RMD-13-04: Consolidated Pest Risk Management Document for pest plants regulated by Canada
Appendix 5B: Risk Management Considerations for Crupina vulgaris (common crupina)

This page is part of the Guidance Document Repository (GDR).

Looking for related documents?
Search for related documents in the Guidance Document Repository

Values at Risk

No values at risk were identified.

Potential Mitigation Measures for Natural Means of Dispersal

The natural dispersal of the achenes would remain fairly local as the seeds fall close to the parent plant and dispersal by wildlife occurs only over short distances. These methods of dispersal are difficult to control. No specific mitigation measures are proposed for natural means of dispersal of Crupina vulgaris.

Potential Mitigation Measures for Intentional Introduction Pathways

Transport of plant parts by tourists and recreational users

A potential intentional pathway for the introduction of Crupina vulgaris is due to the appearance of the achenes. They are tapered and slightly iridescent, and with their stiff bristles at the wide end, somewhat resemble dry flies used for fishing.

Previous imports

It is not possible to assess the quantity of achenes that enter Canada for fly fishing, but it is most likely small.

Risk mitigation measures

Increase public awareness of the regulation and the risk posed by this plant and distribute awareness material at border crossings to the public. This is not considered effective by itself if the risk is high, but is a viable action if the level of risk is low.

Trade implications

As most imports of this type are non-commercial, there would be no trade implications.

Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

A public awareness campaign is the most feasible option, whereas inspection would be very disruptive, difficult to implement, and expensive.

Potential Mitigation Measures for Non-intentional Introduction Pathways

Hay and Straw

Previous imports

Potential risk mitigation measures

Regulate Crupina vulgaris under the Plant Protection Act as a quarantine pest by adding it to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada. This will:

Additional requirements may include:

Trade implications

Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Regulation under the Plant Protection Act is already in place for other pests regulated by Canada. Minor costs will be incurred for training of inspectors for weed identification. Costs may be incurred during the negotiation of requirements with the U.S. or other affected trading partners.

Seed

Previous imports

Between 2004 and 2008, an average of $42 million worth of seed was imported into Canada from the four US states where Crupina vulgaris occurs.

Risk mitigation measures

Crupina vulgaris seeds are not likely to contaminate seed as it does not tolerate cultivation and would not be prevalent in crop fields, although it can become established along field edges. However, it also matures earlier than crop plants and the achenes are easily removed by screening due to its bristly pappus. Seeds suspected of being contaminated with Crupina vulgaris could be re-cleaned to remove the contaminant seeds.

Crupina vulgaris is listed as a Class 1 prohibited noxious weed in the Weed Seeds Order Footnote 2, and therefore, due to current regulations and requirements under the Seeds Act, imported seed is unlikely to be a pathway.

Other options include regulating Crupina vulgaris as a quarantine pest under the Plant Protection Act. Adding this species to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada (CFIA, 2009) would:

Regulatory actions under the Plant Protection Act could include one or more of the following:

Trade implications

NPPOs of exporting countries and seed certification agencies currently devote resources towards inspection of seed lots and issuance of Phytosanitary Certificates. Laboratories in foreign countries will need to be able to identify seeds of Crupina vulgaris within a seed sample. Exporters need to ensure freedom of Crupina vulgaris in seed lots, otherwise CFIA can refuse import.

Field Crops Not Intended for Propagation

Included in this section are cereal grains, oilseeds, pulses, forage, and new crops not covered under the Seed section above.

Previous imports

Between 2004 and 2008, an average of $1.7 million worth of field crops not intended for propagation were imported into Canada from the four U.S. states where Crupina vulgaris occurs.

Risk mitigation measures

Crupina vulgaris seeds are not likely to be a contaminant as they do not tolerate cultivation and would not be prevalent in crop fields, although Crupina vulgaris can become established along field edges. However, it also matures earlier than crop plants and the achenes are easily removed by screening due to its bristly pappus. Grain suspected of being contaminated with Crupina vulgaris could be re-cleaned to remove the contaminant seeds.

Livestock

Previous imports

Potential risk mitigation measures

Regulate Crupina vulgaris under the Plant Protection Act as a quarantine pest by placing it on the List of Pests Regulated by Canada. This would:

Trade implications

Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Raw Wool and Raw Skin

Previous imports

Potential risk mitigation measures

No measure is required:

Vehicles and Used Farm Machinery

Previous imports

Potential Risk mitigation measures

Enforcement of the Directive 95-26: "Phytosanitary requirements for soil and related matter, and for items contaminated with soil and related matter" (CFIA 2010).

In 2003, the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) assumed responsibility for the initial import inspection services in respect to the Acts and Regulations administered by the CFIA to the extent that they are applicable at Canadian border points. The inspection of goods that may be contaminated with soil are among the responsibilities that were transferred to the CBSA in 2003. The Food, Plant and Animals Programs Section of the CBSA is currently finalizing its Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) concerning the "Inspection of Imported Goods Potentially Contaminated with Soil." This SOP provides the CBSA's Border Services Officers with formal procedures for the inspection and disposition of goods that may be contaminated with soil, including used agricultural machinery and vehicles.

Trade implications

Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

As vehicles and used farm machinery are already required to be free from soil, this would address one of the likely sources of Crupina vulgaris contamination, resulting in no additional costs. However, ensuring that used vehicles and farm machinery are free from Crupina vulgaris achenes not in association with soil would require additional resources and training as well as renegotiating the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between CFIA and CBSA.

Used Recreational Equipment and Clothing

Previous imports

It is not possible to assess the quantity of used recreational equipment and clothing that enters Canada, but it is most likely significant.

Risk mitigation measures

Increase public awareness of the regulation and the risk posed by this plant and distribute awareness material at border crossings to the public. This is not considered effective by itself if the risk is high, but is a viable action if the level of risk is low.

Trade implications

As most imports of this type are non-commercial, there would be no trade implications.

Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

A public awareness campaign is the most feasible option, whereas inspection would be very disruptive, difficult to implement, and expensive.

Date modified: