Coping with water shortages; adopting anti-drought measures including selective termination of irrigation during the first growing season of 2015; compensating farmers and protecting their rights and interests

Background

　　Data from the Central Weather Bureau of the Ministry of Transportation and Communications shows that the status of water supplies began to worsen as early as the second half of 2014. In August of that year no typhoons reached Taiwan, and it was the driest year in 67 years. Starting in September, relevant agencies of the central government and local governments began to closely monitor the status of water supplies. This period was the heading period for the second growing season of 2014, and the most urgent task was to ensure adequate irrigation for the rice crop. As a result of efforts by all concerned to adjust and control water usage, irrigation supply remained stable and the second rice crop was harvested without any problems.

　　Starting in November of 2014 selected areas of Taiwan began to implement “Level 1” and “Level 2” water restriction measures. We initiated reduction of water supplies for daily home use and for industrial use, while all relevant government agencies pro-actively implemented a variety of anti-drought measures.

　　Unfortunately, the water situation continued to worsen. Relevant ministries and agencies established drought-response task forces, and the Ministry of Economic Affairs convened a “drought emergency response working group” that included all drought-response task forces at the central government level. It was decided that irrigation would be halted for some areas for the first growing season of 2015. Affected areas included some irrigation districts under the Taoyuan, Hsinchu, Miaoli, Taichung, and Chia-nan irrigation associations. Under the announced policy, irrigation was halted over a total land area of 43,659 hectares.

　　The drought situation lasted until the latter part of May of 2015, when the “plum rains” (the nickname for the seasonal rains at that time of year) refilled reservoirs and the drought ended. The relevant ministries and agencies returned to normal operations and the routine irrigation policy mechanisms were re-activated.

Measures were taken in response to the drought

● Diversified response measures: With respect to the areas for which irrigation was suspended for the first growing season of 2015, measures were taken by the COA included: (a) diversified compensation arrangements based on the subsidies provided for leaving land fallow or switching over to contract crops; (b) relief for reduced seedling cultivation; (c) liberalization of agricultural loans; (d) continued implementation of guidance to “large tenant farmers”; and (e) encouraging early planting of crops for the second growing season of 2015.

● Strengthened irrigation management measures: The COA also pro-actively guided irrigation associations in areas throughout the country not designated for suspension of irrigation (accounting for a total of 140,000 hectares of land) to undertake a variety of drought response measures. We helped them to use agricultural water more efficiently, and thereby achieved all irrigation tasks for the first growing season of 2015 with no problems.

● Monitoring and guidance of compensation issued for irrigation halts: Affected irrigation associations completed distribution of all compensation funds for suspension of irrigation for the first growing season of 2015. Distribution was done in a prompt fashion and completed before July 31 of 2015.

Implementation results

● Irrigation associations received applications for and handled compensation for the suspension of irrigation covering 32,382 hectares, accounting for 74.17% of all land area for which irrigation was suspended. This was higher than the rate of 71.31% seen in previous years. Of this, 29,615 hectares were from the base year for calculations of farmland use, accounting for 91.46% of the total.

● Statistics reveal the various types of standards that farmers used to apply for compensation. Data shows that the highest proportion of farmers used Criterion 1 (the level of subsidies provided for farmers who leave land fallow and plant green manure on it), accounting for 69.41% of acreage. This group was followed by farmers who applied for compensation using: (i) Criterion 2 (fallow land), accounting for 20.65% of acreage; (ii) Criterion 6 (general crops), accounting for 8.95%; and (iii) Criteria 3 through 5 (cultivation of contract crops), accounting in total for less than 1%.

● The total cost of all compensation for the drought period (including administrative costs) was NT$2.646 billion. The COA paid NT$1.222 billion (46.18%) of this amount, with the remainder being paid by the Ministry of Economic Affairs, the Ministry of Science and Technology, and the Taiwan Water Corporation.

Promoting preventive measures against highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI); rebuilding and restoring the poultry industry; minimizing the impact of HPAI on daily life

　　In 2015 emerging HPAI caused severe damage to the poultry industry in Taiwan. As of 6:00 PM on December 31 of 2015, 17 local governments had seeded specimens from 1021 poultry farms, with the HPAI exam being positive at 981 farms and negative at 39, with one farm testing positive for influenza A virus subtype H6N1 (which is not on the OIE list of notifiable diseases). We conducted culling at 980 farms (totaling 5,144,299 birds). In addition, we conducted sample testing at all poultry farms within one kilometer radius of farms with confirmed HPAI cases, and discovered 45 farms with confirmed cases of HPAI (resulting in the culling of 276,657 additional birds). The epidemic is now under control. However, because of latent viruses, isolated new cases have occurred. In addition, in order to prevent or minimize any outbreaks of avian influenza in fall and winter, the COA mapped out and refined the following tasks:

■ Strengthening early warning mechanisms

　　All local governments continued to strengthen all testing and monitoring mechanisms. At the same time the COA closely monitored the avian disease situation in upstream countries for migratory birds that pass through Taiwan. We also encouraged farmers to act on their own initiative to report suspected cases of avian flu, and we worked with slaughterhouses to follow up any unusual situations, with the aims of early discovery and timely handling of any suspected cases.

■ Upgrading disease prevention and response mechanisms

　　Local governments accelerated cleaning and disinfection at poultry farms where culling was done. In addition, the COA announced the “Prevention Measures for Avian Influenza Virus Subtypes H5 and H7,” and on the basis of these we guided poultry farms to set and follow timetables to improve their layouts and to thoroughly implement various bio-security measures. At the same time we continued to promote measures such as: (i) “health certificates” for poultry, (ii) “fumigation certificates” for poultry eggs, and (iii) disinfection and cleaning measures for transport vehicles and cages.

■ Restoration and rebuilding of the poultry industry

　　The COA, acting on the basis of the “Manual for Emergency Response Measures for Avian Influenza Virus Subtypes H5 and H7,” worked to assist affected poultry farms to restore their operations. Moreover, on January 29 of 2015, the COA’s Bureau of Animal and Plant Health and Quarantine convened a special conference on measures to restore and rebuild the operations of affected poultry farms. At the conference, attendees discussed the application process and supply measures for the sentinel poultry needed for restoration of operations at affected farms, and established a relevant production plan.

　　The COA also set up an “industry reconstruction technical services team” to assist farmers to restore operations; to obtain sources of breeding poultry; to assure the quality of chicks, ducklings, and goslings; and to provide consulting services and on-site guidance with respect to: (i) poultry housing design, (ii) feeding management, (iii) bio-security measures, and (iv) financial assistance. At the same time, in order to minimize the risks from avian influenza, the COA introduced non-open poultry sheds and helped farmers establish demonstration farms. In 2015, the COA conducted on-site guidance of 184 farms and established 140 demonstration farms for farmers’ reference.

■ Subsides and loans

　　In order to assist those who suffered losses as a result of HPAI to rebuild their operations and to get relief from the pressures of paying off previous debt, on February 2 of 2015 the COA’s Bureau of Agricultural Finance finalized a formal policy document on “assistance measures from agricultural financial institutions to cope with avian influenza.” (This document was revised again on June 2 and October 22 in order to meet practical needs.) Under this policy financial assistance was provided to farmers who had acquired: (a) certification that agencies in charge of controlling the epidemic had determined that the farm in question was confirmed as testing positive for HPAI and undertook culling; (b) certification of a decline in slaughtering volume; or (c) certification of impact on slaughtering volume. (As of December 31 of 2015, extensions for repayment of old loans were given in 96 cases, totaling NT$284.87 million; and new loans were given in 27 cases, totaling NT$64.35 million.) The rules for these types of financial aid were set as follows:

● Old loans: Repayment of principal can be extended by one year; no interest is collected during the one-year extension period but is subsidized by the government; the full term of the loan, in conformity with the one-year postponement of payments on the principal, is also extended one year.

● New loans: The interest for the first year of new loans is subsidized by the government; recipients can apply for a grace period on repayment of principal depending upon the conditions of each individual loan. The term for repayment of new loans made to provide operating capital in conformance with disease prevention policy is extended from three to five years; the grace period for such loans can be one to two years.

● If borrowers still have repayment difficulties at the end of all extensions and/or grace periods, they may apply to the original loan processing organization, under regulations currently in effect, for an extension.

■ Education and training

　　In order to upgrade the level of knowledge about disease prevention possessed by businesses and workers in poultry-related industries, the COA held special classes and lectures for owners of poultry farms where HPAI cases occurred; for drivers of feed trucks, rendering transportation vehicles, and poultry and egg transport vehicles; and for contracted veterinarians. A total of 60 forums were held with 2217 participants.

　　Eradication of avian influenza requires the poultry industry to cooperate with the government, to comply with relevant disease prevention and response measures, and to take the initiative to independently implement all “hardware” and “software” bio-security measures. In their restoration efforts and operational procedures they must act correctly step-by-step in order to minimize the risk of any further outbreaks or transmission of the disease.

Dealing with Type A foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) in Kinmen County; activating relevant response mechanisms; assisting in preventing the spread of the disease

　　On May 8 of 2015, in the course of routine testing and inspection procedures, one case (in cattle) of Type A FMD was confirmed in Kinmen County. The nucleic acid sequence alignment showed 98.9% similarity with the virus strain discovered in Guangdong Province of mainland China in 2013. A meeting of the Prevention Advisory Group decided: (a) to conduct culling at the affected farm and all livestock farms within that specific livestock zone; (b) to conduct movement control and clinical observation on surrounding cloven-hoofed animal farms within a radius of three kilometers around the infected farm; and (c) to conduct sampling and surveillance on surrounding cloven-hoofed animal farms within a radius of one kilometer around the infected farm.

　　We also strengthened cleaning and disinfection at meat markets, slaughterhouses, and animal transport vehicles, as well as conducted inspections of hygiene and sanitary conditions at slaughterhouses attached to meat markets. We also took other strict preventive measures to ensure that the disease was not transmitted to Taiwan and could not enter Taiwan proper. These included banning the sale into Taiwan proper of any cloven-hoofed animals from Kinmen County, their carcasses, their internal organs, or any fresh or processed meat products made from these animals.

　　“A-serotype” FMD had never been detected before in Taiwan, and there was no cross-protective immunity for the vaccine for the “O-serotype” FMD for which there was precedent among domestic cloven-hoofed animals. Therefore, for as long as the overall epidemic situation remained unclear, the COA adopted an attitude of staying ahead of any potential problems through prevention measures. On May 8 the COA announced a ban on all movements to Taiwan proper or other offshore islands of any cloven-hoofed animals from Kinmen County, their carcasses, their internal organs, or any fresh or processed meat products made from these animals.

　　Thereafter, we completed the culling of animals in the affected area, and clinical inspection and surveillance of nearby cloven-hoofed animals yielded no abnormalities. Scholars, experts, and the Kinmen County government then conducted a risk assessment and analysis and reached the following conclusions: (1) Beef products that (i) had been treated with certain heat conditions, and (ii) conformed to both OIE norms and the inspection & quarantine conditions for import of processed products containing meat into Taiwan, could be exported to Taiwan proper. (2) As for (i) other cloven-hoofed animals, their carcasses, their internal organs, or any fresh or processed meat products made from these animals, or (ii) products which had not been treated with the specified heat conditions, these would remain controlled items.

　　As noted earlier, we also conducted sample testing of all cloven-hoofed animal farms within a one-kilometer radius of the farm with the confirmed case. None of the samples tested positive for the FMD virus. Only three cattle tested positive for NSP antibodies. Samples from these three cattle were sent to the Pirbright Institute in the UK (a reference laboratory specializing in detecting and controlling viral diseases). One of them tested positive for Type A neutralizing antibodies. On June 9 the COA’s Animal Health Research Institute convened a meeting at which it was decided to confirm this as the second case of A-serotype FMD.

　　On June 10 of 2015 the Kinmen County government completed culling of 283 head of cattle on the affected farm and in the farm’s designated area, and also completed disinfection tasks. The carcasses were burned and buried and the disposal areas were disinfected in accordance with the Statute for Prevention and Control of Infectious Animal Disease and relevant bylaws. The Kinmen County government also, in accordance with OIE norms, conducted further tests three months after the discovery of the initial two cases. These tests involved serological surveillance and clinical inspection at 57 farms (with 95% confidence interval and a 5% prevalence rate). The results of these tests were reviewed at a meeting of the Prevention Advisory Group, which determined that fresh, chilled, and frozen cloven-hoofed animal products from Kinmen County met the Stage 1 Risk Evaluation criteria, and that these products could, upon completion of legally mandated procedures, once again be sold in Taiwan proper.

　　It has been over two years since there has been any confirmed case of FMD in Taiwan proper, in Penghu County (the Pescadore Islands), or in Lianchiang County (the Matsu Islands). On October 16 of 2015 the COA applied to the OIE to confirm Taiwan, Penghu, and Matsu as “an FMD-free zone where vaccination is practiced.” As for Kinmen County, if there is no outbreak of FMD for two years starting from the time when the two cases were confirmed in May of 2015, then the COA will also apply to have Kinmen incorporated under the “FMD-free zone” designation. This would complete our goal of our entire territory being recognized as completely free of FMD.

Being notified by the EU of the possibility of being identified as a non-cooperating third country in fighting against illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing; comprehensive reassessment by the COA with the aims of strengthening fishing-industry management, upholding fishing operations, and protecting our nation’s image

　　The UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) estimates that each year there is total catch of about US$23 billion from illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing. The world’s various regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs) have also passed resolutions about preventing and deterring IUU fishing. Since 2009 the US has cited vessels from 17 countries (including Italy, mainland China, and France) for IUU fishing activities. Starting in 2012 the EU began reviewing the efforts of various countries to combat IUU fishing, and has notified 20 countries (including Korea and the Philippines) of the possibility of being identified as a “non-cooperating third country in fighting against IUU fishing.”

　　On October 1 of 2015, the European Commission, acting on the basis of Council Regulation (EC) No. 1005/2008 of 29 September 2008, placed Taiwan on the “yellow card” list for possible designation as a “non-cooperating third country in fighting against IUU fishing.” Reasons included: (1) Taiwan’s legal framework for fishing has shortcomings and loopholes. (2) The punitive mechanisms in place do not effectively deter IUU fishing. (3) There is no effective capability to manage Taiwan’s distant-water fishing fleet.

　　Under the EU system, Taiwan must improve in these areas within six months. Having been listed as a “yellow card” country, Taiwan must implement all action plans to improve fisheries management that have been demanded by the EU. If during this period there is no improvement in the problems pointed out by the European Commission, Taiwan will be deemed to be a “red card” country—which is to say a “non-cooperating third country”—and the EU will ban the import of fisheries products from Taiwan.

　　In order to ensure that Taiwan is removed from the yellow card list as quickly as possible, the COA immediately acted to promote measures to strengthen fisheries management. These included the following:

■ New legal framework: the Act for Distant-Water Fisheries

　　The new Act for Distant-Water Fisheries will strengthen the legal basis for management of the distant-water fishing fleet and allow improved management of the operations of this fleet. The Act will incorporate the core principles, spirit, and management measures of the UN Law of the Sea and other international documents. It will provide for heavy fines or even criminal prosecution as the main punitive provisions and will permit heavier punishments for repeat offenders.

■ Upgraded monitoring, control, and surveillance (MCS) measures

● We have adopted the “National Plan for Control and Inspection of Fisheries” which lays out MCS measures for distant-water fisheries. Meanwhile, we have also set inspection benchmarks based on risk assessments.

● We are promoting the installation of e-logbooks on distant-water fishing vessels, strengthening traceability of fisheries products, avoiding behavior that has a high risk of being considered IUU fishing, gaining real-time command of data on fishing vessel capabilities and catch volume, and assessing changes in fishing industry resources through stock assessment models.

● In March of 2015 the COA requested that all distant-water fishing vessels participate in the “landing declaration” mechanism and strengthen MCS measures.

● The COA has also been promoting measures regarding transshipment and landing of catch at designated domestic and foreign ports. We have announced a list of designated foreign ports and sharply reduced the number of designated foreign ports from 41 to 29. Starting in July of 2016 Taiwanese fishing vessels can only land or transship catch in foreign ports that have port inspection and monitoring schemes.

■ Strengthened traceability system for seafood products

　　The COA in 2015 continued to pursue our strategic plan for auditing of trading companies (or agents) engaged in trade of fish or fisheries products. The purpose is to ensure that the catch that they purchase from Taiwanese or foreign fishing vessels is not connected to IUU fishing.

■ Strengthened international cooperation

　　In terms of the international aspects of the prevention of IUU fishing, the COA has been working with countries that have the greatest interaction with our fishing industry (such as Thailand and Pacific island nations) to sign MOUs or other official cooperation agreements to conduct inspections of transshipment or landing of catch at designated foreign ports. We also exchange data with cooperating nations and cooperate in tracking individual investment from Taiwan in operations of foreign-flag fishing vessels.

■ Respect for norms set by international organizations

　　The COA has continually been working to educate and guide our nationals to comply with all norms set by regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs) and improve their compliance record at RFMOs.

　　In conclusion, in the future the COA will continue to fight for more resources in manpower and financing to more effectively combat IUU fishing, and to avoid inclusion in the EU’s list as a “non-cooperating third country in fighting against IUU fishing.” We will strengthen our management systems for the fishing industry and conform to the goal of sustainable fisheries.