to considerable difficulties, financial difficulties which we could well do without. Also the damage is enormous in terms of destroyed agricultural out-put, and the losses are very important indeed for the farmers. We have farmers who do not have enough food at their disposal.
Hans RAMEL (Sweden): My delegation wants to thank Dr Brader for the interesting information we have been given about the campaign against locusts and grasshoppers. I can assure you that we are very much aware of the great problems that face the affected countries. We congratulate FAO on its very fast and efficient action when Sweden was one of the donors. We want to underline the need for continuous control of development. We think that the natural services for plant protection must be built in the different countries, and that cooperation between the countries must be even more lively than before.
We want to recommend more intensive research aimed at finding insecticides and methods which are both more efficient and less dangerous to the environment.
Mabayo SANGHANTA (Mali): Permettez-moi de m'associer aux autres délégués qui m'ont précédé pour vous féliciter de votre élection à la Présidence de notre commission et de la manière dont vous dirigez nos débats. Je voudrais également remercier et féliciter le Secrétariat de la FAO pour la qualité des documents qui sont soumis à notre analyse.
Si nous n'avons pas cru devoir intervenir sur les premiers points de notre ordre du jour, c'est parce que nous avons estimé que les points essentiels qui nous préoccupaient à l'heure actuelle concernant le sujet, ont été suffisamment mis en exergue et que les premiers intervenants ont souligné les problèmes ayant retenu notre attention notamment la question de la dette africaine, de la commercialisation et des débouchés et de l'avènement d'un nouvel ordre économique entre autres.
Dans les documents C 87/2 paragraphe 58, il est dit que sept pays d'Afrique dont le Mali avaient des excédents exportables de céréales secondaires sur la récolte de 1985-86. Si ceci a été rendu possible et ce malgré une attaque acridienne sans précédent dans mon pays, c'est surtout grâce à une intervention concertée et diligente de la Communauté internationale et des autorités de mon pays, action coordonnée par la FAO. Nous saisissons donc cette occasion solennelle pour exprimer notre profonde reconnaissance à tous les bailleurs de fonds et à tous les organismes qui nous ont apporté aide et assistance dans les domaines de la protection des végétaux.
J'ai l'honneur également de porter à votre connaissance que face à cette situation mon pays vient d'ériger un Service National de Protection des Végétaux. Nous voudrions cependant attirer l'attention de notre forum sur le fait que l'organisme de lutte contre les criquets, l'OCLALAV, traverse actuellement une période critique de son existence et en conséquence, nous lançons un cri d'alarme pour que cet organisme soit soutenu afin de pouvoir faire face à sa mission dont l'importance et l'enjeu ont été sufisamment soulignés par les délégués qui m'ont précédé.
Adama SY (Mauritanie): Permettez à la Mauritanie de s'associer à tous ceux qui vous ont félicité pour votre nomination à la tête de cette commission, mais également de féliciter la FAO pour les actions décisives qu'elle a entreprises en ce qui concerne les problèmes qui nous préoccupent.
La FAO nous a fait part d'une situation alarmante à plus d'un titre dans la mesure où, si nos espoirs jusqu'à présent étaient maintenus pour ce qui est de la production soutenue et croissante, il se peut très bien qu'ils soient anihilés par ces calamités qui ne sont plus à identifier.
Comme la FAO l'a fait remarquer, la situation en ce moment est extrêmement grave dans la région ouest-africaine et principalement dans les pays tels que la Mauritanie et le Niger. Mais encore faut-il ajouter les invasions qui ont été observées en Afrique du Nord et tout ceci nous conduit à dire qu'il faudrait une solution immédiate à ce problème.
La Mauritanie, par notre voix, remercie sincèrement tous les pays et organismes qui jusqu'à présent ont déployé une volonté commune pour aider ces pays face à cette situation et renouvelle également ces félicitations à la FAO qui ne cesse de mobiliser l'opinion internationale.
Les délégations qui nous ont précédés ont suffisamment souligné la gravité du problème actuel qui se pose au niveau de ce cas bien précis et l'on ne saurait oublier tous ces paysans qui par delà des diversités, les différences, les contraintes s'efforcent quotidiennement de rechercher une production de qualité.
Masuhla Humphrey LETEKA (Lesotho): Much has already been said on the subject but it is the wish of my delegation to make a few positive remarks on the subject. First, allow me to thank Dr Brader for his introduction of the document before us. At the same time we wish to congratulate the Secretariat for its preparation of this high-quality report.
Lesotho has not as yet suffered any serious outbreak of locusts and grasshoppers, but it takes seriously into account the possibility of this threat, considering that our neighbours in Southern Africa have in the recent past experienced the attack.
At the same time we are faced with the threat of the Karroo Desert in South Africa encroaching into the southern parts of Lesotho. The swarms of 1985/86 from the Darroo reached the Orange Free State, a province in RSA which is nearest to Lesotho. As it was, we were lucky that the problem was arrested before it could reach Lesotho.
In this regard we strongly appeal to FAO for its technical assistance in policy formulation and the drawing of contingency plans to counter any possible outbreak in Lesotho.
Secondly, my delegation would also like to take this opportunity to support the delegate of Zambia on his proposal for possible budget increases on the TCP for emergency purposes. TCP is very important to us, not only with regard to these menacing pests, but also for other emergencies of a natural character.
We should like to commend the donor countries, international organizations and NGO's for their tireless efforts for giving the necessary assistance in times of need to affected countries. FAO ' s role in this regard cannot be over-emphasized. The establishment of the International Red Locust Control Organization for Central and Southern Africa, and the creation of other emergency centres for locust operations in other areas, will go a long way to curbing the adverse effects which can be caused by these pests on global food security.
Finally, my delegation wishes to endorse the conclusions drawn by the Document on the need for the strengthening of national and regional plant protection services, the need for training in pesticides application techniques at all levels and the need for large-scale testing of new pesticides within the context of the needs of countries affected. These measures would certainly help control the spread of these swarms on a more sustainable basis.
L. BRADER (Director, Plant Production and Protection Division): I would certainly like to thank all the delegates for their strong interest shown in this matter, which I would almost say is in prolongation of the effective and strong cooperation we have had with everybody concerned in this campaign, the countries affected and the donor community. We certainly welcome your critique; I think it will help us in improving the work. We also accept your praise because we see it as a signal that we are on the right track in trying to control the locusts and. the grasshoppers in the various countries.
I should like to make some general comments which would more or less summarize a number of the questions or remarks that have been made. First, let me say that we have put before you document C 87/22 with the purpose of giving you some of the practical aspects of the campaigns which everybody has undertaken. We did not intend to show that everything was right, but we wanted to have a rather pragmatic look at the matter, particularly to see what lessons could be learned from it. In that sense, it may have disappointed some people that we were quite critical of certain activities. Various comments have been made that there should be more working groups, more studies etc. In this working document we have listed the number of meetings that we have held. In this whole activity we - when I say "we" I really mean the donors, the countries concerned and FAO -have continuously consulted with the technicians, with those who had knowledge of the matter and who could assist in the effective implementation of the various activities.
In fact, we have even had in the last two days further expert meetings to appraise the current desert locust situation and draw up action plans in order to put them forward to the countries and to the donor community. I can assure those that have expressed concern about these expert meetings that we shall hold them as and when needed. I think that if one thing was easy in the last two years it was that everybody was quite willing to collaborate on this matter and that sometimes, at two weeks' notice, we could bring the experts in order to discuss matters or even provide direct assistance.
There has also been quite a discussion and quite a number of remarks about the further establishment of global commissions, regional commissions, in order better to coordinate the work. I must be careful what I say. I am tempted to say that may be there are too many committees and that is why sometimes there were difficulties in coordination. But one should not take that remark too seriously.
I want to remind the Commission that there is a Desert Locust Control Commission, which is an overall commission looking at desert locusts and other locust problems. It is an FAO Commission. Under this commission there are various regional bodies, regional FAO commissions or regional control organizations and, as it stands now, these structures and commissions cover the whole of Africa and Asia as far as locust problems are concerned, and we are continously working closely with them.
We have also heard remarks that the regional organizations were not always capable of doing their work. I can inform the Commission that we are closely cooperating with the three existing regional organizations in Africa, to evaluate their structures, to analyse what best form they should have in order to provide the most effective assistance to the countries, and to ensure that the necessary collaborative action is taken with respect to those pests which are typical of a regional or even African inter-regional nature. The task is not easy. Each of these regional bodies, be it OCLALAV, DLCOEA or the International Red Locust Control Organization, encounters financial difficulties and it is against that background that we try to develop the most pragmatic approach, which ensures that the work is done at the field level with the necessary regional coordination.
We have already noted in the report that we are also very strongly emphasizing and developing plans - outline proposals are available and will be published soon - on strengthening national structures. There is no doubt, as has been clearly proved in the past, that the regional organizations on their own cannot carry out their work when there are not national structures which can effectively interact with these regional bodies. We have thus prepared plans for medium-term action which we hope soon to submit to donors. Incidentally, in that respect, and also with respect to the earlier remarks I made, we shall have another evaluation meeting-of the campaign in the Sahel in the second week of December. We shall probably have to extend the discussion at that meeting to cover the desert locust situation.
The problem of pesticides is a major concern. I should like to stress at the outset that I consider that FAO can be proud of its record with respect to promoting the safe and effective use of pesticides and paying particular concern to environmental problems. The examples of this work are there. I need only refer to the total work on the Codex Alimentarius, the Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides, and the pioneering work that FAO has undertaken on integrated pest management and biological control. With respect to the environmental impact of work on the control of locusts, for about a ten-year period from 1965-1975 we carried out a whole series of experiments particularly to evaluate the potential environmental impact of the chemicals used for control of these insects. We only to happy to report that the environmental impact was extremely limited and certainly did not warrant the use of other chemicals to control these locusts. Nevertheless, in view of the overall decisions taken by other countries on banning certain of these pesticides, we have moved to others, and I discussed this matter, which causes us some concern, in my introduction. As technicians, we are not sure the environmental problems that we are creating now by replacing those former pesticides by new ones are not worse that they were before and that the work cannot be done effectively.
I should also like to emphasize that we continuously seek new pesticides with particularly in mind that we need safer ones, ones that are less damagingto the environment, and that in addition in this campaign donors have provided considerable assistance in the provision of protective clothing in order to avoid any incidents with the use of these pesticides. The reports we have received are favourable. We have not received any report of human intoxication. We may see some minimal effect on the environment, but I think that everyboy who is familiar with pest control will know that it is impossible to avoid any effect, but this information that we have collected will further serve to improve the methology in order to try to reduce further these potential impacts.
I should also like to inform the Commission that the current campaign we are undertaking is continuously monitored with respect to the potential effects on the environment, and the lessons learned from that will be put into practice.
Some remarks were made on wide-scale control. I should like to say very strongly here that in our approach to these activities, be it grasshoppers or desert locusts, we advocate the use of small planes, limited control, just in those areas which are under threat, and that we are in principle against widespread application of pesticides. To give one example, if we had tried to eradicate in total the grasshoppers in the Sahel area, we should probably have sprayed 200 millions hectares. That would be impossible from a logistic point of view. I think we would then really have environmental problems, and it would be completely unjustified. That was also the reason why we have not even attempted to eliminate these grasshoppers, becasue they were not there all the time and did not pose a continuous threat to agricultural land.
I will quickly round up some specific comments that were made. I think I have already dealt with most of them. Swaziland insisted on training. I am happy to inform them that next week a regional training course will be starting in Kenya for eastern and southern Africa on safe application of pesticides for the control of locusts and birds and involving further testing of the most appropriate equipment.
With respect to Nicaragua and the problems in Central America, a regional technical cooperation programme has been prepared to face the current problem. This has been done jointly with the regional organization OIRSA. We are waiting for the approval of the various countries concerned to put that project into motion.
I think I addressed in my introduction the question of the cost of the campaign. The delegate of Yugoslavia remarked that it was started too late and it was too costly. In addition to what I said in my introduction on planning and whether it should be at an early or late stage, we drew the conclusion that a late stage would be probably more cost effective. Let me remind the Commission that the cost of the campaigns in the Sahel of this year and last year were about the same. They were each about $ 30 million. Last year we sprayed 3.5 million hectares and this year 800 000 hectares. Although we were all very proud that we had prepared it well, at the end that early preparedness was certainly not more cost-effective than the ad hocarrangements we made last year, and there we were also successful in controlling the grasshoppers.
The UK delegate made a number of remarks on the regional organizations and on strengthening the infrastructures. I "address that in my general comments. We fully agree with him that we are concerned about the West African situation with respect to the regional capability of addressing the problems. That also covers the question raised by Burkina Faso with respect to OCLALAV. We have taken good notice of the tree locust in Sudan. We know this insect. It is a typical problem that has to be dealt with locally and we hope that, through the new project, the locust control capability of Sudan will be strengthened in the coming three to five years and that this problem can be properly addressed.
The matter of information exchange was highlighted and emphasized. We have done a lot during this campaign to improve communications through the provision of equipment, radios, etc. the sending of consultants to help the people properly to use this equipment, and we are currently also analysing, with the help of consultants, how we can strengthen our own system. We have already invited a consultant for that. Further work will be done with the help of consultants in the coming months in order better to service from the FAO side the whole community with respect to information needed.
I think I addressed Norway's question with respect to environmental pesticides. The German Federal Republic specifically made a remark on paragraphs 12 a) and b). I agree with him, and I must admit that when I read the report again after it was printed I was almost tempted to put forward an erratum. I feel that as it stands it is almost a contradiction. In paragraph 12 b) there should be a full stop after "grasshopper population levels". The end of the sentence should be dropped because it is not correct.
The American delegate addressed the need for better monitoring and communications networks. I have addressed that in general terms.
The delegate of Peru brought up the question of biological control. We are very interested in the matter. We have done a lot on it with respect to other pest problems. As I said earlier, we are very proud of the fact that we have had some very successful projects. We are well aware of the success in Peru, which has been an inspiration to do work elsewhere. The delegate referred to the works with trichogramma, which is now used in many other countries on cotton and other pests, but all the researches we have undertaken so far in order to have effective biological control of grasshoppers and locusts have failed to the extent that they have not led us to a quick, practical and effective solution to face the problem when there is an upsurge, when there are large populations. I regret to say that in that case we have to fall back on pesticides, and, as I said earlier, every attempt is currently being made to test new pesticides that are safer to humans, to the applicators and to the environment. We hope in that respect further to improve the work.
C.H. BONTE-FRIEDHEIM (Assistant Director General, Agriculture Department): I would like to make only three remarks. First of all, on behalf of FAO I would like to thank not only those who spoke here today but especially who during the last two years and who hopefully and perhaps unfortunately also in the future will share the resources with the countries who are affected; the human resources, the financial resources and the experience. Those who have talked today with some experience from the other regions will, I think, be very welcome to cooperate closely with FAO and other donors in trying to fight the new emergency in Africa.
My second point is that the Secretariat will follow up matters with a number of delegations who have raised individual points which need some follow-up. We shall be only too happy to discuss some of the interesting points which have been made this afternoon.
My third point is a request to the Chairman please not to close the discussion because there is the outstanding issue of the proposal for a resolution which we would like to discuss with the Tunisian delegation first. If you will permit it, we would like to come back tomorrow morning after some discussion on this resolution'and report to you, Mr Chairman, and to Commission I on the results of the discussion with the Tunisian delegation.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr Bonte-Friedheim. The only outstanding issue from the procedural point of view is the resolution to which reference has been made by the delegate of Tunisia.
If delegates will wait for a few minutes, we shall be clear. My suggestion would be that we leave that portion open because even if a resolution is to be tabled, there are a number of procedural steps through which it has to go before it comes before us formally for consideration.
Since all the delegates who wished to speak on the subject have already spoken, with the Commission's permission I shall sum up the discussion, leaving open only the resolution aspect.
We have had 32 participants in all, it was a mix of the donor countries and also the countries which have actually fought the locusts and the grasshoppers, and a few others who have had experience in related and connected areas, though not directly connected with grasshoppers and locusts.
The discussion generally agreed with the consensus that the work done by the FAO and with the help of the FAO in the affected areas and different nations, mainly in Africa, has won general acclaim. The discussion has also been critical and there was a feeling that the results achieved are noted with approval and with critical acclaim.
While taking note of the activities which have been launched and the results which have been achieved, there was a feeling that in certain areas there is scope for improving the general performance in tackling the grasshopper and locust menace. These areas cover firstly the wide variations which seem to be occurring now in terms of the costs of spraying and also in terms of the cost-benefit analysis, granted that the data about the crops saved and their value is not subject to verification.
Secondly, there was a feeling that there is scope for planning a better mix of the spraying methodology. This could be in terms of a plane versus a helicopter, a large plane or a small plane, or airborne spraying versus land-based operations.
The third area was that there is scope for planning a better mix of pesticides to take care of the environmental aspects and also to ensure that the spraying operations are timed in a better manner before the crops are harvested and are carried out more effectively.
There is clearly recognition in the discussions that there is a need .for strengthening the role and operations of the FAO in locust control and in donor liaison, in training of staff, in technical backstopping, in terms of the coordination of information exchange, surveillance data and the training of field operators, and also of monitoring their effectiveness and evaluation. Along with those there is the concomitant requirement for technical staff and support personnel.
Lastly, the discussion has brought into focus and emphasized the need for strengthening the national and the regional organizations, as specified, in an agreed time frame, so that the lead time for eliciting a response from this mission to an emergency which arises at very short notice, and also for ensuring the timely and effective tackling of the pest menace could be improved over a period of time.
With your permission, I shall conclude the discussion for this evening at this stage with the caveat that depending on what happens to the draft resolution which the delegate from Tunisia wanted to table, we may revert to this subject if the need arises. Subject to these observations we shall be meeting tomorrow at 9.30. We are running slightly ahead of time. We shall be breaking at 10.30 to go to the Papal Audience. My solution, therefore, would be that if delegates could make sure that the quorum is established at 9.30, we could possibly have the introduction and initial discussion on item 6.3, the World Food Day. Depending on how lengthy the discussion on the World Food Day turns out to be, hopefully tomorrow afternoon we could take up for consideration item 7, Feasibility Study on Expanding the Provision of Agricultural Inputs as Aid-in-Kind. We would request the Secretariat to keep that eventuality in sight so that if the discussion on agenda item 6.3 comes to an early conclusion, we can straight away go to agenda item 7.
The meeting rose at 17.35 hours
La seance est levée à 17 h 35
Se levanta la sesión a las 17.35 horas
